Falkland Island Seabird Monitoring Programme Annual Report 2007/2008

Transcription

1 FALKLAND ISLANDS SEABIRD MONITORING PROGRAMME SMP 15 Falkland Island Seabird Monitoring Programme Annual Report 2007/2008 By Nic Huin July 2008 FALKLANDS CONSERVATION PO Box 26 Stanley

2 SUMMARY Overall the seabird monitoring programme showed that the 2007/08 season was very good for some species and average for others. Gentoo penguins had a slight increase in population size and experienced their highest breeding success, for the forth time in a row. King penguins are still on the increase with the second highest number of chicks produced in November. Rockhopper penguin numbers were more or less stable this season and well-protected colonies had an average breeding success. Colonies that are now too small for protection or where cormorant left them alone, like on Sea Lion Island suffered very low breeding success. Monitoring of Magellanic penguins restarted this season. Heavy floods in the beginning of the season caused lots of nests to fail, but well drained areas experienced high breeding density. Like gentoo penguins they experienced high breeding success and the new study site on Steeple Jason was easily monitored and should produce good results in seasons to come. Southern giant petrels are still on the increase and breeding success was normal. Another colony was discovered in Lafonia. Black-browed albatross numbers were stable this season and breeding success was the highest recorded. This season was the second of a long-term demographic study. It was based on a study colony on Steeple Jason where around 400 nests were marked and all birds breeding were ringed, slowly increasing the numbers of ringed birds monitored. Breeding success in the study colony was slightly lower than in the previous season, but still above average. This is the first season that we could calculate a recovery rate from last year ringed birds. A total of 89.81% of birds were recovered, from which a future annual survival rate will be calculated.

3 INTRODUCTION This season followed changes started in the previous one, with a few more improvements. This involved the re-introduction of the monitoring of Magellanic penguins and improvement of rockhopper penguins monitoring dates. As in the previous season, not only penguins were monitored, but also black-browed albatross and southern giant-petrel. The introduction last year of the black-browed albatross demographic study on Steeple Jason meant that the calendar had to be readjusted to be able to monitor all species involved within their respective breeding cycle. This was especially true for the second part of the season when fledging time of the different species had to be accommodated. This implied that rockhopper and Magellanic penguin chicks had to be monitored early in January, followed by the visit to Steeple Jason and finishing counts of gentoo penguin chicks in early February. The last visit to Steeple Jason was conducted at the same dates as last season when blackbrowed albatross chicks were ringed and southern giant-petrel chicks also counted as during the visit in January most of the chicks were still guarded by their parents and counts would have created too much disturbance. Ideally, this will provide better results within the time frame and resources available and will provide a solid base for future monitoring and will continue to produce an effective method for the conservation of such important species in the Falkland Islands.

4 MATERIALS & METHODS POPULATION SIZE & BREEDING SUCCESS Breeding success and population size was determined at Volunteer Point (Volunteer Beach, Cow Bay, Lagoon Sands; gentoo, Magellanic and king penguins), the north coast of Berkeley Sound (rockhopper penguins), Port San Carlos (Fanning Head, Rookery Bay, Paloma Beach; rockhopper and gentoo penguins), Bull Point (gentoo penguins), Walker Creek (Low Bay, Motley Point and Sandhills; gentoo penguins), New Haven (gentoo penguins), Fitzroy (Fox Point and Bertha s Beach; gentoo penguins), Sea Lion Island (rockhopper, Magellanic and gentoo penguins and southern giant petrels), Gypsy Cove to Hadessa Bay area (Magellanic penguins) and Steeple Jason Island (two colonies of gentoo penguins, three study colonies of rockhopper penguins, two areas of Magellanic penguins. three colonies of southern giant petrel and five study colonies of black-browed albatross). When available, further counts of known colonies of southern giant petrel were also made, especially for sites close to other penguin monitoring sites. For gentoo and rockhopper penguins and southern giant-petrels (apart at Steeple Jason), numbers of breeding pairs (at the beginning of the breeding season in November) and chicks (shortly before fledging in January/February) were counted at least twice by two or more people using tally counters (in accordance with standard methods, Thompson, 1989; Ingham, 1998). When the two counts differed by more than 10%, a third count per person was conducted and all counts within the 10% limits were subsequently averaged. For four of the black-browed albatross colonies and southern giant-petrel colonies on Steeple Jason, the same method was employed, apart that the second count was conducted in mid-march. The fifth black-browed albatross colony was part of a new demographic study (see below). The results obtained were then used to calculate both colony size (in terms of number of breeding pairs) and the breeding success (expressed in terms of number of chick produced per pair for penguins and as a percentage for petrel and albatross) for each site. For king penguins, only the final number of chicks produced at the end of the season (November) was counted. This number of chicks reflects both the annual breeding success and original number of breeding birds. It is very hard for this species to assess the true number of breeding birds as they do not breed annually and at the early egg stage differentiating breeding birds from non-breeders is almost

