Search the SPREP Catalogue

The NISSAP aims to protect the RMI’s natural resources, environment, and communities from the impact of invasive species. Further, it seeks to enhance and strengthen cooperation and coordination to combat invasive species by improving public awareness, enhancing capacity for managing and preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species. The NISSAP includes an overview of the current situation of invasive species in the RMI and identifies the process for their management. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Commerce will implement the NISSAP in cooperation with key stakeholders and partners.

Field support and training was provided to Government of Kiribati staff at Kiritimati (Christmas Island) during 1-15 November 2023 as part of a Biopama project facilitated by BirdLife/SPREP. This project focused on rat eradication for biodiversity recovery, and associated outcome monitoring and capacity building. Specific objectives (and outcomes) included eradicating Kimoa (Rattus exulans) which had reinvaded Big Nimroona and SW Nimroona motu in 2017 (both motu were baited 6 days apart); confirming the status of invasives and birds on other key motu (checks of other significant motu indicated that Kimoa remain absent and rat-sensitive birds are thriving as a result); monitoring of endangered seabirds revealed that the Kiritimati population of Te Ruru continues to increase, while a large number of smaller motu provide secure nesting for Te Bwebwe ni Marawa; determining island and motu biosecurity needs (detailed biosecurity needs lists were completed and motu surveillance protocols adapted); and some additional training was completed for all.

Breeding success of 5 Cory’s shearwater Calonectris diomedea sub-colonies of Lavezzu Island (Lavezzi Archipelago, Corsica) was checked annually for 25 consecutive years from 1979 to 2004. Between 1989 and 1994, 4 ship rat Rattus rattus controls were performed in several subcolonies. In November 2000, rats were eradicated from Lavezzu Island and its 16 peripheral islets (85 ha) using traps then toxic baits. We compare cost (number of person-hours required in the field) and benefit (Cory’s shearwater breeding success) of control and eradication. The average breeding success doubled when rats were controlled or eradicated (0.82) compared to the situation without rat management (0.45). Moreover, the average breeding success after eradication (0.86) was significantly (11%) higher than after rat controls (0.75). Furthermore, the great variation in breeding success recorded among sub-colonies both with and without rat control declined dramatically after eradication, suggesting that rats had a major impact on breeding success. The estimated effort needed to perform eradication and checking of the permanent bait-station system during the year following eradication was 1360 person-hours. In contrast, rat control was estimated to require 240 or 1440 person-hours per year when implemented by trained and untrained staff, respectively. Within 6 yr, eradication cost is lower than control cost performed by untrained staff and confers several ecological advantages on more ecosystem components than Cory’s shearwater alone. Improved eradication tools such as hand or aerial broadcasting of toxic baits instead of the fairly labour-intensive eradication strategy we used would dramatically increase the economic advantage of eradication vs. control. Therefore, when feasible, we recommend eradication rather than control of non-native rat populations. Nevertheless, control remains a useful management tool when eradication is not practicable.