Search the SPREP Catalogue

1 page fact sheet by Perth Zoo, Australia, with brief description, diet, behavior and threats posed

4 page Fact sheet provides general information to background history, disribution, behavior, description of Cane Toad in different life stages, why they are invasive pest, and control actvities; The Australian Government cane toad commitment is providing more than $2 million over two years (2008-09 to 2009-10) to reduce the impacts of cane toads and to develop a national cane toad plan. Through these investments under the Caring for our County initiative, the Government is continuing to assist with funding for ground-control work, as well as research and development of sustainable control measures. In 2009-10, the Government provided over $1 million for community-based control activities and research to reduce cane toad numbers.

Invasive weeds are one of the most serious threats to biodiversity and sustainable development in the Pacific region. Biocontrol is likely to be the only feasible way of managing many widespread weeds, but is not always appropriate or successful. With so many weed species to tackle and inevitably limited resources, prioritising where to direct control efforts most effectively is of key importance. Landcare Research recently developed a framework for the Australian government that allows the best and worst weed targets for biocontrol to be identified. Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund and USDA Forest Service International Programs funding enabled this framework to be applied to weeds of the Pacific region.

Over the last four decades the eradication of rats from islands around New Zealand has moved from accidental eradication following the exploratory use of baits for rat control to carefully planned complex eradications of rats and cats (Feliscatus) on large islands.

Invasive species are widespread and can have devastating effects on biota, especially insular biota. Invasive species eradications are increasingly employed to promote island recovery to preinvasion states. However, it remains unclear if additional restoration actions may be required on islands that were once heavily reliant on seabird guano for ecosystem functions. Active seabird augmentation has been suggested as necessary to exact ecosystem recovery on contemporary timescales in some cases. I use two experiments on offshore islands in Cook Strait, New Zealand, to test the hypothesis that seabird restoration will restore island ecosystem functioning following invasive rodent removal. The first is a small-scale single-island fertilization experiment that simulates seabird recovery.

Islands house a majority of the world’s biodiversity and are thus critical for biodiversity conservation. Seabird nesting colonies provide nutrients that are integral to maintain island biodiversity and ecosystem function. Invasive rats destroy seabird colonies and thus the island ecosystems that depend on seabird-derived nutrients. After rat eradication, it is unclear how long ecosystem recovery may take, although some speculate on the order of centuries. I looked at ecosystem recovery along a chronosequence of islands that had 12–22 years to recover following rat eradication. I show that soil, plant, and spider marine-derived nitrogen levels and C:N ratios take mere decades to recover even after centuries-long rat invasion. Moreover, active seabird restoration could speed recovery even further, giving much hope to quickly conserve many endemic species on islands worldwide.

The Helping Islands Adapt workshop was held in Auckland, New Zealand between the 11th and 16th of April 2010 to support regional action against invasive species on islands, in order to preserve biodiversity and adapt to climate change. It arose from decisions under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) relating to invasive alien species and island biodiversity, and was hosted by the Government of New Zealand with support from a number of partner organisations and countries. The workshop focused on four major island regions: the Caribbean, Coral Triangle, Indian Ocean and Pacific, and involved participation by 82 people from 24 countries and territories, and 29 national, regional and international organisations (see participants list in Appendix 5). The workshop was specifically designed to allow for the maximum exchange of experience and support between representatives from diverse island regions working in invasive species management. It also included a field inspection of one of the Department of Conservation‘s invasive species management projects on Rangitoto Island in Auckland‘s Hauraki Gulf. The workshop built on efforts under the Cooperative Islands Initiative, a partnership launched at the World Summit for Sustainable Development and the CBD 6th Conference of the Parties in 2002. Its intended outputs had been agreed by the organiser‘s steering committee and set out as a 'road map‘ that was used to ensure clarity of the workshop‘s intended purpose, outputs and outcomes. An overview of the workshop, its sponsors, participants and conclusions was developed during the workshop and submitted to the 14th ?Subsidiary Body on Scientific Technical and Technological Advice (SBSSTA 14) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Nairobi 10-21 May 2010. That report is provided in full in Appendix 5 to these proceedings.

