Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

INVITED ARTICLE

Habitat restoration and management in avian reintroductions* Philip J. Seddon1

Abstract Habitat loss to agriculture, and habitat change

many avian reintroduction programmes, management ofdue to alien invasive species are now the principal threats

the birds and their habitat must be sustained long after thefacing birds globally. One successful conservation inter-

successful establishment of a new population. Reintroduc-

vention involves population restoration through reintro-tion practitioners cannot rely on being able to release

duction. Evaluation of reintroduction outcomes has high-birds into pristine patches of habitat, but rather mustlighted the importance of releases into appropriate habitat,embrace the notion of a ＂natural diversity enriched byand traditionally reintroductions have had a focus on rela-human intervention＂ (Takeuchi 2003).

tively intact habitat. I explore habitat management at rein-

Key words Population restoration, Translocation, Rein-

troduction areas, in order to highlight examples of viabletroduction, Bird conservation

reintroductions taking place within highly modiﬁed habitats. I evaluated reintroduction projects for 28 bird species
to categorise the degree of habitat modiﬁcation at release

Introduction

sites, and the intensity of ongoing habitat management

We are widely considered to be living in what has beennecessary to support the new population. Twenty-one oftermed the Anthropocene (Crutzen ₂₀₀₂), an era in which

the 28 species have been released into habitat that is rela-humans have become a global geophysical force (Steffen

tively unmodiﬁed. For 15 of these 21 species, there has

et al. ₂₀₀₇) effecting modification of natural habitats

been pre-release restoration of habitat to approximate nearworldwide. Over the last ~₅₀ years humans have alteredpristine conditions, and for seven species intensive post-

the world＇s ecosystems to a greater extent and at a greater

release habitat management remains essential. Only sevenrate than at any other time in our history (Millenniumof the 28 species have been released into relatively modi-

Ecosystem Assessment ₂₀₀₅) and as a consequence theﬁed habitat, and three species in highly modiﬁed habitats

Earth has entered its sixth great extinction event (Ceballos

requiring intensive ongoing habitat management: the₂₀₁₀). One-fifth of species are currently classified as

black stilt, Oriental white stork, and Japanese crested ibis.

Threatened, and on average ₅₂ species of mammals, birds

Habitat modiﬁcation by agricultural and urban expansion

and amphibians move closer to extinction each year, withwill become an increasingly important threat to birds

in excess of ₂₂₀ bird species declining by at least one

globally. This means that that the area of natural, rela-threat category between ₁₉₈₈ and ₂₀₀₈ (Hoffman et al.

tively intact habitat available in which to undertake rein-₂₀₁₀). Birds are highly visible but also highly vulnerable

troductions is shrinking. It is worth considering restora-

indicators of habitat change. The ₂₀₀₉ Red List assess-tion of viable wild populations within habitats that havement found that ₁,₂₂₇ species of birds are classiﬁed as

been substantially altered. The challenge will be to man-globally threatened with extinction (www.iucn.org), withage the factors that limit the establishment, growth andhabitat loss to agriculture and habitat change due to alien

persistence of a reintroduced population. Some native

invasive species being the principal threats to birds

species will be more adaptable than we assume, and for(Birdlife International ₂₀₀₈).

some the cause of original declines may be addressed

One intensive, and increasingly successful conservation

without restoring habitat to near pristine conditions. Forintervention involves population restoration through con-

₁

Department of Zoology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New
Zealand/Bird Section Chair, IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group* E-mail:

servation translocation (Seddon et al. ₂₀₀₇; Seddon ₂₀₁₀)
to reenforce or reintroduce wild populations. Reenforcement involves the movement of individuals to build up an
existing population, while reintroduction is the intentional
5

Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

movement of an organism into part of its native range

most concerned with the restoration of degraded habitats

from which it has disappeared (IUCN ₁₉₉₈; Seddon ₂₀₁₀).

(Seddon et al. ₂₀₀₇). In this paper I explore some general

The number of reintroduction projects is increasing. The

patterns relating to the habitat in a reintroduction area,

World Conservation Union＇s (IUCN) Reintroduction Spe-speciﬁcally the degree of pre-release habitat modiﬁcation

cialist Group had records for current reintroduction proj-

and the intensity of post-release habitat management. In

ects for ₁₃₈ bird species by ₂₀₀₃ (Seddon et al. ₂₀₀₅), up

doing this I aimed to highlight some examples of viablefrom only ₆₉ species in ₁₉₉₈ (Stanley Price and Soorae

reintroductions taking place within highly modiﬁed habi-₂₀₀₃), and likely to exceed ₂₀₀ species by ₂₀₁₂.

tats and consider whether such examples offer a glimpse

Evaluation of reintroduction outcomes across a largeof the future where reintroduction practitioners explore

number of projects has highlighted the importance ofincreased opportunities to reintroduce bird species into

releases into appropriate habitat (Wolf et al. ₁₉₉₈). The

modiﬁed habitats rather than assuming an overriding need

IUCN＇s Guidelines for Re-introductions (IUCN ₁₉₉₈)

for near-pristine habitat conditions.

