When New Zealand separated from Gondwanaland 80 million years ago, it’s generally accepted that the only mammals to make the journey with the shifting land mass were the long and short tailed bats. While they continued to survive, other species such as insects became large and slow, such as the Pill Millipedes and giant Weta. Birds also evolved uniquely, becoming large flightless ground dwellers - like the giant Moa species and the flightless Kakapo and Takahe. Many animals grew fearless and large.
So before man arrived, animals ruled the New Zealand landscape. With no dominant predators to speak of they were able to develop so uniquely, untouched. But does that have to mean that there couldn’t have been another mammal here also, one that developed alongside the animals we accept and recognise today?
Its generally accepted that the first serious mammalian predators arrived with the first Maori peoples from Hawaii-iki. Around 2000 years ago they came, bring dogs and both Polynesian rats and the Kiore, or Maori Rat as it is known today.
Later when European settlers arrived, they quickly introduced a multitude of new mammal species also, with little or no thought to the impact they might have on the environment. These included cats, quoll, hogs and wallabies.
Cook's ship Resolution, from which a first sighting was made. ( http://www.heritage.nf.ca/exploration/cook_ship.html )
But even before European settlers gained a ‘foothold’ on the New Zealand landscape, reports were being made of sightings of a ‘beaver-like’ animal. One of the first came from the logs of Captain James Cook of the Resolution in 1773. Cook himself reported seeing a cat-sized, four legged tawny like animal on the shore at Pickersgill Harbour. Another man added it seemed to have a bushy, almost jackal-like tail. The ships naturalists, without actually sighting the animal themselves, speculated it must be a fox or ships cat that had somehow managed to beat the crew ashore.
In the 1840’s sightings of a beaver-like animal were again made, this time from the Lake Hawera are of the South Island. A European settler in the area at the time offered a reward to anyone who could bring him the pelt of the elusive animal. Although his wish wasn’t recognised, he did learn from the local Maori of a creature they called Kaureke. A cat-sized animal with a bushy tail, it laid eggs and was greatly prized by the Maori.
Lake Hawera in the late 1800's. ( http://www.tepapa.govt.nz/images/ )
In 1855 the Reverend Richard Taylor published a book titled ‘Te Ika A Maui’ (New Zealand and its inhabitants). It contained the following information:
“A man named Seymour, or Otaki, stated that he had repeatedly seen an animal in the Middle Island (now called the South Island), near Dusky Bay, on the south-west coast, which he called a musk-rat, from the strong smell it emitted. He said its tail was thick and resembled the ripe pirori, the fruit of the kie-kie, which is not unlike in appearance to the tail of a beaver. This account was corroborated by Tamihana te Rauparaha, who spoke of it as being more than double the size of the Norway Rat, and as having a large flat tail. A man named Tom Crib, who had been engaged in whaling and sealing in the neighborhood of Dusky Bay for more than twenty-five years, said he had not himself seen the beaver, but had several times met with its habitations, and had been surprised by seeing little streams dammed up, and houses like bee-hives erected on one side, having two entrances, one from above and the other below the dam. One of the Camerons, who lived at Kaiwarawara, when the settlers first came to Wellington, stated that he saw one of these large rats and pursued it, but it took to the water and dived out of sight.”
In 1862, German born Julius von Haast, New Zealand’s first premier geologist, stated to a fellow he was sure that otter-like animals populated the rivers of the South Island. He often found match boxed sized tracks of webbed feet along the rivers he traversed.
While totally convincing evidence of the Waitoreke does not exist today, certainly sightings from the 1800’s gathered some tantalising evidence of the existence of some sort of animal. Familiar stories included the following features:
* The creature was small, brown and elusive.
* It was observed mostly near rivers and lakes.
* It could be found at various altitudes.
* Dams could be occasionally found, not unlike those of beavers (beavers are not known to have been officially released in New Zealand)
* They could be found entering or exiting burrows or tunnels at the waters edges.
* Musky smells sometimes accompanied sightings.
Sightings of this elusive animal seemed to begin to be documented more frequently again in the 1960’s. In the Southland area of the South Island, an adult otter-like animal and three young were seen slipping out of a stream. In 1971 in the Hollyford River a hunter reported watching an otter-like animal ‘playing’, on the riverbank for about 15 minutes before it finally disappeared.
So if there was, and maybe still is, a small shy mammal living in the New Zealand wilds, what might it be? There seems to be three main possibilities that may answered this.
Firstly, as Waitoreke is mainly described as beaver or otter-like, these two suspects must be seriously considered as candidates. While no complete habitat descriptions fits either - beavers for example are not really known to frequent burrows and otters do not build dams as a rule, the physical attributes given to each animal vaguely describe both. One report of Waitoreke having small rounded flat ears and a penchant for eating fish sounds very otter-like. While the discovery of igloo-type living mounds sound much like the lodge of a beaver.
The Otter - a likely candidate? ( http://www.naturfoto.cz.com )
What is pretty well known is that neither otter or beaver were officially released into the New Zealand wilderness. That is not to say, that long before any sort of quarantine or governmental laws of importation were enacted this could not have happened. We certainly know that similar animals such as Stoat, Weasel and Ferret were definitely released, however the aquatic habitat consistent with Waitoreke reports would rule them out.
So if not the otter and beaver candidates, what else? Could it be that sightings of this retiring animal were in fact miss-identified seal sightings. Of all the pinniped species, New Zealand Fur Seals, Hookers Seal Lions and Elephant seals frequent the oceans around the three main islands. In the 1800’s there were sufficient numbers to make sealing a growing and flourishing industry. While it would be rare to find them inland, it is not considered impossible as around the world they are known to have been found in areas such as Loch Ness.
NZ Fur Seal - mistaken identity? ( http://www.pinniped.org/species/nzfursl.htm )
One thing about the pinniped theory is that physically the descriptions are not at all similar. While dynamite in the water, pinniped have flippers, not legs with webbed feet - they are clumsy and slow on land and highly unlikely to frequent burrows.
So that leaves a last main theory, and an intriguing one at that. Is it possible, that in the separation from Gondwanaland, New Zealand retained and evolved its own monotreme species. Indeed, Australia, our closest geographical neighbour has its own monotreme species, the Echidna and the Platypus.
It is easy to discard the Echidna, as at first sight its doesn’t share the main attributes given to the Waitoreke; it is terrestrial and spiny and not at all well adapted for an aquatic lifestyle.
The Platypus however, is a much more likely candidate. Indeed, some Maori description of the Waitoreke speak of it having ‘spurs’, much like those of the paws of the male Platypus. Some descriptions also talk of the laying of eggs, much like the platypus, and the elusiveness and love of aquatic habitat certainly add up. So while the Platypus monotreme theory cannot totally be proven, it certainly cannot be discarded altogether.
The Echidna, an unlikely match.
The Platypus, a possible contender. ( Both pictures
http://www.fauns.com.au/monotreme )
By far the most frustrating of all aspects in the search for the truth about the Waitoreke, is the complete and utter lack of physical evidence. There are no photographs of them at the waters edge, and no casts of the webbed tracks alongside the rivers. There is no definitive skins and no bones or complete skeletons. And while we cant be totally sure of the seat of the legend, there is certainly enough lore from the Maori peoples and European settlers to show that something did once roam the New Zealand countryside; something no quite meant to be there.
Sources:
http://newanimal.org/motter.htm
http://www.cryptozoology.com/cryptids/waitoreke.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitoreke
Board index