5 impossible within the scope of a single visit; a fact further complicated by the long span of time during which eggs are laid. For Magellanic penguins, two methods were used. At Sea Lion Island and Volunteer Green, counts were made by transects. At Steeple Jason two study plots (the first area was to the west of the neck and south of the gentoo penguin colony and the second area was to the east of the neck north of the track and between two patches of cinnamon grass) and at the area between Gypsy Cove and Hadessa bay all burrows were counted in what is called the direct method. Each transect was marked by a 30 metres rope on the ground and the ends marked by short bamboo poles. Four randomly selected transects were marked at Volunteer Green and five at Sea Lion Island in areas of high density of burrows to obtain a big enough sample size. Each transect was then inspected with a four metres long string (2m each side of the transect line) and every burrow inspected. Each burrow was recorded as occupied (adult on egg in November and either one or two chicks in January), empty or unclassifiable if occupancy couldn t be determined. The number of burrows of unknown status was later reassigned to the other categories with respect to the same proportion of known burrows. Results for the number of breeding pairs were expressed as the percentage of burrows occupied for both methods, the density of breeding burrows (pairs.km -2 ) for the transect method and the total number of occupied burrows in the direct method. Breeding success, like for other penguin species was expressed as the number of chicks produced per pair. DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY OF BLACK-BROWED ALBATROSS This season was the second of this study and involved three visits to the site on Steeple Jason. The first and longest took place from mid October to mid November, when a total of 400 nests were marked and all breeding birds were checked. Nests were marked with cattle tags and checked birds were painted on the breast with orange spray paint to avoid them being disturbed more than once. Checked birds were either ringed, in which case their ring number was identified, or they were not, in which case they were ringed on the right leg using stainless steel rings provided under license by the British Trust for Ornithology (license /C/4600). Regular visits were then conducted to check as many of the partner of the marked nests as possible. Each nest was approached slowly, if the bird was ringed, it was lifted gently and the ring number read, if it was not ringed, the egg was removed temporarily for protection, the

6 bird was then held by the leg and ringed and finally the egg was replaced carefully. On few occasions the bird started to leave the nest. In each case the ringer moved downwind of the bird and waited until the bird moved back to the nest. No bird deserted after handling. Visits were carried out until all partners available were checked (few nests failed before the partner came back). Nest failures were recorded as when they occurred and nest tags removed. The rest of the study colony was counted individually with tally counter and spray paint to have as accurate an estimate of its size as possible. A second visit took place in the second half of January, when all marked nests were checked and failed nests recorded. A final visit took place in mid March, where all the chicks from the marked nests were ringed on the left leg (for future easy identification when they will be recruited in the breeding population). Tags of all nests were removed and their outcome recorded (failed, successful or unknown). To boost sample size a further 19 chicks were ringed from outside the tagged nests. The rest of the chicks present in the study colony were also counted by tally counter to estimate breeding success of the whole colony to compare with the study area. STATISTICS All statistical analysis, apart any regression analysis, was carried out using Minitab 13 for Windows. SigmaPlot 2000 was used to plot graphs and to conduct regression analysis. Prior to analysis, data were checked for normality or homogeneity of variance. In cases where such assumptions were invalid, data transformation was conducted for Analysis of variance and regression analysis were modified using weighting to stabilise homoscedasticity. As the breeding season takes place over two calendar years, each season was mentioned either in full (e.g. 2003/04) or by the year in which the season started (e.g for the season 2004/2005). All values given in the text are mean ± 1 Standard Error.

