Breeding Status and Population Trends of Seabirds in Alaska, 2014

BREEDING STATUS AND POPULATION TRENDS OF SEABIRDS IN ALASKA, 2014

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AMNWR 2015/03

BREEDING STATUS AND POPULATION TRENDS OF SEABIRDS IN ALASKA, 2014

Compiled By:

Donald E. Dragoo, Heather M. Renner and David B. Ironsa

Key words: Aethia, Alaska, Aleutian Islands, ancient murrelet, Bering Sea, black-legged kittiwake, Cepphus, Cerorhinca, Chukchi Sea, common murre, crested auklet, fork-tailed storm-petrel, Fratercula, Fulmarus, glaucous-winged gull, Gulf of Alaska, hatching chronology, horned puffin, Larus, Leach’s storm-petrel, least auklet, long-term monitoring, northern fulmar, Oceanodroma, parakeet auklet, pelagic cormorant, Phalacrocorax, pigeon guillemot, Prince William Sound, productivity, red-faced cormorant, red-legged kittiwake, rhinoceros auklet, Rissa, seabirds, Synthliboramphus, thick-billed murre, tufted puffin, Uria, whiskered auklet.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge 95 Sterling Highway, Suite 1 Homer, Alaska, USA 99603

February 2015

Cite as: Dragoo, D. E., H. M. Renner, and D. B. Irons. 2015. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska, 2014. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2015/03. Homer, Alaska. aDragoo ([email protected]) and Renner ([email protected]), Alaska Maritime NWR, Homer; Irons ([email protected]), U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Migratory Bird Management, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska USA 99503

When using information from this report, data, results, or conclusions specific to a location(s) should not be used in other publications without first obtaining permission from the original contributor(s). Results and conclusions general to large geographic areas may be cited without permission. This report updates previous reports.

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the Department of the Interior. Executive Summary

Data are collected annually for selected species of marine birds at breeding colonies on the far-flung Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), and at other areas in Alaska, to monitor the condition of the marine ecosystem and to evaluate the conservation status of species under the trust of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The strategy for colony monitoring includes estimating timing of nesting events, rates of reproductive success, and population trends of representative species of various foraging guilds (e.g., offshore diving fish-feeders, diving plankton-feeders) at geographically dispersed breeding sites. This information enables managers to better understand ecosystem processes and respond appropriately to resource issues. It also provides a basis for researchers to test hypotheses about ecosystem change. The value of the marine bird monitoring program is enhanced by having sufficiently long time-series to describe patterns for these long-lived species.

During the summer of 2014, seabird data were gathered at eight monitoring sites on the Alaska Maritime NWR. The species monitored were northern fulmars, storm-petrels, cormorants, kittiwakes, glaucous-winged gulls, murres, ancient murrelets, auklets and/or puffins. In addition, data were gathered at other locations which are visited intermittently or were part of a research or monitoring program outside the refuge.

Timing of breeding (Table A) l Statewide, in 2014 the mean hatch date was early for 69% of the species and average for the others. No species had a late mean hatch date. l Seven species hatched early at every Alaskan colony where they nested.

Table A. Regional and statewide seabird breeding chronologya compared to averages for past years within regions and the state of Alaska as a whole. Only regions for which there were data from 2014 are included. Region FTSPb LHSP RFCO BLKI RLKI GWGU COMU TBMU ANMU PAAU LEAU WHAU CRAU RHAU HOPU TUPU SE Bering E E E E E E A A E E E E SW Bering A A E L L A E A A E N. Gulf of Alaska A A A A A E E Southeast E A L E Alaska E E E E E E A A E A E E A E A E aCodes: “E” and red cell color indicate hatching chronology was > 3 days earlier than the average for sites in this region. “A” and yellow cell color indicate hatching chronology was within 3 days of average. “L” and green cell color indicate hatching chronology was > 3 days later than the average for sites in this region. bFTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s storm-petrel, RFCO=red-faced cormorant, BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged kittiwake, GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, ANMU=ancient murrelet, PAAU=parakeet auklet, LEAU=least auklet, WHAU=whiskered auklet, CRAU=crested auklet, RHAU=rhinoceros auklet, HOPU=horned puffin, TUPU=tufted puffin.

i Productivity (Table B)

l Statewide, productivity was above average in 35% of species, average in 59%, and below average in only 6%.

l Statewide, kittiwakes, gulls, common murres, rhinoceros auklets, and tufted puffins exhibited high productivity, whereas success was low only for crested auklet in 2014.