have been the most widely applied international framework for reintroduction planning and implementation andmake ﬁve main points concerning release site selection

Methods

and management: the site should be within the historic

A qualitative survey of bird species reintroduction

range of the species; reintroduction should only take placeaccounts was compiled for a sample of species, derived

where the habitat and landscape requirements of the spe-from summaries published by the IUCN RSG (₂₀₀₈,

cies are satisﬁed, and likely to be sustained; the area₂₀₁₀) and augmented from the available literature. Proj-

should have sufﬁcient carrying capacity to sustain growthects were summarised according to six factors: cause ofof the reintroduced population; there needs to be identiﬁ-

decline, status of the original habitat, release site prepara-

cation and elimination of previous causes of decline; andtion, degree of modiﬁcation of the habitat at the release

where the release site has undergone substantial degrada-

site, and level of habitat management required in order totion, a habitat restoration programme should be initiatedsustain the reintroduced population. I considered ＂habitat＂(IUCN ₁₉₉₈). Thus the IUCN guidelines do not stipulate

to include all aspects of the environment, including veg-

that release sites must consist of relatively intact habitat,

etative features, food and predators. Reintroduction target

but this is likely to be the default target since it is reason-area (Mihoub et al. ₂₀₀₉) is deﬁned as the general region

able to assume that the less the habitat has changed sincesurrounding a release site into which the released birds

a given species was last present, the more likely it is to be

are expected to disperse and settle, with the release siteable to sustain a restored population of that species.

deﬁned as the speciﬁc locale at which a release takes

Reintroductions have therefore had a focus on translo-

place. Reintroduction target area status was categorised

cations into relatively intact habitat, and this has been aalong an approximate ₅-point scale from ₁ = pristine topoint of difference between the disciplines of reintroduc-

₅ = extremely modiﬁed (Table ₁). The level or intensity

tion biology and of restoration ecology, the latter beingof ongoing habitat management required to support theTable ₁. Sliding ₅-point scale of the degree of habitat modification at a release site, and the intensity of post-release monitoringnecessary at a reintroduction site in order to enable persistence of the restored wildlife population.
Category
₁● Pristine, e.g. unmodiﬁed primordial rainforest

₂● Relatively intact, e.g. regenerated/restored woodland

₃
₄
₅

6

Degree of habitat modiﬁcation of
the reintroduction target area

Intensity of post-release habitat management
at the reintroduction target area
● No ongoing habitat management post-release● Low intensity, intermittent management, e.g. limiting

disturbance due to agricultural activity● Relatively modiﬁed, e.g. mixed natural and agricultural● Moderate intensity ongoing management, e.g. anti-● Highly modified, e.g. intensive agriculture, or restored● High intensity ongoing management, e.g. modiﬁcation oflandscapes

vegetation but presence of exotic predators

poaching patrols; anti-predator vigilance

agricultural practices; predator trapping; livestock fencing● Extremely modified, e.g. high density inner city urban ● Very high intensity management, e.g. maintenance ofdevelopment

predator-proof fencing with continuous trapping

Philip J. Seddon: Habitat restoration in avian reintroductions

Table ₂. Summary of release-site habitat status and management in the reintroduction of ₂₈ bird species illustrating a range of degreesof habitat modiﬁcation and management intensity, from near pristine conditions and minimal ongoing management, through to highly
modiﬁed habitat and intensive ongoing management.

Name

OstrichSpecies

Struthio
camelusNene goose Branta
sandvicensis

Original causeof decline

Saudi
ArabiaHunting

USA

Hunting,
habitat loss,
introduced
predators
Introduced
predators

Great
Spotted
Kiwi

Apteryx haastii NZSouthern
GroundHornbill

Bucorvus
leadbeateri

Red-billed
Curassow

Crax
blumenbachii

Hawaiian
Creeper

Oreomystis
mana

NZ North
Petroica
Island robin longipesCountry

Current
status oforiginal
habitatRelease site
preparation

Degraded by Fencing andlivestock
livestockexclusion
Modiﬁed by Predator conagriculture
trol

Invaded by
Predator
exotic preda- exclusion
tors
fencing &trapping
Degraded
South
Habitat loss
Cessation of
Africadue to human and fragcattle
mented bypopulation
ranching due
growth &farming
to changing
cattleenvironment
BrazilHunting and
Lost to forest Restricted
loss of Atlantic clearing
access andforest habitat
anti-poaching
patrols
USA
HabitatDegradedFencing todegradation;and lost by
exclude feral
introduced
logging and ungulates;
ungulates
exoticnaturalungulates
regeneration
NZ
Exotic preda- Fragmented None
tors and habitat by livestock
fragmentation farming, withrats
Seychelles Nest predation Invaded by
Eradication
by exotic
exotic preda- of rats andpredators
tors
cats

Degree ofhabitatIntensity of
modiﬁcation
habitat
at the release management
site

Reference

Restoredgrassland

Livestock
fencing

Zafur ul-Islamet al. (₂₀₀₈)