7 RESULTS & DISCUSSION POPULATION SIZE AND BREEDING SUCCESS Gentoo penguin Breeding pair numbers and breeding success for all seasons monitored are provided in Figures 1 to 7 and Table 1 in appendix 1. Of the same 15 monitoring sites visited during 2006 (Huin 2007) and 2007, 9 increased and 6 decreased, providing an overall increase in population size of 2.3%. None of the changes were substantial and out of the six sites that decreased in 2007, four were colonies badly affected by the HAB event of 2002/03 (Uhart et al 2004) that haven t yet fully recovered. These four sites are Bull point, Sea Lion and the two colonies on Steeple Jason. The colony at Sandhills in Walker Creek is still not in use and it appears that its penguins have now moved to the nearby site of Motley Point were numbers now exceeds the total number of these two colonies in All other sites showed far less variation in their population size. Overall, no trend exists in the gentoo penguin population size of the Falkland Islands, confirming the results of the last full island census (Huin 2006). In 2007 the average breeding success was the highest recorded at 1.44 chicks per pair, for the forth year in a row. No breeding success was lower than 1,1 chicks per pair, the first time that all colonies monitored produced no less than one chick per pair. The highest record was 1.73 chicks per pair at Fanning Harbour, again the highest ever recorded. This bode well for the gentoo penguins, a species that declined between the 2000 and 2005 censuses, but which on its way to recovery since then. Magellanic penguin After three years of interruption, it is the first return to the monitoring of Magellanic penguins. In addition to previous study sites, part of Steeple Jason have now been included and it is hoped to expand this sites in future seasons. All results are shown in Figures 8 to 10 and in Table 2 in appendix 1. At both Sea Lion Island and Volunteer Green both the density of breeding pair (36.04 pairs.km -2 ) and the percentage of occupancy (25.22%) were slightly below average, whilst the colony at Gypsy Cove was slightly above average. We cannot compare results of Steeple Jason, as it is the first time it was conducted at this site, although compared to other sites the percentage of burrows occupied was lower at around 15%. However, casual observations reveal that original numbers at the start of the season were much higher

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18 than those recorded and that heavy rainfall in early November caused numerous burrows to be flooded before counts were made. For example, 24 of 90 burrows inspected at Volunteer point (around 27%) were flooded at the time monitoring took place. Breeding success was the highest recorded ever at 1.78 chicks per pair, with most burrows that survived flooded being successful and most of the successful pairs produced each two chicks. It shows that even if breeding numbers were not as high as it should be, there was no shortage of food for the production of healthy chicks by the end of the season. The inclusion of Steeple Jason as a study site was successful and there is all hope that this can be developed and the area monitored on the island to be increased. This species appeared to have a slump in breeding numbers in the early 2000 s, it seems to have recovered and both numbers and productivity have increased in recent years, although it is our first measured effort to record it. Hopefully, next start of the season will be less affected by heavy rain and number should be able to reveal the true extend of this species recovery. King penguin As in all previous years, King penguin chicks were counted in November at the main colony in Volunteer Green, just before fledging. A Total of 501 chicks were counted in 2007 compared to 533 in 2006 (Figure 11 and Table 3 in appendix 1). This is the second highest number of chicks recorded at the main king penguin colony of the Falkland Islands. The rate of increase now stands at around chicks per year. Another colony that normally produces chicks and situated at Lagoon Sands didn t have a single chick left after the end of the winter in the last four seasons. Rockhopper penguin Rockhopper populations were monitored at the same 6 sites in 2007 as in the previous season (Figures 12 to 14 and Table 4 in appendix 1). They increased, compared to the previous season at the three sites on Steeple Jason, decreased at Fanning Head and are more or less stable at Sea Lion and Berkeley Sound. Overall it represents a slight increase of 7.91% from the previous year, but not enough to compensate from the last population crash this species endured in Breeding success varied from colony to colony with the best breeding success of the season recorded at Johnson Harbour with a value of 0.91 chick per pair. The