Table B. Regional and statewide seabird breeding productivity levelsa compared to averages for past years within regions and the state of Alaska as a whole. Only regions for which there were data from 2014 are included. Region FTSPb LHSP RFCO PECO BLKI RLKI GWGU COMU TBMU ANMU PAAU LEAU WHAU CRAU RHAU HOPU TUPU SE Bering A A H H H H H H H A A A H SW Bering H H L H H H L L A A L A H N. Gulf of Alaska L A H H H H A H H H Southeast L A H A L L H H Alaska A A A A H H H H A A A A A L H A H aCodes: “L” and red cell color indicate productivity was > 20% below the average for the region. “A” and yellow cell color indicate productivity was within 20% of average. “H” and green cell color indicate productivity was > 20% above the average for the region. bFTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s storm-petrel, RFCO=red-faced cormorant, PECO=pelagic cormorant, BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged kittiwake, GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, ANMU=ancient murrelet, PAAU=parakeet auklet, LEAU=least auklet, WHAU=whiskered auklet, CRAU=crested auklet, RHAU=rhinoceros auklet, HOPU=horned puffin, TUPU=tufted puffin.

Population trends during 2005-2014 (Table C)

l Statewide, 19% of species showed increasing population trends, 69% were stable and 12% declined between 2005 and 2014.

l No species showed declines in southeast Alaska.

Table C. Regional and statewide seabird population trendsa between 2005 and 2014 within regions and the state of Alaska as a whole. Only sites for which there were data from at least two years (at least 5 years apart) within the target decade are included. Region NOFUb FTSP STPE RFCO PECO UNCO BLKI RLKI GWGU COMU TBMU UNMU PIGU LEAU RHAU TUPU N. Bering/ Chukchi i i i 1 h h SE Bering h 1 i h 1 1 1 1 1 1 h 1 SW Bering i h h h N. Gulf of Alaska i 1 1 h 1 1 1 Southeast 1 h h 1 1 h 1 Alaska 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 1 h 1 1 1 1 h h 1 aCodes: i and red cell color indicate a negative population trend of ≥3% per annum for this site or region. 1 and yellow cell color indicate no population trend. h and green cell color indicate a positive population trend of ≥3% per annum for this site or region. bNOFU=northern fulmar, FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, STPE=unspecified storm-petrel, RFCO=red-faced cormorant, PECO=pelagic cormorant, UNCO=unspecified cormorant, BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged kittiwake, GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, UNMU=unspecified murre, PIGU=pigeon guillemot, LEAU=least auklet, RHAU=rhinoceros auklet, TUPU=tufted puffin.

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Executive Summary...... i Table of Contents...... iii Introduction ...... 1 Methods ...... 1 Results...... 4 Northern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis)...... 4 Populations...... 4 Fork-tailed storm-petrel (Oceanodroma furcata)...... 5 Breeding chronology...... 5 Productivity...... 5 Populations...... 8 Leach’s storm-petrel (Oceanodroma leucorhoa)...... 9 Breeding chronology...... 9 Productivity...... 9 Populations...... 8 Red-faced cormorant (Phalacrocorax urile)...... 12 Productivity...... 12 Populations...... 14 Pelagic cormorant (Phalacrocorax pelagicus)...... 15 Productivity...... 15 Populations...... 14 Black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla)...... 17 Breeding chronology...... 17 Productivity...... 17 Populations...... 20 Red-legged kittiwake (Rissa brevirostris)...... 22 Breeding chronology...... 22 Productivity...... 22 Populations...... 25 Glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens)...... 26 Breeding chronology...... 26 Productivity...... 26 Populations...... 29 Common murre (Uria aalge)...... 30 Breeding chronology...... 30 Productivity...... 30 Populations...... 33 Thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia)...... 36 Breeding chronology...... 36 Productivity...... 36 Populations...... 33 Pigeon guillemot (Cepphus columba)...... 39 Populations...... 39

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page

Ancient murrelet (Synthliboramphus antiquus)...... 40 Breeding chronology...... 40 Productivity...... 40 Parakeet auklet (Aethia psittacula)...... 41 Breeding chronology...... 41 Productivity...... 41 Least auklet (Aethia pusilla)...... 44 Breeding chronology...... 44 Productivity...... 44 Populations...... 44 Whiskered auklet (Aethia pygmaea)...... 47 Breeding chronology...... 47 Productivity...... 47 Crested auklet (Aethia cristatella)...... 48 Breeding chronology...... 48 Productivity...... 48 Rhinoceros auklet (Cerorhinca monocerata)...... 51 Breeding chronology...... 51 Productivity...... 51 Populations...... 51 Horned puffin (Fratercula corniculata)...... 53 Breeding chronology...... 53 Productivity...... 53 Tufted puffin (Fratercula cirrhata)...... 56 Breeding chronology...... 56 Productivity...... 56 Populations...... 59 Summary tables...... 60 Acknowledgments...... 63 References ...... 63

iv Introduction

This report is the latest in a series of annual reports summarizing the results of seabird monitoring efforts at breeding colonies on the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) and elsewhere in Alaska (see Byrd and Dragoo 1997, Byrd et al. 1998 and 1999, Dragoo et al. 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2006-2014 for compilations of previous years’ data). The seabird monitoring program in Alaska is designed to keep track of selected species of marine birds that indicate changes in the ocean environment. Furthermore, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service has the responsibility to conserve seabirds, and monitoring data are used to identify conservation problems. The objective is to provide long-term, time- series data from which biologically significant changes may be detected and from which hypotheses about causes of changes may be tested. The Alaska Maritime NWR was established specifically to conserve marine bird populations and habitats in their natural diversity and the marine resources upon which they rely and to provide for an international program for research on marine resources (Alaska National Interests Land Conservation Act of 1982). The monitoring program is an integral part of the management of this refuge and provides data that can be used to define “normal” variability in demographic parameters and identify patterns that fall outside norms and thereby constitute potential conservation issues. Although approximately 80% of the seabird nesting colonies in Alaska occur on the Alaska Maritime NWR, marine bird nesting colonies occur on other public lands (e.g., national and state refuges) and on private lands as well. The strategy for colony monitoring includes estimating timing of nesting events, reproductive success, population trends and prey used by representative species of various foraging guilds (e.g., murres are offshore diving fish-feeders, kittiwakes are offshore surface-feeding fish-feeders, auklets are diving plankton-feeders, etc.) at geographically dispersed breeding sites along the entire coastline of Alaska (Figure 1). A total of nine sites on the Alaska Maritime NWR, located roughly 300-500 km apart, are scheduled for annual surveys (Byrd 2007), and at least some data were available from most of these in 2014. Furthermore, data are recorded annually or semiannually at other sites in Alaska (e.g., Cape Peirce, Togiak NWR, and Puale Bay, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof NWR). In addition, colonies near the annual sites are identified for less frequent surveys to “calibrate” the information at the annual sites. Data provided from other research projects (e.g., those associated with evaluating the impacts of invasive rodents on marine birds) also supplement the monitoring database. In this report, we summarize information from 2014 for each species; i.e., tables with estimates of average hatch dates and reproductive success, and maps with symbols indicating the relative timing of hatching and reproductive success at various sites. In addition, historical patterns of hatching chronology and productivity are illustrated for those sites for which we have sufficient data. Population trend information is included for sites where adequate data are available.

Methods

Data collection methods followed standardized protocols (e.g., USFWS 2014). Timing of nesting events and productivity usually were based on periodic checks of samples of nests (usually in plots) throughout the breeding season, but a few estimates of productivity were based on single visits to colonies late in the breeding season (as noted in tables). Hatch dates were used to describe nesting chronology. Productivity typically was expressed as chicks fledged per egg, but occasionally other variables were used (Table 1). Population surveys were conducted for ledge-nesting species at times of the day and breeding season when variability in attendance was reduced. Most burrow-nester counts were made early in the season before vegetation obscured burrow entrances. Deviations from standard methods are indicated in reports from individual sites which are appropriately referenced.

1 St. Lazaria I. Prince William Sound Southwestern Bering Northern Bering/Chukchi Southeast Alaska Southeastern Bering Northern Gulf of Alaska Northern Gulf of Middleton I. E. Amatuli I. Puale Bay Chowiet I. Round I. Aiktak I. Cape Lisburne Puffin I. Puffin Cape Peirce Hall I. St. Paul I. St. George I. Kiska I. N 500 KM Koniuji I./Ulak I. Buldir I.

Figure 1. Map of Alaska showing the locations of seabird monitoring sites summarized in this report. Text color indicates geographic regions.

2 Table 1. Productivity parameters used in this report. Species Productivity Value Storm-petrels Chicks Fledged/Egg (Total chicks fledged/Total eggs) Cormorants Chicks Fledged/Nest (Total chicks fledged/Total nests) Glaucous-winged gull Hatching Success (Total chicks/Total eggs) Kittiwakes Chicks Fledged/Nest (Total chicks fledged/Total nests) Murres Chicks Fledged/Nest Site (Total chicks fledged/Total sites where egg was laid) Ancient murrelet Chicks Fledged/Egg (Total chicks fledged/Total eggs) Auklets (except RHAU) Chicks Fledged/Nest Site (Total chicks fledged/Total sites where egg was laid) Rhinoceros auklet Chicks Fledged/Egg (Total chicks fledged/Total eggs) Puffins Chicks Fledged/Egg (Total chicks fledged/Total eggs)

This report summarizes monitoring data for 2014, and compares 2014 results with previous years. For sites with at least two years of data prior to 2014, site averages were used for comparisons. For chronology, we considered dates within 3 days of the long-term average to be “normal”; larger deviations represented relatively early or late dates. For productivity, we defined significant deviations from “normal” as any that differed by more than 20% from the site average. Population trends were analyzed using linear regression models on log-transformed data (ln) to calculate the slope of the line. The resultant slope is equivalent to the annual rate of population change. A trend was defined as any change greater than or equal to a three percent per annum increase or decline (≥3% p.a.). Population counts were analyzed using two time frames: 1) data from all available years, and 2) data from the last decade (2005-2014 for this report). A percent per annum change was calculated for each data set during both time periods, if sufficient data were available. We also summarized seabird phenology and productivity, as well as population trends (from 2005-2014), by region and for the entire state. Chronology was calculated for each species in a region using data from all colonies. Each colony was weighted equally within each region. The chronology was averaged for all sites within each region resulting in a value for each species, thus producing one statewide value for each species. Productivity was calculated for each species in a region using data from all colonies. Each colony was weighted equally within each region. The productivity was averaged for all sites within each region resulting in a value for each species. Species productivities were then averaged to calculate a statewide value for each species. Population trends were calculated for each species in a region using data from all colonies. Each colony was weighted equally within each region. Trends (line slopes) were averaged for all sites within each region resulting in a regional value for each species. Only sites for which there were data from at least two years (at least 5 years apart) between 2005 and 2014 were included.

3 Results

Northern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis)

Northern fulmar, Hall I. Northern fulmar, St. Paul I. +0.2% p.a. (-7.3% p.a.) +2.0% p.a. (+8.3% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (198 birds) Percent of Maximum (487 birds) 0 0 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year Year

Northern fulmar, St. George I. Northern fulmar, Chowiet I. -0.7% p.a. (+2.5% p.a.) -0.7% p.a. (-3.0% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of maximum (623 birds) Percent of Maximum (2350 birds) 0 0 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011 Year Year

Figure 2. Trends in populations of northern fulmars at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