Mixed
natural andplantedgrasslands
Beech forest& alpine

Predator
control

Marshall et al.
(₂₀₀₈)

Predator
exclusion

Gasson(₂₀₀₈)

Restoredgrassland,
woodlandand savannah
Remnant
forestCattleexclusionand provision of nest
cavities
Poaching
patrols

Theron andTurner (₂₀₀₈)

Steiner Sao
Bernardo etal. (₂₀₀₈)

Restored
Fencing to Kohley andhigh altitude exclude feral Lockyer
forestungulates(₂₀₀₈)

Restored forest fragmentwith predators
Predator freeislands but
modiﬁed byorchards andgardens
Regulation of Natural dune
access andlandhunting,some control
of natural
predators
None
Modiﬁed/restored lakewith humandisturbanceNational Park Recovering
protection,
low-mid altireduction of tude grassagriculture
lands turning
to unsuitablescrubland
None
Relatively
intact alpine
slopes

Seychelles
White-eyeZosterops
modestus

HoubaraBustardChlamydotis
macqueenii

UAE

HuntingMinor
degradation
by grazing

Whiteheaded
Duck

Oxiuraleucocephala

Hungary

Habitat loss,
hunting andegg collecting

Cheer
Pheasant

CatreuswallichiPakistan

Hunting

Drained wetlands andmodiﬁedlakes
Low altitude
hills modiﬁed by grazing and grass
cutting

Bearded
VultureGypaetusbarbatus

Austria

Persecution

Alpine slopes
with low
intensity
domestic
ungulates

Aplomado
FalconFalco femoralis USA
septentrionalis

Unknown

Xeric
National
Relatively
grassland
Wildlife Ref- intact xeric
with lowuge
grasslands
intensity
cattle grazing

None

Morgan et al.
(₂₀₀₈)

Prevention Rocamora
of invasion andby predators HenriettePayet (₂₀₀₈)
Huntingprevention

Lawrence etal. (₂₀₀₈)

None

Bijomi (₂₀₀₈)

Restriction Garsonof agricul(₂₀₀₈)
tural activity

None

Zink and Frey(₂₀₀₈)

Provision of Heinrichsome(₂₀₀₈)
artificial nest
structures7

Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

Table ₂. Continue.
Current
status oforiginal
habitatDegree ofhabitatIntensity of
modiﬁcation
habitat
at the release management
site

Country

Original causeof decline

Aquilachrysaetos

Ireland

Persecution

Low intenNational
sity livestock Parkgrazing

Relatively
intact Irish
mountains

Restrictionof farming

O＇Toole(₂₀₀₈)

Milvus milvus

England

Persecution

Woodlands
and open
habitats
modiﬁed andfragmented
by arable/
grass ﬁelds

Woodlands
and open
habitats
surroundedby ﬁelds

None

Murn et al.
(₂₀₀₈)

UK

Mechanization Arableof agriculture grasslands

Changegrassing
cutting
regimes

Newbery(₂₀₁₀)

Name

Species

GoldenEagle
Red KiteCorn Crake Crex crex

Release site
preparation

None apartfrom raisingawareness of
local farmers

Agreements Managedwith landarable grassmanagers for lands
late cutting

Reference

Grey
Partridge

Perdix perdix

UK

Habitat loss to Arable farm- None
agriculture
land aintensiﬁcation fragmented
schrub/woodlandManagedMaintenance Rantanen etarable grass- of hedges;al. (₂₀₁₀)
lands
reducefarming disturbanceHoubaraBustardChlamydotis
macqueenii

Saudi
ArabiaHunting

Restoredsavannah

Malherbe＇s
parakeet

Cyanoramphus NZ
malherbi

Exotic preda- Invaded by
Predator
tors and habitat exotic preda- eradication
fragmentation tors

Predator free Prevention Ortiz-Catedral
offshoreof invasion et al. (₂₀₁₀b)
islandby predators

Red-fronted Cyanoramphus NZ
Parakeetnovaezelandiae

Exotic preda- Invaded by
Predator
tors and habitat exotic preda- eradication
fragmentation tors

Predator free Prevention Ortiz-Catedral
offshoreof invasion et al. (₂₀₁₀a)
by predators
islandYellowcrowned
Parakeet

Cyanoramphus NZ
auriceps

Exotic preda- Invaded by
Predator
tors and habitat exotic preda- eradication
fragmentation tors

Predator free Prevention Adams andoffshoreof invasion Cash (₂₀₁₀)
islandby predators

Helmeted
honeyeater

Lichenostomus Australia
melanops
cassidix

Habitat loss to Fragmented
agriculture
by agriculintensiﬁcation ture

State Park

Restored
Restriction
riperian veg- of farming
etationMenkhorst etal. (₂₀₁₀)

Western
Bristlebird

Dasyornis
longirostris

Australia

Wildlﬁres

Fragmented
by agriculture

National
Park

Mixed age
scrubland

Burbridge etal. (₂₀₀₈)

OrientalCiconia
White Stork boyciana

Japan

Intensiﬁcation/mechanizationof paddy ﬁeld
agriculture

Original
marshland
lost tofragmented
paddy ﬁelds
and woodland fringe

Fish ladders, Functionaland reduction paddy ﬁelds
pesticides,
change waterﬂow regimes

Restoration Naito andof traditional Ikeda (₂₀₀₇)
agricultural
practises

Japanese
Nipponia
Crested Ibis nippon

Japan

Intensiﬁcation/mechanizationof paddy ﬁeld
agriculture

Original
marshland
lost tofragmented
paddy ﬁelds
and woodland fringe

Fish ladders, Functionaland reduction paddy ﬁelds
pesticides,
change waterﬂow regimes

Restoration Sado Cityof traditional Government
agricultural (₂₀₁₀)
practises

Habitat loss tofarming/water
abstraction;
introduced
predators

River deltas Intensive
and farmpredator conland, withtrol
low intensity
agriculture
and exotic
predators

NZ
Black Stilt/ Himantopus
Kakinovaezelandiae

8

Severedegradation
by grazing

Fencing andlivestockexclusion

Fencing to Zafur ul-Islam
prevent
et al. (₂₀₁₀)
hunting andlivestockgrazing

Controlled
ﬁre management

Natural river Intensive
predatordeltas andcontrol
farmlandwetlands
with exotic
predators,
human
disturbanceVan Heezik etal. (₂₀₀₉)

Philip J. Seddon: Habitat restoration in avian reintroductions

Table ₂. Continue.

Country

Original causeof decline

Current
status oforiginal
habitatRelease site
preparation

Degree ofhabitatIntensity of
modiﬁcation
habitat
at the release management
site

Name

Species

KakapoStrigops
habroptilus

NZ

Exotic preda- Invaded by
Predator
tors and habitat exotic preda- eradication
fragmentation tors

Southern
Emu-wrenStipiturusmalachurusAustralia

Habitat loss
and degradation due toagriculture
expansion

Fragmented
by agriculture

Conservation Restored
Park
xeric
scrubland

Restriction Pickett (₂₀₁₀)of agricultural activity

Peregrine
FalconFalco
peregrinus

USA

Habitat loss
and pesticides

Fragmented
by agriculture andurbanisation

None

Provision of USFWS
some(₂₀₁₁)
artificial nest
structures

Predator free Predator
offshore
exclusion
island with
intact forest

Urban andperi-urban
areas,
building
mimic
natural cliff
side habitats

Reference

Lloyd and
Powlesland(₁₉₉₄)

reintroduced population was categorised on a similar slid-

being released into an urban environment, and the remain-ing ₅-point scale from ₁ = no management, to ₅ highest

ing ﬁve species have been released into landscapes trans-

intensity management (Table ₁).

formed by agriculture. Three species in highly modiﬁed
habitats require intensive ongoing habitat management:

Results

the black stilt, Oriental white stork, and Japanese crestedibis.

I evaluated a total of ₂₈ bird species (Table ₂) for which
sufﬁciently detailed information was available on current
reintroduction attempts to categorise the degree of habitat

Discussion

modiﬁcation at release sites, and the intensity of ongoing

Although a majority of the limited sample of projects

habitat management considered necessary to support thesurveyed here describe avian reintroduction attempts tak-establishment, growth and persistence of the new popula-ing place within relatively intact habitats that closelytion (sensu Armstrong and Seddon ₂₀₀₈). Twenty one ofapproximate the original pristine conditions in key

the ₂₈ species have been released into habitat that is rela-respects, there are a number of examples of viable rein-tively unmodiﬁed compared to the original habitat of thetroduction attempts taking place in highly modiﬁed habi-

species, either due to an absence of degradation or changetats. To illustrate some speciﬁc features across the spec-(rarely) or due to restoration and regeneration of vegeta-trum of different types of habitat modification andtive elements and removal or mitigation of the impacts ofmanagement associated with avian reintroduction proj-

invasive species (Fig. ₁). For ₁₅ of these ₂₁ species, con-ects, I outline ﬁve case studies below (see underlined

siderable effort has gone into the pre-release restorationcommon names in Fig. ₁).

of habitat to approximate near pristine conditions, and forseven species intensive post-release habitat management

₁. Case studies

remains essential.

₁-₁) Relatively unmodified with high intensity habitat

Only seven of the ₂₈ species have been released into

management: Kakapo

relatively modiﬁed habitat: for the two New Zealand spe-

The kakapo is perhaps the quintessential New Zealandcies, the North Island robin and the black stilt (see Table

endemic bird: it is critically endangered and has a suite of

₂ for the scientiﬁc names of species mentioned in theunusual features that are both a legacy of the long isola-text), the release site habitat remains modiﬁed by the pres-tion of the New Zealand landmass, and which make itence of exotic predators; the peregrine falcon is unique inparticularly vulnerable to introduced predators. Kakapo

9Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

Fig. ₁. Reintroduction projects for ₂₈ bird species, plotted on two axes: x-axis is degree of
habitat modiﬁcation in the reintroduction area, from pristine or largely intact natural ecosystems
at the left through to increasing modiﬁcation by agriculture and urbanization, on the right; y-axis
is the level or intensity of post-release habitat management required to sustain the reintroduced
population.

are large, nocturnal, ﬂightless, lek-breeding parrots, that

Guapiaçu (REGUA), Rio de Janeiro State, from ₂₀₀₆.

were once widespread throughout New Zealand but which

REGUA comprises >₅,₀₀₀ ha of forest within the larger

were reduced to a single remote location in Fiordland byTrês Picos State Park, where the only post-release habitat-

the ₁₉₅₀s (Elliot et al. ₂₀₀₁). During the ₁₉₈₀s and ₁₉₉₀s

related management involves anti-poaching patrols by

all surviving kakapo were translocated to predator-freeeight park rangers (Steiner Sao Bernardo et al. ₂₀₀₈).

islands (Lloyd and Powlesland ₁₉₉₄). Currently, kakapo

₁-₃) Highly modiﬁed with low intensity habitat manage-

are on only two southern islands, Codﬁsh/Whenua Hou,

ment: Peregrine Falcon

the only site with a successfully breeding population, andFollowing a rapid decline in population throughout theAnchor Island following a translocation in ₂₀₀₅ (www.

continental United States, in ₁₉₆₉ the Peregrine Falcon

kakaporecovery.org.nz/, accessed ₂₂ June ₂₀₁₁). Bothwas placed on the U.S. Endangered Species list. The pri-islands have dense native forest cover and highly restrictedmary cause of the population crash was widespread use of

public access. These two populations are sustained

the pesticide DDT, and following the ban on DDT use inthrough an intensive management programme that

₁₉₇₀, projects were started to reintroduce Peregrines.

includes stringent measures to prevent reinvasion of

Between ₁₉₇₄ and ₁₉₉₉ over ₅,₀₀₀ Peregrines wereislands by predators.

released, with some of the most successful releases taking

₁-₂) Relatively unmodified with low intensity habitat

place in cities (Heinrich ₂₀₀₉), where tall buildings effec-

management: Red-billed Curassow

tively mimicked the bird＇s cliff nesting habitat. Peregrine

The red-billed curassow is endemic to the Brazilian

Falcons have been reintroduced successfully to a number

Atlantic rainforest, but was driven to extinction in partsof range states and in a variety of environments, I haveof its range by the early ₂₀th century due to hunting pres-chosen to highlight their successful restoration in highly

sure and the loss of habitat (Steiner Sao Bernardo et al.

modiﬁed urban environments requiring no speciﬁc post-₂₀₀₈). There have been successful reintroductions sincerelease habitat management. New York city now has one

₁₉₉₁, the most recent programme returning the birds toof the highest concentrations of peregrine falcons in therelatively intact Atlantic forest in Reserva Ecólogica deworld (Luniak ₂₀₀₄).

10Philip J. Seddon: Habitat restoration in avian reintroductions

₁-₄) Highly modiﬁed with high intensity habitat manage-

modernise.

ment: Oriental White Stork (OWS) and Japanese
Crested Ibis (Toki)
Both the OWS and Toki were extinct in the wild in

₂. Future need for ongoing management to sustain spe-

cies

Japan by ₁₉₇₁ and ₁₉₈₁, respectively, the decline of both

By ₂₀₀₄ loss and degradation of habitat to agricultural

species being due to the combined effects of increased use

expansion was the most signiﬁcant threat affecting birdsof agricultural pesticides and changes in the management

listed as Near Threatened in the IUCN Red List (Birdlifeof the rice paddy ﬁeld systems in which the species used

International ₂₀₀₈). Habitat modiﬁcation by agricultural

to forage for ﬁsh, frogs, and a wide variety of inverte-

and urban expansion is set to become an increasingly

brates (Naito and Ikeda ₂₀₀₇; Sado City Government

important threat to birds globally in the very near future.

₂₀₁₀). Reintroduction projects for OWS and Toki started

This means that not only will greater numbers of birdwith pilot releases in ₂₀₀₅ in the Toyooka Basin of Hyogo

species require conservation interventions, but that thePrefecture, and in ₂₀₀₈ on Sado Island in the Niigata Pre-

area of natural, relatively intact habitat available in which

fecture, respectively (Naito and Ikeda ₂₀₀₇; Sado City

to undertake such interventions is shrinking. It is possible,

Government ₂₀₁₀). For both species the key to future suc-however, for at least some threatened species, to consider

cess lies in the restoration of traditional paddy ﬁeld agri-

restoration of viable wild populations within habitats that

culture, entailing the forging of strong links with thehave been substantially altered by agriculture or urbanisa-

farming community in order to reduce the use of pesti-tion. The challenge will be to determine the factors thatcides, to restore the wet winter condition of paddy ﬁelds,

may limit the establishment, growth and persistence of a

to maintain peripheral water channels to support diverse

reintroduced population and to address these speciﬁcally.

invertebrate communities, and to install ﬁsh ladders to

The physical appearance of habitat within a reintroduction

facilitate natural ﬁsh dispersal and migration pathways.

target area may be a poor guide to habitat suitability, par-The most fascinating aspect of these reintroduction proj-

ticularly if we consider habitat to encompass more thanects is the almost total reliance of the birds on a highly

just landscape and vegetative elements. For example, themodiﬁed agricultural landscape. The ﬁrst paddy ﬁelds inpresence of exotic predators in areas of native forest inJapan date to the Yayoi period, ₁₅₀₀–₂₀₀₀ years ago

New Zealand may not be overtly evident, and may not(Akazawa ₁₉₈₁), and before that time it can be assumed

alter the appearance of the forest, but would signiﬁcantly

that OWS and Toki foraged in much less modiﬁed wet-

reduce the suitability of the site as a potential reintroduc-

land sites. Under traditional rice paddy management sys-

tion area. This is not to say that we give up on the protec-

tems, with no artiﬁcial sprays and with winter ﬂooding,tion and restoration of functional natural ecosystems;

the birds presumably regarded paddy ﬁelds as just anotherrelatively intact habitats will always be needed to sustain

wetland, albeit with more human disturbance. It is per-sensitive species, such as habitat specialists. However, it

haps unique to have to go back more than ₂₀₀₀ years toseems likely that some native species will be more adapt-locate the original habitat type of a species, but clearly theable than we may assume, and that for many species thelong intervening history of use of paddy ﬁelds by bothcause of any original decline may be addressed without

species indicates that up until recently, self-sustaining

having to restore habitat to near pristine conditions.

populations could be sustained in this highly modiﬁed

The other realisation is that for many, perhaps most,environment. However, populations of neither OWS nor

avian reintroduction programmes, management of theToki can persist in the face of increased mechanization

birds and their habitat must be sustained long after thenecessitating changes in water ﬂow regimes, or with thesuccessful establishment of a new population. This idea

increased use of pesticide sprays. The restoration of OWS

of ongoing management is perhaps epitomised by the res-and Toki on mainland Japan will depend on strong sup-toration of Oriental White Stork and Japanese Crested Ibis

port for the project from farmers and local communities

in the satoyama landscapes of rural Japan, landscapes thatand a willingness to restore traditional paddy ﬁeld man-are characterised by the management of the natural envi-

agement systems in the face of economic incentives toronment, described also as ＂natural diversity enriched by

11Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

human intervention＂ (Takeuchi ₂₀₀₃). This is also an
excellent description of the future of many species restorations, where success depends on long-term, perhaps
even perpetual, management. The work does not stop
when the released birds ﬂy free, nor when the ﬁrst wild
hatchlings ﬂedge, and not even when a robust wild population has been established. If we want to have wild populations of storks, or ibis, or kakapo, then we cannot relyon having some last pristine patches of habitat. Although
the reintroduction ideal may be ＂persistence without intervention＂ (Seddon ₁₉₉₉); the reality seems likely to requirea long-term commitment to the stewardship of restored
wildlife populations and their habitats.
Acknowledgements
My sincere thanks to Satoshi Yamagishi, Yasuo Ezaki,
Hishashi Nagata, Yoshito Ohsako, Hiromune Mitsuhashi
for making it possible for me to learn more about thewonderful efforts being made in Japan for the reintroduction of Oriental White Stork and Japanese Crested Ibis. I
am also grateful to Junko Sagara for her expert translation
during formal discussions.

References
Adams L, Cash B (₂₀₁₀) Re-introduction of yellow-crownedkakariki to Long Island (Malborough), Mana Island(Wellington) and Motuara Island (Malborough), New
Zealand. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe.
IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi,
pp. ₁₆₀ – ₁₆₄.
Akazawa T (₁₉₈₁) Maritime adaptation of prehistoric huntergathers and their transition to agriculture in Japan. Senri
Ethnological Studies, ₉: ₂₁₃ – ₂₅₈.
Armstrong DP, Seddon PJ (₂₀₀₈) Directions in reintroduction
biology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, ₂₃: ₂₀ – ₂₅.
Bajomi B (₂₀₀₈) Re-introduction of the white-headed duck to
Kiskunsag, Hungary. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Aroundthe Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group,
Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₃₅ – ₁₃₇.
Birdlife International (₂₀₀₈) Agricultural expansion is a major
threat to birds, and it appears to be increasing in importance.
Presented as part of the Birdlife State of the world ＇ s
birds website. Available from: www.birdlife.org/datazone/
sowb/casestudy/₁₃₀. Accessed ₂₀ June ₂₀₁₁.
Burbridge AH, Comer S, Danks A, Berryman A, Hamilton N(₂₀₁₀) Attempted re-introduction of the western bristlebird
in south-western Australia. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Reintroduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from12

Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist
Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₇₁ – ₁₇₅.
Ceballos G, Garcia A, Ehrlich PR (₂₀₁₀) The sixth extinction
crisis: Loss of animal populations and species. Journal of
Cosmology, ₈: ₁₈₂₁ – ₁₈₃₁.
Crutzen PJ (₂₀₀₂) Geology of Mankind. Nature, ₄₁₅: ₂₃.
Garson P (₂₀₀₈) Attempted re-introduction of cheer pheasant to
the Margalla Hills National Park, Pakistan. In Soorae PS(ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction
Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₃₈ – ₁₄₀.
Gasson P (₂₀₀₈) Wild-to-wild transfer of great spotted kiwi to the
Rotoiti Natuirte Recovery Project, Nelson Lakes National
Park, New Zealand. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Aroundthe Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group,
Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₀₀ – ₁₀₃.
Heinrich WR (₂₀₀₈) Re-introduction of the Aplomado falcon into
Texas and New Mexico, USA. In Soorae PS (ed) Global
Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies
from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₄₅ – ₁₄₈.
Heinrich W (₂₀₀₉) Peregrine Falcon recovery in the continental
United States, ₁₉₇₄ – ₁₉₉₉, with notes on related programs of
the Peregrine Fund. In Sielicki J, Mizera T (eds) Peregrine
Falcon Populations – Status and Perspectives in the ₂₁stCentury. Turul/Poznan Unmiversity of Life Sciences Press,
Warsaw, pp. ₄₂₉ – ₄₄₂.
Hoffman M et al. (₂₀₁₀) The impact of conservation on the statusof the World＇s vertebrates. Science, ₃₃₀: ₁₅₀₃ – ₁₅₀₉.
IUCN (World Conservation Union) (₁₉₉₈) IUCN Guidelines for
Re-introductions. IUCN/ SSC Re-introduction Specialist
Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge United
Kingdom.
Kohley R, Lockyer A (₂₀₀₈) Release of captive-reared Hawaii
creeper and Hawai＇i Akepa into Kipuka ₂₁ on the Big Islandof Hawai＇I, USA. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction
Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Around the
Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu
Dhabi, pp. ₁₁₂ – ₁₁₅.
Lawrence M, Judas J, Combreau O (₂₀₀₈) Re-introduction andpopulation re-enforcement of Asian houbara bustard in Asia.
In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Reintroduction Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₃₀ –₁₃₄.
Lloyd BD, Powlesland RG (₁₉₉₄) The decline of the kakapo
Strigops habroptilus and attempts at conservation by translocation. Biological Conservation, ₆₉: ₇₅ – ₈₅.
Luniak M (₂₀₀₄) Synurbization – adaptation of animal wildlife
to urban development. In Shaw WW, Harris LK, Vandruff L(eds) Proceedings of the ₄th International Urban Wildlife
Symposium, Tucson, AZ, pp. ₅₀ – ₅₅.
Marshall AP, Bank PC, Misajon, K, Hu D (₂₀₀₈) Re-introductionof the nene, a remote island goose, Hawai＇I, USA. In Soorae
PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₉₆ – ₉₉.
Menkhorst P, Quin B, Cartwright K, Smales I (₂₀₁₀) Using captive-bred helmeted honeyeaters to establish a new popula-

Philip J. Seddon: Habitat restoration in avian reintroductions

tion and supplement an existing population, Victoria,
Australia. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe.
IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi,
pp. ₁₆₅ – ₁₇₀.
Mihoub J-B, Le Gouar P, Sarrazin F (₂₀₀₉) Breeding habitat
selection behaviors in heterogeneous environments: implications for modelling reintroduction. Oikos, ₁₁₈: ₆₆₃ – ₆₇₄.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (₂₀₀₅) Ecosystems andHuman Well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington,
D.C., ₁₃₇ p.
Morgan K, McArthur N, Johnston R, Richard Y, Armstrong DP(₂₀₀₈) Using translocation of North Island robins to counter
effects of forest fragmentation in the central North Island of
New Zealand. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Around the
Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu
Dhabi, pp. ₁₁₆ – ₁₂₀.
Murn C, King A, Hunt S, Smith A (₂₀₀₈) Captive breeding andre-introduction of red kites to Hampshire, England. In
Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Reintroduction Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₅₉ –₁₆₂.
Naito K, Ikeda H (₂₀₀₇) Habitat restoration for the reintroductionof Oriental White Storks. Global Environmental Research,
₁₁: ₂₁₇ – ₂₂₁
Newbery P (₂₀₁₀) Re-introduction of corncrakes in the UK. In
Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₂₄ – ₁₂₇.
O＇Toole L (₂₀₀₈) The re-introduction of the golden eagle to
Glenveagh National Park, County Donegal, Republic of
Ireland. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Around the Globe.
IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi,
pp. ₁₄₉ – ₁₅₂.
Ortiz-Catedral L, Adams L, Hauber ME, Brunton DH (₂₀₁₀a)
Conservation translocations of red-fronted parakeet on
Matiu/Somes Island and Motuihe Island, New Zealand. In
Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₅₅ – ₁₅₉.
Ortiz-Catedral L, Kearvell J, Brunton DH (₂₀₁₀b) Re-introduction of captive-bred Malherbe＇s parakeet to Maud Island,
Malborough Sounds, New Zealand. In Soorae PS (ed)Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/ SSC Re-introduction
Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₅₁ – ₁₅₄.
Pickett M (₂₀₁₀) Re-introduction of the Mount Lofty Ranges
southern emu-wren to Cox Scrub Conservation Park, South
Australia. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe.
IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi,
pp. ₁₇₆ – ₁₈₁.
Rantanen EM, Buner F, Riordan P, Sotherton NW, Macdonald
DW (₂₀₁₀) Grey partridge supplementations in Oxfordshireand east Gloucestershire, UK. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Reintroduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies fromAround the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction SpecialistGroup, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₂₈ – ₁₃₁.
Rocamora G, Henriette-Payet E (₂₀₀₈) Conservation introductionof the Seychelles white eye on predator-free rehabilitatedislands of the Seychelles archipelago, Indian Ocean. In
Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Reintroduction Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₂₁ –₁₂₉.
Sado City Government (₂₀₁₀) Sado Island Guiding Principles forharmonious coexistence with biological diversity: Aiming
towards a biodiverse community nurturing Japan＇s Crested
Ibis. Biodiversity Strategy Ofﬁce, Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries Department, Sado City, Niigata Prefecture, Japan,
₂₅ p.
Seddon PJ (₁₉₉₉) Persistence without intervention: assessing success in wildlife reintroduction. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, ₁₄: ₅₀₃.
Seddon PJ (₂₀₁₀) From reintroduction to assisted colonization:
moving along the conservation translocation spectrum. Restoration Ecology, ₁₈: ₇₉₆ – ₈₀₂.
Seddon PJ, Armstrong DP, Maloney RF (₂₀₀₇) Combining theﬁelds of reintroduction biology and restoration ecology.
Conservation Biology, ₂₁: ₁₃₈₈ – ₁₃₉₀.
Stanley Price MR, Soorae PS (₂₀₀₃) Reintroductions: whence
and whither? International Zoo Yearbook, ₃₈: ₆₁ – ₇₅.
Steffen W, Crutzen PJ, McNeill JR (₂₀₀₇) The Anthropocene:
Are humans now over whelming the great forces of nature?
Ambio, ₃₆: ₆₁₄ – ₆₂₁.
Steiner Sao Bernardo C, Azeredo R, Simpson J, Valgas Paiva E(₂₀₀₈) The re-introduction of the red-billed curassow atReserva Ecologica de Guapiacu, Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil.
In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Reintroduction Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₀₈ –₁₁₁.
Takeuchi K (₂₀₀₃) The nature of satoyama landscapes: Satoyama
landscapes as managed nature. In Takeuchi K, Brown RD,
Washitani I, Tsunekawa A, Yokohara M (eds) Satoyama: The
Traditional Rural Landscape of Japan. Springer-Verlag,
Tokyo, pp. ₉ – ₁₆.
Theron N, Turner A (₂₀₀₈) Ten tears on: a re-introduction ofsouthern ground hornbill on Mabula Private Game Reserve
ion the Limpopo Province of South Africa. In Soorae PS(ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction
Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₀₄ – ₁₀₇.
USFWS (₂₀₁₁) Peregrine Falcon Reintroduction overview.
[accessed ₁₇ June ₂₀₁₁, http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/3315.
htm]
van Heezik Y, Maloney RF, Seddon PJ (₂₀₀₉) Movements oftranslocated captive-bred and released Critically Endangeredkaki (Black Stilt) Himantopus novaezelandiae and the valueof long-term post-release monitoring. Oryx, ₄₃: ₆₃₉ – ₆₄₇.
Wolf CM, Garland T, Grifﬁth B (₁₉₉₈) Predictors of avian andmammalian translocation success: reanalysis with phylogenetically independent contrasts. Biological Conservation, ₈₆:
₂₄₃ – ₂₅₅.
Zafur-ul Islam M, Boug A, Shobrak M (₂₀₀₈) Conservation status of re-introduced red-necked ostrich in Mahazat as-Sayd,
Saudi Arabia. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Per13

Reintroduction（2011）1:5 – 14

spectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Around the
Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu
Dhabi, pp. ₉₁ – ₉₅.
Zafur-ul Islam M, Bolug A, Basheer, MP, Sher Shah M, al Subai
H (₂₀₁₀) Re-introduction successes of Asian houbara bustard in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In Soorae PS (ed)Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Additional Case Studies from Around the Globe. IUCN/ SSC Re-introduction

14

Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₃₂ – ₁₃₈.
Zink R, Frey H (₂₀₀₈) Re-introduction of the bearded vulture to
the European Alps. In Soorae PS (ed) Global Re-introduction Perspectives: Re-introduction Case Studies from Aroundthe Globe. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group,
Abu Dhabi, pp. ₁₄₁ – ₁₄₄.

(Accepted: ₁₄ September ₂₀₁₁)