19

20

21

22

23 colony at Fanning Head had an average breeding success at 0.74 chick per pair and the study colony of Steeple Jason was slightly below average at 0.58 chick per pair. The two other colonies on Steeple Jason and the colony of Sea Lion were all below average. As mentioned in previous seasons (Huin 2007), the colony at the western tip of Steeple Jason suffers a high level of disturbance and often display a low breeding success, whilst the colonies at the neck of Steeple Jason have suffered a huge reduction in numbers and are now too small and fragmented to withstand the effects of heavy predation (the biggest colony is of about 50 pairs). Similarly, the colony on Sea Lion Island suffered from heavy predation this season as the king cormorants that normally breed with them have moved about one kilometre away. It shows that this season, there was nothing abnormal in food availability for this species and that the below par breeding success from some colonies is due to circumstances on shore due to the vulnerability of small colonies exposed to heavy predation. The inclusion in the last few years of small colonies in decline has lowered the average breeding success measured for the monitoring program. It will be very interesting to monitor the future changes of these small colonies and, unless the cormorants come back to their original colonies, the status of the Rockhopper penguins on Sea Lion Island remains in doubt. Southern giant petrel Since the first census of this species in 2004 (Reid & Huin 2005), several colonies are now part of the annual monitoring program. These include mainly the three colonies on Steeple Jason and the colony on Sea Lion. Depending on landowners information and visits to colonies close to penguin rookeries monitored, further counts were added to the basic monitoring sites. All four colonies monitored in the last four years are on the increase (Figure 15), although the colony at the neck of Steeple Jason seems to have stabilised in the last two seasons. On average breeding success was higher than last season at 62.33% (range to 72.69%), but slightly lower than the average of 68.1% recorded in The colony at False Bull Point didn t produce any chick for the last two seasons, but the colony on Black Point at Lagoon Sands is doing well with 30 pairs, but is difficult to monitor without a telescope. Another new site was discovered at Lion Creek at North Arm, but is difficult to count. It was estimated that a few hundred pairs were seen in November, but a thorough search in February could only find 15 chicks. Overall this species is

24

25 doing well in the Falkland Islands with population still increasing and with back to a high breeding success this season compared to Black-browed albatross Four outlying colonies on Steeple Jason were monitored in the last three years and the new demographic study colony is included in the monitoring (see below). Four out of the five colonies studied are on the decrease (Figure 16), one small colony is more or less stable and the new demographic study has increased. On average breeding success was 60.69% in 2007 (range: 42.4 to 72.9%), one of the highest recorded. This was a good season for this species with high number of breeding birds and a very good breeding success. DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY This is the second season of this study and there were three objectives to complete. First was to recover as many as possible of the adults ringed last season. Secondly to expand the number of birds ringed to increase our sample size. The third aim was to determine the breeding success of the studied birds and to ring their offspring before fledging. Nests were marked in the area that was in use last season and incorporated any bird already ringed. A total of 401 nests were thus marked this season and as much as possible of the pairs were checked and their outcome recorded and chicks ringed when appropriate. A full list of the nests followed is available in Table 1 of appendix 2. In two of the original nests marked the bird sitting on it during the first visit was too shy to be ringed and they both subsequently failed before their partner were also checked. These two nests were removed from the total used for all subsequent calculations. There are two reasons that prevent such study to check all 100% of both partners breeding at a particular nest. In the first instance nests can fail before the partner has returned and in the second instance partners were missed because they were too long gone at sea and were missed before the end of our visit. This season a total of 15 nests failed before the partner returned and in 1 nest the partner was not seen before we left. Thus out of a possible 798 birds, 782 were checked giving a recovery effort of 98.0%. Although slightly lower than last season (99.33%), it is still a very good effort that will have little impact on final results and still much better than the one achieved on Saunders Island (Huin 1999). This figure will need to be

26

27 used to convert the number of rings recovered from last year. Out of a total of 594 adults ringed last season, a total of 511 were breeding again this season. This gives a raw recovery rate of 86.0%, which divided by our recovery effort gives an actual recovery rate of 87.79%. On top of the recoveries of breeding birds, we observed a few birds ringed last season that did not breed but only visited the colony temporarily. A total of 12 such birds were seen and their ring numbers are giving in Table 2 of appendix 2. These birds can be added to the recovery rate to boost it up. However, there is no way to estimate the recovery effort associated with these non-breeding birds as they stay a much shorter period than the breeding birds and being not tied to a nest are more difficult to approach and where often left alone rather than create too much disturbance in the colony. So to add them up, first one divide the number of breeding birds recovered by the recovery effort and then add the number of nonbreeding birds and then divide this total by the total of original birds ringed. This gives a total corrected recovery rate for 2007 of 89.81%. Note here that it is called a recovery rate for the time being and not the actual survival rate of the species between the two seasons. The reason for this is that not all birds breed every year, but that a small percentage (which varies from season to season) are still alive and skip one or more season between breeding attempts. These birds will be recovered in the next seasons and will add up to the actual survival rate that will be higher than the vale of 89.81%. Of all the partners that were ringed last year and seen again this season, a total of 11 pairs have apparently changed partner. The list of changes can be found in Table 3 of appendix 2. This represents 2.76% of all pairs from last year and is too high a value for a species which is supposed to mate for live and takes up to 3 years to form pair bonds. Most than likely, the majority if not all of these changes are due to rings being misread, or of birds visiting failed nests and being misjudged as being a true partner. The next few visits should clarify these small problems. Out of the five pairs of last year from which we were missing a partner, one has now been ringed, leaving 4 from last year and 16 from this year remaining to be identified. Part of this year work included the increase of the sample size of breeding adults to be monitored. This was achieved by expanded the area where nests were marked to form a more homogenous well-delimitated area. Out of a total of around 400 nests marked, as opposed to 300 last season, 273 new birds were ringed as part of 142 new pairs. It is hoped, resources permitted, to increase slowly but constantly such

28 sample size to more than compensate for the decline that the albatrosses suffer at the moment, so that in years to come, this demographic study will maintain a big enough sample size to be statistically robust. As an aside and of interest, was the case study of nest Blue (U) 189. This nest was not monitored last season and when we marked the nest, we noticed that there were two eggs being incubated. Following the different incubation shifts of the birds, we found out that actually three birds were incubating the nest. It is a classic case of one male breeding with two different females at the same time. Unfortunately, the outcome of such a ménage à trois reached its predictable outcome and both eggs failed to hatch. The two main for this are, first that neither eggs are incubated properly as they don t fit in the brood patch and the second reason occurs during change-over and when the two females need to swap between each other. Nest failures were recorded throughout our first visit as well as in late January and in March, when all chicks alive were ringed. Up until the 7 th November a total of 20 nests failed (5.01%), which was higher than last season (7 out of 299 or 2.34%). During the second visit in late January, the colony was revisited and all empty nests were recorded, as well as all loose tags. A further 92 nests were found to have failed by then. This gives an estimate of hatching and brooding success of 71.93%, which again is lower than last year (74.6%), but not significantly so. During our last visit in March all chicks alive were ringed on the left leg and out of the original 399 nests, or out of the 287 nests still active in January, a total of 255 chicks were ringed in the study plot. This gives a fledging success between January and March of 88.85%, again slightly lower than the previous season value of 91.92%. Overall, this season total breeding success in the study plot was 63.91%. As expected from results above, this breeding success is lower than the one of the previous season (68.56%), but still above the overall average across seasons (Figure 16). Compared to the other colonies on Steeple Jason obtain this season, the breeding success is lower than the rest of the study colony (70.61%) but above the average for the island of 60.69%, indicating little or no effect from monitoring study birds and that this season was still a good one for this species. As in the previous season, sample size of ringed chicks was improved by ringing an extra 19 chicks on the perimeter of the study plot. All official ringing schedules for the British Trust of Ornithology are given in appendix 3. They are part of the ringing license and are compulsory to fill, so that when birds are recovered outside of the islands the information concerning such recovery can be passed both

29 ways. One of the problems with nests tags is that a significant proportion becomes loose during the season, either by chicks or adults pulling them loose themselves, or when the nests have failed, predators play with them. Out of the 255 chicks ringed at the end of the season, 82 did not have a nest tag attached to their nests (32.2%). Looking at it from the opposite way, out of the original 399 nests tags deployed, 50 were found loose on the ground and 54 nests tags were not found at the end of the season. It is a loss of information in the true outcome for 25.6% of the nests followed. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Falkland Islands Government provided license for the Seabird Monitoring Program. Falklands Conservation would like to thank all the landowners who allowed us to conduct fieldwork on their land and especially WCS for allowing us extended stay on Steeple Jason and Mike Clarke for ferrying us across to this island. Many thanks too, to all who helped in the field, both volunteer helpers and FC staff, including Sarah Brennan, Chris Bell, Anna Shepherd, Chris Harris, Sarah Money and Annabel Sill. REFERENCES Huin, N. (1999). Aspects of the breeding biology and foraging ecology the blackbrowed albatross in the Falkland Islands. British Antarctic Survey/ Falklands Conservation report. 85pp. Huin, N. (2006). Falkland Islands Penguin census 2005/06. Falklands Conservation Report. 31pp. Huin, N. (2007). Falkland Islands Seabirds Monitoring Programme Report 2006/2007. Falklands Conservation Report. Ingham, R. (1998) Manual of information and methods for the Falkland Islands seabird monitoring programme. Falklands Conservation Report. 28pp Reid, T.A. & Huin, N. (2005). Census of the southern giant petrel population of the Falkland Islands, 2004/05. Falklands Conservation Report. 26pp Thompson, K.R. (1989) An assessment of the potential for competition between seabirds and fisheries in the Falkland Islands. Falkland Islands Foundation Project Report. 94 pp Uhart, M., Karesh, W., Cook, R., Huin, N., Lawrence, K., Guzman, L., Pacheco, H., Pizarro, G., Mattson, R. & Mörner, T. (2004) Paralytic shellfish poisoning in Gentoo

30 penguins (Pygoscelis papua) from the Falkland (Malvinas) islands proceedings AAZV, AAWV, WDA joint conference:

31 Appendix 1 Table 1: Gentoo penguin counts Season 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 Adults Bull Point Chicks B.S Adults Volunteer Point Chicks B.S Adults Lagoon Sands Chicks B.S Adults Seal Bay Chicks B.S Adults Cow Bay Chicks B.S Adults Paloma Beach Chicks B.S Adults Rookery Sands Chicks B.S Adults Fanning Harbour Chicks B.S Adults Sea Lion Island Chicks B.S Adults Saunders Is (Sugar Loaf) Chicks B.S Adults Saunders Is (The Neck) Chicks B.S Adults Walker Creek (Motley Point) Chicks B.S Adults Walker Creek (Sandhills) Chicks B.S Adults Walker Creek (Low Bay) Chicks B.S Adults Bertha's Beach Chicks B.S Adults Fox Point (Mare Harbour) Chicks B.S Adults New Haven Chicks B.S Adults Steeple House Chicks B.S Adults Steeple Neck Chicks B.S Means N B.S

32 Table 2: Magellanic penguin counts Season 1989/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /08 Saunders Island N transects N burrows Occupied N % Breeding N 11 (in 2 Tr) Chicks N 53 9 (in 2 Tr) BS different method Volunteer Point N transects N burrows Occupied N % Breeding N 16 (in 3 Tr) 16 (in 5 Tr) Chicks N (in 3 Tr) 2 (in 5 Tr) BS Sea Lion N transects N burrows Occupied N % Breeding N 10 (in 3 Tr) 16 (in 4 Tr) Chicks N 11 (in 3 Tr) 11 (in 4 Tr) (in 3 Tr) BS Gypsy Cove N transects all all all all all N burrows Occupied N % Breeding N Chicks N BS Steeple Jason N burrows 234 Occupied N 35 % Chicks N 70 BS 1.90 Bull Point BS West Point BS All average N occupied(%) mean Density BS

33 Table 3: King penguin counts season chicks adults 80/ / /91 91/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /08 501

34 Table 4: Rockhopper penguin counts Season 93/94 94/95 95/96 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 Adults Fanning Head Chicks BS Adults Seal Bay Chicks BS Adults Rabbit Rincon Chicks BS Adults Saunders Is - The Neck A Chicks BS Steeple West Adults Chicks BS Steeple Neck Adults Chicks BS Steeple Study colony Adults Chicks 362 BS 0.58 Adults Saunders Is - The Neck B Chicks BS Adults Saunders Is - Rookery Mt Chicks BS Adults Sea Lion Island Chicks BS Adults Johnson Chicks BS Means N BS

35 Appendix 2 Table 1: black-browed albatross nests followed in 2007/08

36 Nest Date Ring1 Date2 Ring2 Failed Chick Comments Outcome? Loose tagsringed chicks color number from UK nests W 7 21-Oct Oct o W 8 21-Oct Oct o W 9 21-Oct Oct Oct o W Oct Oct loose tag o W Oct Oct o W Oct Oct o W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct Broken wing? r W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct loose tag r W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct loose tag r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct loose tag r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct unknown r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct Jan r W Oct Oct Jan VISITED NEST ON 24/10 r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct r W Oct Oct loose tag u W Oct Oct u O Oct Oct u O Oct Oct u O Oct Oct u O Oct Oct u O Oct Oct w O Oct Oct Jan w W Oct Oct w O Oct Oct w W Oct Oct w W Oct Oct Jan w W Oct Nov Jan w O Oct Oct Jan w O Oct Oct w O Oct Oct loose tag w O Oct Oct loose tag w O Oct Oct loose tag O Oct Oct loose tag O Oct Oct unknown O Oct Oct Jan O Oct Oct loose tag O Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct

37 Nest Date Ring1 Date2 Ring2 Failed Chick Comments Outcome? Loose tagsringed chicks color number from UK nests R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct W Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Mar R Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Nov Jan R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Nov unknown R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct W Oct Nov R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct W Oct Oct unknown O Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct Mar R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Nov R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Nov R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct crossbilled R Oct Oct R Oct Oct U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct Mar U Oct Oct Mar U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct loose tag

38 Nest Date Ring1 Date2 Ring2 Failed Chick Comments Outcome? Loose tagsringed chicks color number from UK nests U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct loose tag W Oct Nov loose tag W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct unknown W Oct 24-Oct W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct loose tag W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct unknown W Oct Oct W Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct loose tag W Oct Oct W Oct Oct W Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct Oct R Oct Oct Mar R Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Nov ON NEST 30/10 R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct VISITED NEST 22/10 R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct

39 Nest Date Ring1 Date2 Ring2 Failed Chick Comments Outcome? Loose tagsringed chicks color number from UK nests R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct R Oct Oct R Oct Nov R Oct Oct Jan R Oct OCT R Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct loose tag R Oct Oct U Oct Nov Jan U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct loose tag U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Mar U Oct Oct Mar U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Nov Jan U Oct Oct Oct U Oct Nov Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct Jan W Oct Oct Nov NEW EGG LAID NO BIRDS W Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown U Oct Nov Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct R Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Nov Jan R Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct LOST TAG ON Rock above u137 and right of U183 U Oct Oct Jan R Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct U Oct Oct loose tag U Oct Oct loose tag U Oct Nov Jan U Oct Oct Jan U Oct Oct unknown U Oct Oct unknown R Oct Oct Mar U Oct Nov U Oct Oct