4 Fork-tailed storm-petrel (Oceanodroma furcata)

Table 2. Hatching chronology of fork-tailed storm-petrels at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Aiktak I. 5 Jul (26)a 16 Jul (17)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 3. Reproductive performance of fork-tailed storm-petrels at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledgeda/Egg Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.98 5 (50)b 0.72 (27)b J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.76 13 (53) 0.81 (14) J. Williams Unpubl. Data St. Lazaria I. 0.47 4 (151) 0.69 (19) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aFledged chick defined as being alive at last check in August or September. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of eggs used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

5 1 0 0 5 0 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 FTSP 9 5 Hatching N - = + Chronology 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. Lazaria (12 Jul) 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 - - 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 - 9 0 8 5 Aiktak (16 Jul) 8 0 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0

Figure 3. Hatching chronology of fork-tailed storm-petrels at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

6 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 9 0.26 - 0.50 2014 FTSP 8 N Productivity 4 8 9 St. Lazaria (0.69) 7 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 0 2 5 7 0 . . . . . 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 9 8 4 8 Aiktak (0.81) 9 7 4 7 4 0 5 0 5 0 1 0 7 5 2 0 . . . . . 1 0 0 0 0 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 9 8 4 Buldir (0.72) 8 9 7 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 0 2 5 7 0 . . . . . 0 0 0 0 1

Figure 4. Productivity of fork-tailed storm-petrels (chicks fledged/egg) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

7 Storm-petrels, Aiktak I. Fork-tailed storm-petrel, E. Amatuli I. +2.2% p.a. (+1.2% p.a.) +0.4% p.a. (+2.8% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (Density 0.22) 0 Percent of Maximum (615 burrows) 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year

Storm-petrels, St. Lazaria I. +1.6% p.a. (+2.5% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (Density 3.68) 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year

Figure 5. Trends in populations of storm-petrels at Alaskan sites. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

8 Leach’s storm-petrel (Oceanodroma leucorhoa)

Table 4. Hatching chronology of Leach’s storm-petrels at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Aiktak I. 19 Jul (36)a 31 Jul (17)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data St. Lazaria I. 21 Jul (33) 31 Jul (19) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 5. Reproductive performance of Leach’s storm-petrels at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledgeda/Egg Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.93 5 (68)b 0.73 (27)b J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.88 14 (92) 0.84 (14) J. Williams Unpubl. Data St. Lazaria I. 0.76 4 (121) 0.71 (19) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aFledged chick defined as being alive at last check in August or September. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of eggs used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

9 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 - 9 0 8 5 Late Average Early 8 0 No Hatch 2014 LHSP St. Lazaria (31 Jul) Hatching N - = 7 5 + Chronology 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 - 9 5 9 0 8 5 Aiktak (31 Jul) 8 0 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0

Figure 6. Hatching chronology of Leach’s storm-petrels at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

10 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 2014 9 LHSP N 9 Productivity 8 4 8 St. Lazaria (0.71) 9 7 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 . . . . . 1 0 0 0 0 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 9 8 4 Aiktak (0.84) 8 9 7 4 1 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 9 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 9 8 4 Buldir (0.73) 8 9 7 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 . . . . . 1 0 0 0 0

Figure 7. Productivity of Leach’s storm-petrels (chicks fledged/egg) at Alaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

11 Red-faced cormorant (Phalacrocorax urile)

Table 6. Hatching chronology of red-faced cormorants at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Paul I. 23 Jun (16)a 30 Jun (24)a Thomson et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 7. Reproductive performance of red-faced cormorants at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledged/Nest Plots Average Reference St. Paul I. 2.07 2 (28)a 1.30 (29)a Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 1.90 4 (31) 1.22 (17) Mudge et al. 2015 Aiktak I. 1.24 NAb (34) 0.81 (9) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.02 3 (49) 1.03 (4) Soucie et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nests used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average. bNot applicable or not reported.