The Common Myna Acridotheres tristis was originally introduced to the island of Atiu, Cook Islands, in 1915 to control the Coconut stick insect Graeffea crouanii but it has since become a pest itself. The Rimatara lorikeet Vini Kuhlii or ‘Kura’ was reintroduced, after disappearing from the Southern Cook Islands almost 200 years ago, to Atiu on 24th April 2007 from Rimatara, French Polynesia to create a reserve population due to there being only approximately 1000 birds left on Rimatara. Due to observations of mynas reportedly harassing and attacking adult and juvenile Kura at the nest, an eradication programme was introduced by Gerald McCormack, Director of the Cook Island Natural Heritage Trust (CINHT), in May 2009 to reduce the population size of myna birds to give the Kura a couple of peaceful nesting seasons to help establish a stable population on Atiu. A study by J. Mitchell of the University of Leeds in May/June 2009 estimated a starting count of approximately 6000 myna birds prior to the eradication programme. That survey was followed up in May 2010 using two strategies, the transect method and roost counts. Analysis of transect method counts, using the Distance software, estimate there are approximately 3128 mynas on Atiu. Roost counts were at variance with that figure and estimated only 1280 myna birds. The roost counts estimate of 1280 may be the most accurate because all mynas would be in the winter roosts for heat conservation from May to July alleviating the concern that females and young would be nesting away from the roosts during counts, whereas transect counts may involve recounting the same birds numerous times; a problem minimized by repeating transect counts twice daily and using different transects to cover as much of the expected habitat as possible. Only a limited survey of the population of Kura was possible during this visit to Atiu since almost all available time and logistics were focused on myna surveys. An estimate of the Kura population suggests there are approximately 100 birds, which suggests that since the 2007 introduction the Kura population is thriving on Atiu. However, comparisons with the exponential growth rate model of 184 birds suggest this difference could be due to myna bird harassment despite culling. A more comprehensive survey is recommended perhaps using similar strategies to determine whether the myna has any deleterious effect on the Kura. In July 2010 a new myna bounty was introduced and is proving successful as a further 383 myna birds were culled by the end of July. The Atiu Island Council may decide on complete eradication of the myna to give the Kura full advantage of living on Atiu in the absence of the competitive myna bird.

Economic impacts from invasive species, conveyed as expected damages to assets from invasion and expected costs of successful prevention and/or removal, may vary significantly across spatially differentiated landscapes. We develop a spatial-dynamic model for optimal early detection and rapid-response (EDRR) policies, commonly exploited in the management of potential invaders around the world, and apply it to the case of the Brown treesnake in Oahu, Hawaii. EDRR consists of search activities beyond the ports of entry, where search (and potentially removal) efforts are targeted toward areas where credible evidence suggests the presence of an invader. EDRR costs are a spatially dependent variable related to the ease or difficulty of searching an area, while damages are assumed to be a population dependent variable. A myopic strategy in which search only occurs when and where current expected net returns are positive is attractive to managers, and, we find, significantly lowers present value losses (by $270m over 30 years). We find further that in the tradeoff between search costs and damages avoided, early and aggressive measures that search some high priority areas beyond points of entry even when current costs of search exceed current damages can save the island more ($295m over 30 years). Extensive or non-targeted search is not advised however.

This review was prepared by the Pacific Invasives Initiative (PII) on request from the Pacific Invasives Partnership (PIP). It was undertaken to examine the invasive species management components within the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans of twelve Pacific island countries (PICs): Cook Islands, Fiji, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu. The results of the review show that invasive species management is included as a component in eleven National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans, Marshall Islands being the only country not to include invasive species management. Five countries have also developed National Invasive Species Action Plans: Federated States of Micronesia (for Kosrae, Pohnpei and Yap), Kiribati (for Kiribati and Line Islands), Marshall Islands, Palau and Samoa; to support their National Biodiversity Strategy Action Plans and to provide a framework for invasive species management