Translocations are becoming increasingly common although the effectiveness of this conservation tool for amphibians is highly variable.We reviewed ten translocations of Leiopelma frogs occurring between 1924 and 2016.Data were gathered on factors which may have influenced translocation outcomes.Results at each location were measured against an established four-step framework for stages of success: survival of individuals, reproduction, population growth, and population viability.Three conservation translocations and two mitigation translocations were considered to have failed, indicated by no or low survival of founders or lack of evidence of reproduction within a reasonable timeframe.Causes of failure include invasive predators at the release site, small founder numbers, homing, and poor habitat quality.The remaining five translocations were considered either successful (meeting all four stages of success), or on the road to success (meeting at least the first two stages of success).Successful translocations included predator control, total release of more than 70 founders, and in some cases adaptive management to address management decisions over time.Our findings emphasise the need for long-term post-release monitoring (> 25 years) to determine translocation success for K-selected species.Better, cost-effective, methods for monitoring population growth and population viability are required for Leiopelma frogs.Improvements could be made in open access reporting of methods and decision-making, disease risk analysis and stakeholder engagement.Further, improving our knowledge of what makes high quality Leiopelma habitat would help to objectively assess potential future translocation sites.Future translocations should consider the impacts of predicted global climate change; assisted migration may be required in the future.Translocations are a risky conservation strategy, so should only be undertaken with good cause, quality planning, and sufficient long-term resources for monitoring and management.Any future translocations for Leiopelma, whether motivated by conservation or mitigation, should follow best practice guidelines and use evidence-based decision-making to maximise outcomes.

While most anurans lay their eggs in or near water, there is a wide diversity of species that lay their eggs on the ground, under rocks, or in burrows.For these terrestrial-breeding species, identifying the habitat requirements of oviposition sites is particularly useful for conservation and management planning, given that oviposition in anurans is strongly related to the environmental characteristics in which they live.Leiopelma archeyi is an endemic New Zealand frog that reproduces on moist substrates.Males brood eggs and carry larvae within retreats until metamorphosis is complete.Two previous observations (in November 2014) reported frogs attending eggs inside dead, hollow trunks of tree-ferns (ponga, Cyathea spp. or Dicksonia spp.).We examined whether these observations were random or whether ponga was a breeding resource consistently used by L. archeyi.We used a non-disturbance protocol and focussed on searching inside ponga systematically during three consecutive breeding seasons.This monitoring allowed us to corroborate the reproductive mode previously known for this species and confirm ponga as a recurring oviposition site for L. archeyi.Around 10% of the oviposition sites monitored during the parental-care period were observed with more than one adult inside.Furthermore, we selected three individual ponga known to be used as oviposition sites to mark the centre of a plot from which we measured all ponga trunks.We fitted a mixed-model logistic regression to examine whether the use of ponga as an oviposition site by L. archeyi was predicted by length and/or diameter at the opening of the trunk.However, neither of these trunk characteristics were useful predictors for the use of ponga as an oviposition site.Our observations raise questions about the reproductive mode of this species such as oviposition site fidelity, and interactions within a community level between two ancestral lineages (Leiopelmatidae and tree ferns).

Context Leiopelma archeyi is a threatened New Zealand amphibian species translocated for conservation purposes. A disease outbreak triggered the translocation of 70 frogs to Pureora Forest in 2006 to establish a new wild population of L. archeyi. Ten years after, 60 more frogs were translocated to this site to enhance the genetic and demographic profile of L. archeyi in Pureora Forest. Here, we analysed 14 years of capture–recapture monitoring data collected for this translocated population. Aims Our aim was to estimate population demographic parameters that allow us to assess the demographic performance of this translocated population. Methods We used spatially explicit capture–recapture (SECR; also called spatial capture–recapture) multi strata/session models to estimate population density and derive its rate of change over time. Key results Here we show that the density of translocated Leiopelma archeyi in Pureora (central North Island, New Zealand) remains stable for most of the study period. After the release of 70 frogs in 2006, density varied from 0.02 frogs/m2 in April 2007 to 0.06 frogs/m2 in December 2014. After the second release of 60 frogs in 2016, density in Pureora of L. archeyi varied from 0.21 frogs/m2 in November 2016 to 0.63 frogs/m2 in November 2018. Conclusions The study species is a long-lived k-selected species, therefore long-term monitoring (>20 years) is required to corroborate demographic indicators. Nevertheless, as the current density estimates are higher than the density estimated for this population after each release (April 2007 and November 2016), we suggest progress towards the establishment of a new wild population of L. archeyi in Pureora Forest. Implications Translocations are a useful conservation tool for many threatened species and post-release monitoring data are the main source of information needed to empirically prove their success.

In New Zealand, it is a legal requirement to involve local Maori people in making decisions about the management of treasured species, and in carrying out that management. This requires a safe space in which both Maori perspectives and western scientific perspectives on how to protect these species can be included. Yet, the full benefits of having such a partnership are usually overlooked, and the protocols and strategies applied have often failed to incorporate Maori culture in the creation of knowledge and in maintaining the relationship. Here we propose a novel framework for amphibian conservation, based on an analysis of a two-way partnership developed during the translocation of a native frog species between two areas in the King Country. The framework 'get together, work together, write together' was identified after Maori and non-Maori authors reflected on the experiences, learnings and thoughts that they had during the partnership associated with this translocation project. 'Get together' refers to building a relationship that provides people with a sense of belonging (whanaungatanga). 'Work together' refers to the cooperative exchange of knowledge, and 'write together' refers to the contribution of new approaches and ways of carrying out research that incorporates all partners' voices. This study provides evidence of the feasibility of partnerships and their long-term conservation benefits. It also emphasises that the multiple cultural connections of Maori with native frogs converge with western conservation perspectives. We offer a detailed explanation of each stage's philosophy and practice to facilitate and encourage use of our framework in other biological/cultural contexts. This involvement should include face-to-face collaboration in order to share experiences, skills and knowledge.