12 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 5 9 0 2014 1.01 - 1.50 0.01 - 0.50 2.51 - 3.00 2.01 - 2.50 1.51 - 2.00 0.51 - 1.00 9 <0.01 RFCO N Productivity 5 8 Chowiet (1.03) Chowiet 0 8 5 7 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 0 1 9 5 5 Aiktak (0.81) Aiktak 0 8 0 0 0 8 5 5 9 7 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 9 5 8 St. Paul (1.30) Paul St. 0 1 0 8 5 0 5 7 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 5 0 9 1 0 5 9 0 5 0 8 0 St. George (1.22) St. 0 5 8 9 5 0 7 9 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 5 8 Buldir (1.39) 0 8 5 7 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0

Figure 8. Productivity of red-faced cormorants (chicks fledged/nest) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

13 Pelagic cormorant, Hall I. Red-faced cormorant, St. Paul I. -3.6% p.a. (-8.0% p.a.) -1.1% p.a. (+1.7% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (345 birds) Percent of Maximum (61 birds) 0 0 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 Year Year Red-faced cormorant, St. George I. Pelagic cormorant, Cape Peirce -1.4% p.a. (-10.6% p.a.) +0.2% p.a. (+4.4% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (195 birds) Percent of Maximum (149 birds) 0 0 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 Year Year Cormorants, Ulak I. Pelagic cormorant, St. Lazaria I. -10.0% p.a. (-18.2% p.a.) +5.0% p.a. (+9.1% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (177 nests) Percent of Maximum (297 nests) 0 0 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 Year Year Figure 9. Trends in populations of cormorants at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

14 Pelagic cormorant (Phalacrocorax pelagicus)

Table 8. Reproductive performance of pelagic cormorants at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledged/Nest Plots Average Reference Cape Peirce 1.01 10 (72)a 1.17 (28)a M. Swaim Unpubl. Data Round I. 2.32 2 (84) 1.41 (13) E. Weiss Unpubl. Data Buldir I. 0.47 NAb (34) 1.00 (24) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 1.30 NA (43) 0.99 (12) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.63 NA (16) 0.78 (3) Soucie et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 1.01 NA (79) 0.71 (20) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nests used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average. bNot applicable or not reported.

15 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 4 9 9 8 4 8 9 7 St. Lazaria (0.71) St. 4 7 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 ...... 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 1 9 0 2014 PECO 1.01 - 1.50 0.01 - 0.50 2.51 - 3.00 2.01 - 2.50 1.51 - 2.00 0.51 - 1.00 <0.01 4 0 N Productivity 9 9 0 4 9 0 0 9 8 1 4 0 4 8 0 9 9 7 0 4 Middleton (0.51) 4 7 9 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 9 4 8 9 1 4 8 4 0 Round (1.41) 0 9 0 7 9 0 0 4 7 4 9 3 . 5 3 . 0 2 . 5 2 . 0 1 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 5 0 . 9 4 8 9 4 1 8 4 Aiktak (0.99) Aiktak 9 0 7 9 4 4 1 0 7 4 9 9 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 0 ...... 9 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 4 4 0 9 9 9 9 8 4 4 9 8 4 1 9 9 8 C. Peirce (1.17) Peirce C. 7 9 0 4 4 8 7 4 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 0 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 Chowiet (0.78) Chowiet 9 7 9 9 4 7 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 4 ...... 9 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 9 8 4 8 Buldir (1.00) 9 7 4 7 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 ...... 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0

Figure 10. Productivity of pelagic cormorants (chicks fledged/nest) at Alaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

16 Black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla)

Table 9. Hatching chronology of black-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Paul I. 1 Jul (241)a 17 Jul (30)a Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 30 Jun (116) 16 Jul (29) Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 5 Jul (21) 8 Jul (26) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 11 Jul (188) 17 Jul (18) Soucie et al. 2014 E. Amatuli I. 14 Jul (10) 12 Jul (16) A. Kettle Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table10. Reproductive performance of black-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledgeda/Nest Plots Average Reference Puffin I. 0.35b NAc (250)d NA (NA)d D. Dragoo Unpubl. Data St. Paul I. 0.66 15 (331) 0.27 (34) Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 0.66 5 (151) 0.20 (38) Mudge et al. 2015 Cape Peirce 0.41 16 (362) 0.20 (31) M. Swaim Unpubl. Data Round I. 0.34 2 (50) 0.22 (15) E. Weiss Unpubl. Data Buldir I. 0.22 12 (179) 0.16 (26) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.55 11 (336) 0.17 (18) Soucie et al. 2014 E. Amatuli I. 0.06 6 (225) 0.35 (26) A. Kettle Unpubl. Data Pr. Will. Snd. 0.08b NA (25,546) 0.23 (29) D. Irons Unpubl. Data aTotal chicks fledged/Total nests. bShort visit. cNot applicable or not reported. dSample size in parentheses represents the number of nests used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

17 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 Late Average Early BLKI No Hatch 2014 8 5 Hatching N - = + Chronology 8 0 E. Amatuli (12 Jul) E. 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 1 0 0 = 0 5 0 9 5 - 9 0 8 5 8 0 Chowiet (17 Jul) 0 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 - - 1 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 5 9 5 = 0 9 0 9 5 8 5 Buldir (8 Jul) 9 0 8 0 8 5 7 5 0 St. Paul (17 Jul) 8 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 1 0 7 5 0 0 5 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. George (16 Jul) 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0

Figure 11. Hatching chronology of black-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

18 0 1 5 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 9 0 0 5 0 0 8 0 0 9 0 0 0 8 5 8 5 7 0 Pr. William Snd. (0.23) William Snd. Pr. 8 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 Middleton(0.15) ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 3 6 9 2 5 8 ...... 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 1.01 - 1.25 BLKI 0.26 - 0.50 2014 1 5 0 N Productivity 0 0 5 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 5 1 8 5 0 0 8 E. Amatuli (0.35) Amatuli E. 0 5 0 7 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 9 5 8 0 0 8 0 1 C. Lisburne (0.56) C. 0 5 7 5 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 0 9 0 5 8 0 Chowiet (0.17) Chowiet 8 0 Puffin 1 5 0 5 7 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 9 0 5 0 8 0 0 C. Peirce (0.20) Peirce C. 0 8 1 5 5 7 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 0 9 0 5 1 8 0 Koniuji (0.48) Koniuji 5 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 7 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 9 0 0 5 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Round (0.22) 5 0 0 0 0 5 8 9 5 0 0 5 9 0 0 7 9 0 3 6 9 2 5 8 0 ...... 5 9 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 5 0 0 9 8 Buldir (0.16) 0 5 0 0 8 9 8 0 5 8 5 7 St. George (0.20) St. 8 0 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 St. Paul (0.27) Paul St...... 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 0 8 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 7 8 5 2 9 6 3 0 ...... 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

Figure 12. Productivity of black-legged kittiwakes (chicks fledged/nest) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

19 Black-legged kittiwake, Cape Lisburne Black-legged kittiwake, Hall I. +3.4% p.a. (+3.3% p.a.) -5.8% p.a. (-16.4% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (374 birds) Percent of Maximum (1069 birds) 0 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Black-legged kittiwake, St. Paul I. Black-legged kittiwake, St. George I. -1.4% p.a. (+2.5% p.a.) +0.4% p.a. (+0.4% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (1882 birds) Percent of Maximum (2939 birds) 0 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Black-legged kittiwake, Cape Peirce Black-legged kittiwake, Round I. -2.2% p.a (+6.7% p.a.) -1.4% p.a. +1.6% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (445 birds) Percent of Maximum (1906 birds) 0 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Figure 13. Trends in populations of black-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

20 Black-legged kittiwake, Buldir I. Black-legged kittiwake, Koniuji I. +3.0% p.a. (+4.7% p.a.) -0.5% p.a. (N/A)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (3321 birds) Percent of Maximum (4100 nests) 0 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Black-legged kittiwake, Chowiet I. Black-legged kittiwake, Puale Bay -0.3% p.a. (+4.1% p.a.) -0.7% p.a. (N/A)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (485 birds) 0 Percent of Maximum (1326 birds) 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Year Black-legged kittiwake, Pr. William Snd. +1.6% p.a. (+1.8% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (32,501 nests) 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year Figure 13 (continued). Trends in populations of black-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses). “NA” indicates that insufficient data were available.

21 Red-legged kittiwake (Rissa brevirostris)

Table 11. Hatching chronology of red-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Paul I. 4 Jul (13) a 19 Jul (26) a Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 4 Jul (170) 15 Jul (33) Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 9 Jul (3) 11 Jul (23) J. Williams Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 12. Reproductive performance of red-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledgeda/Nest Plots Average Reference St. Paul I. 0.65 4 (17)b 0.25 (34)b Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 0.62 8 (312) 0.24 (38) Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 0.30 5 (20) 0.19 (26) J. Williams Unpubl. Data aTotal chicks fledged/Total nests. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of nests used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

22 Late Average Early No Hatch RLKI 2014 Hatching N - = + Chronology - - 1 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 1 0 St. Paul (19 Jul) 1 0 7 5 0 5 0 0 0 5 2 5 1 3 - 1 3 - 2 5 0 0 0 0 9 5 = 9 5 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 8 5 8 5 8 0 Buldir (11 Jul) Buldir (11 8 0 St. George (15 Jul) 7 5 0 7 5 2 5 1 3 - 1 3 - 2 5 0 2 5 1 3 - 1 3 - 2 5

Figure 14. Hatching chronology of red-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

23 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 RLKI 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 N Productivity 0 1 0 5 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 5 0 0 9 1 9 0 0 0 5 5 9 0 St. Paul (0.25) Paul St. 8 0 5 Buldir (0.19) 0 0 8 0 8 0 5 5 8 9 7 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 5 0 . . . . 7 9 0 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 . . . . 5 8 St. George (0.24) St. 0 8 5 7 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 . . . .

Figure 15. Productivity of red-legged kittiwakes (chicks fledged/nest) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

24 Red-legged kittiwake, St. Paul I. Red-legged kittiwake, St. George I. -4.1% p.a. (-0.3% p.a.) +0.7% p.a. (+1.1% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (180 birds) 0 Percent of Maximum (4484 birds) 0 1975 1985 1995 2005 1975 1985 1995 2005 Year Year

Red-legged kittiwake, Buldir I. +2.3% p.a. (+7.5% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (1095 nests) 0 1975 1985 1995 2005 Year

Figure 16. Trends in populations of red-legged kittiwakes at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

25 Glaucous-winged gull (Larus glaucescens)

Table 13. Hatching chronology of glaucous-winged gulls at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 8 Jun (21)a 24 Jun (14)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 7 Jul (80) 11 Jul (19) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 28 Jun (29) 4 Jul (8) Soucie et al. 2014 Puale Bay 11 Jul (8) 9 Jul (4) Welfelt et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 1 Jul (73) 4 Jul (15) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 14. Reproductive performance of glaucous-winged gulls at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Hatching No. of Long-term Site Successa Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.65 NAb (30)c 0.45 (16)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.79 4 (285) 0.51 (19) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.70 3 (76) 0.55 (7) Soucie et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 0.50 3 (161) 0.55(19) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aTotal chicks/Total eggs. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of eggs used to calculate hatching success and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

26 1 0 0 5 0 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. Lazaria (4 Jul) 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 = Late Average Early 1 0 No Hatch 2014 GWGU Hatching N - = 0 5 + Chronology 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 Puale Bay (9 Jul) 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 1 0 0 5 = 0 - 9 5 9 0 8 5 Chowiet (4 Jul) 8 0 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 - 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 0 1 0 0 9 0 0 5 8 5 0 Aiktak (11 Jul) Aiktak (11 0 8 0 9 5 7 5 0 9 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 8 5 Buldir (24 Jun) 8 0 7 5 - 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0

Figure 17. Hatching chronology of glaucous-winged gulls at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

27 2 1 8 0 4 0 0 0 6 9 St. Lazaria (0.56) St. 2 9 0 0 5 0 5 0 2 5 7 0 . . . . . 1 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 GWGU N Productivity 2 1 8 0 4 0 0 0 Chowiet (0.55) Chowiet 6 9 2 9 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 2 1 2 1 8 0 8 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 Aiktak (0.51) Aiktak Buldir (0.45) 6 9 6 9 2 9 2 9 0 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 . . . . . 7 5 2 0 0 1 . . . . . 1

Figure 18. Productivity of glaucous-winged gulls (hatching success) at Alaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

28 Glaucous-winged gull, Aiktak I. