Register      Login
Emu Emu Society
Journal of BirdLife Australia
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > MU > MU06056
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 108(1)

Restoring avian island endemics: use of supplementary food by the endangered Pink Pigeon (Columba mayeri)

Kelly Edmunds A B , Nancy Bunbury A B D , Shivananden Sawmy B , Carl G. Jones B C and Diana J. Bell A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK.

B Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Grannum Road, Vacoas, Mauritius.

C Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, Les Augrès Manor, Trinity, Jersey, JE3 5BP, Channel Islands, UK.

D Corresponding author. Email: nancy.bunbury@virgin.net

Emu 108(1) 74-80 https://doi.org/10.1071/MU06056
Submitted: 9 November 2006  Accepted: 12 February 2008   Published: 13 March 2008

Abstract

The wild population of Pink Pigeons (Columba mayeri) of Mauritius has recovered from ten individuals in 1990 to ~390 birds in 2008. Limited availability of native feeding habitat is a primary factor restricting further increases in population. Current management of the species includes provision of supplementary food (wheat) and restoration of native forest habitat. This study investigated dependence on supplementary food by examining patterns of supplementary food use and social interactions in two Pink Pigeon subpopulations. During 72 h of observations over a 10-week study period 99% of the birds visited supplementary feeding stations, and the combined duration of these visits per individual was 0–1.7% of the total observation period. Frequency of visits peaked in late afternoon and timing of feeding visits also varied between sexes in one subpopulation, where males fed for longer after daytime nest incubation (1600–1800 hours) than females, and females fed for longer than males throughout the middle of the day (1000–1300 hours). Younger birds (<1 year old) fed more frequently than older birds. Implications of these findings for the long-term management of this and other recovering avian populations are discussed.


Acknowledgements

We thank the staff and volunteers involved in the Mauritian Wildlife Foundation/Mauritius NPCS Pink Pigeon restoration program, particularly those who assisted with this research: A. Powell, K. Ramoo, A. Rane and R. Kennerley. We are very grateful to J. Reynolds, S. Schoech and an anonymous reviewer for their constructive comments on the manuscript. KE was supported by a partial NERC studentship NER/S/M/2004/12522. This research was funded by the Henrietta Hutton Memorial Fund, British Ornithologists’ Union, Whitley Wildlife Conservation Trust, the Isobel Blackman Foundation and the University of East Anglia.


References

Armstrong, D. P. , and Perrott, J. K. (2000). An experiment testing whether condition and survival are limited by food supply in a reintroduced hihi population. Conservation Biology 14, 1171–1181.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Atkinson R., and Sawmy M. (2003). Research and management suggestions for constructing self-sustainable and healthy Pink Pigeon populations. Unpublished report to the Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Vacoas, Mauritius.

Brightsmith, D. , Hilburn, J. , del Campo, A. , Boyd, J. , Frisius, M. , Frisius, R. , Janik, D. , and Guillen, F. (2005). The use of hand-raised psittascines for reintroduction: a case study of Scarlet Macaws (Ara macao) in Peru and Costa Rica. Biological Conservation 121, 465–472.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Bunbury N. (2006). Parasitic disease in the endangered Pink Pigeon Columba mayeri. Ph.D. Thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Butler D., and Merton D. (1992). ‘The Black Robin, Saving the World’s Most Endangered Bird.’ (Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.)

Carter S. P., and Bright P. W. (2002). Habitat refuges as alternatives to predator control for the conservation of endangered Mauritian birds. In ‘Turning the Tide: The Eradication of Invasive Species’. (Eds C. R. Veitch and M. N. Clout.) pp. 71–78. (International Union for the Conservation of Nature SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group: Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.)

Castro, I. , Brunton, D. H. , Mason, K. M. , Ebert, B. , and Griffiths, R. (2003). Life history traits and food supplementation affect productivity in a translocated population of the endangered Hihi (stitchbird, Notiomystis cincta). Biological Conservation 114, 271–280.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Edmunds K. L. (2005). Resource utilisation: territory distribution and supplementary food use by the endangered Pink Pigeon Columba mayeri. M.Sc. Thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Elliott, G. P. , Merton, D. V. , and Jansen, P. W. (2001). Intensive management of a critically endangered species: the Kakapo. Biological Conservation 99, 121–133.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | IUCN (2004). ‘Red List of Endangered Species.’ Available at http://www.redlist.org/ [Accessed: 15 October 2006], IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

Houston, D. C. , Mcinnes, K. , Elliott, G. , Eason, D. , Moorhouse, R. , and Cockrem, J. (2007). The use of a nutritional supplement to improve egg production in the endangered kakapo. Biological Conservation 138, 248–255.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Jones C. G. ((1987). ). The larger land birds of Mauritius. In ‘Studies of Mascarene Island Birds’. (Ed. A. W. Diamond.) pp. 208–300. (Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.)

Jones C. G. (1995). Studies on the biology of the Pink Pigeon Columba mayeri. Ph.D. Thesis, University College of Swansea, University of Wales, Swansea, UK.

Jones C. G. (2004). Conservation management of endangered birds. In ‘Bird Ecology and Conservation’. (Eds W. J. Sutherland, I. Newton and R. E. Green.) pp. 269–301. (Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.)

Jones, C. G. , Swinnerton, K. J. , Taylor, C. J. , and Mungroo, Y. (1992). The release of captive-bred Pink Pigeons Columba mayeri in native forest on Mauritius – a progress report July 1987 – June 1992. Dodo Journal of the Wildlife Preservation Trusts 28, 92–125.
Newton I. (1998). ‘Population Limitation in Birds.’ (Academic Press: London.)

Perdeck, A. C. , Visser, M. E. , and van Balen, J. H. (2000). Great Tit Parus major survival and the beech-crop cycle. Ardea 88, 99–108.
Rane A. N. (2005). Restoring the endangered Pink Pigeons (Columba mayeri) and Echo Parakeets (Psittacula eques) in Mauritius: feeding ecology. M.Sc. Thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Reynolds, S. J. , Schoech, S. J. , and Bowman, R. (2003a). Diet quality during pre-laying and nestling periods influences growth and survival of Florida Scrub-jay chicks. Journal of Zoology 261, 217–226.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Swinnerton K. J. (2001). Conservation and ecology of the Pink Pigeon Columba mayeri in Mauritius. Ph.D. Thesis, Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

Verner, J. (1992). Data needs for avian conservation biology: have we avoided critical research. Condor 94, 301–303.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | Walton B. J., and Thelander C. G. (1988). Peregrine Falcon management efforts in California, Oregon, Washington and Nevada. In ‘Peregrine Falcon Populations, Their Management and Recovery’. (Eds T. J. Cade, J. H. Enderson, C. G. Thelander and C. M. White.) pp. 587–597. (The Peregrine Fund Inc.: Boise, ID.)

Whittaker R. J. (1998). ‘Island Biogeography.’ (Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.)

Wilson J. D. (2001). Foraging habitat selection by skylarks on lowland farmland during the nestling period. In ‘The Ecology and Conservation of Skylarks Alauda arvensis’. (Eds P. F. Donald and J. Vickery.) pp. 91–101. (The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds: Sandy, Bedfordshire, UK.)

Worthington T. (2004). The use of supplementary feeding by the Echo Parakeet Psittacula eques echo and its effect on chick productivity. M.Sc. Thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Zeigler, H. P. , Green, H. L. , and Siegel, J. (1972). Food and water intake and weight regulation in the pigeon. Physiology & Behavior 8, 127–134.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |