NZ Bird Extinctions

[ledzep]

Quite by accident I came upon a sculpture to NZ bird extinctions and was surprised to find out that South Island Piopio was last seen in the 1960's and Bush Wren in the 1970's. I thought they were 19th century extinctions. Pleased to see that the South Island Kokako hasn't been listed yet!

[SomesBirder]

I understand the Eyle's Harrier date, but what's the story behind the very wrong extinction dates of the Crested Moa and Long-billed Wren?
I'm also surprised that they put Finsch's Duck as going extinct in the 19th century but not the New Zealand Raven.

[simon.fordham]

I remember Brian Bell telling me he had twice seen bush wren (in the '60s?), once on Big South Cape Island and the other, I think, was in the Urewera's.

[Jim Kirker]

I understand the Eyle's Harrier date, but what's the story behind the very wrong extinction dates of the Crested Moa and Long-billed Wren?
I'm also surprised that they put Finsch's Duck as going extinct in the 19th century but not the New Zealand Raven.

It could be based on 19th century reports, including Alice McKenzie's report of a small moa at Martin's Bay in 1880. The RNZ item includes interviews with her and with Geoffrey Orbell and Robert Falla, who say her report is credible.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018650146

[Jan]

I don't intend to be provocative, but what such date lists show is the obvious impact Polynesian settlement had on the fauna they found here after discovering NZ. Around Chch some very large wetland basins are being constructed at present and excavation has found huge roots and remains of matai forest dating to 600yrs BP the same date, more or less, as the loss of the moa and adzebill. Also when forests were being burnt by polynesians in the South Island. There are remains of kahikatia forest around the shores of Lake Ellesmere too.

The Green Party, for which I'm a co-convenor of an electorate in Aoraki/Canterbury, has been asking for members input about several policies connected to rural landuse. One of our charter principles is to uphold te Tiriti o Waitangi, which gives Maori equal say over use of natural resources. I find it somewhat conflicting that it is supposed to be common belief that before colonisation, NZ had communities in balance with their environment. That is patently not true. Anyone got any ideas to help me resolve anything? Anything at all?

[SomesBirder]

I understand the Eyle's Harrier date, but what's the story behind the very wrong extinction dates of the Crested Moa and Long-billed Wren?
I'm also surprised that they put Finsch's Duck as going extinct in the 19th century but not the New Zealand Raven.

It could be based on 19th century reports, including Alice McKenzie's report of a small moa at Martin's Bay in 1880. The RNZ item includes interviews with her and with Geoffrey Orbell and Robert Falla, who say her report is credible.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=2018650146

Thank you for the link. Alice McKenzie's sighting was discussed at length in one of Bruce Spittle's Moa Sightings books. It was concluded that the bird could have been a heron or a large penguin.

[chris]

If you read accounts of the maori arrival to the Chatham islands regarding the plunder of the native wildlife to be sent back to nz I think you get the idea that in fact up to that time the attitude was take it all until it's no more.my ancestors learn,t nothing from around 60 species wiped off the earth never to be seen again. And all unique and fascinating animals.im part maori but I get really mad when I here claims of this mysterious connection our ancestors had with the animals of the natural world.conservation is clearly a new concept and one we can all share together for the benefit of all, love of country and kiwi sense of identity.making up history solves nothing,insults people,s intelligenc and destroys credibility.the truth is not always easy to accept.

[Boris]

Thank you Chris for your refreshing commentary on our woeful list of bird extinctions. In much of modern NZ straight talking like this is increasingly rare. I think it fair to add that Maori and European both had to learn conservation the hard way, i.e. through blundering and regret.

[Jake]

Pleased to see that the South Island Kokako hasn't been listed yet!

...or the NZ Owlet-nightjar

Good discussion here and really ties into a semi-Eurocentric (and racist) rhetoric that says indigenous peoples weren't advanced enough to alter ecosystems or landscapes... of course they were. The canals that were cut South of Blenheim are a prime example of massive modifications which resulted in many localized extinctions. Some of the things Māori did with stone tools blows my mind

[Jan]

I'm grateful to everyone posting on this topic. I have never looked at it from the perspective that Jake mentioned, that Europeans thought indigenous people couldn't have changed the environment much. Well in Europe, early ages of people certainly did clear huge masses of forest, but that must have been forgotten, or glossed over.
The Iron Age in Europe has been equated to Maori settlements that Europeans first encountered, even though Maori had no metal tools. I once attended a lecture in Chch where a historian showed plans of iron age houses from Britain that were the same as maori pa and dwellings. It all seemed rather distasteful at the time. However.
It is very hard for humans or any animal group for that matter to live in a balanced way with its resources. They change with the seasons and from year to year as climatic and other influences affect them. Whole civilisations have gone under as people destroyed the reasons they lived in those places in the first place.
What i'm concerned about is that a lot of modern thinking raises indigenous cultures to the height of environmental responsibility. Like the Green Party.
Of course they had a slower impact on species extinction and changing their climate than modern society has had. But all the Moa species went out very fast indeed.
i don't think going back to indigenous mahinga kai as regional councils seem to recommend, is very wise. For a start many species considered as maginga kai are no longer regarded as collectable, or legal, even. The concept of stewardship of the land , kaitiatitanga, and mauri, life force, are wholly honourable and the belief that maori view the environment and their society as a group entity, rather than individualistic, is perfectly fine. But we can't keep conservation going as a process while pretending that indigenous culture has the best answers. Does that make sense?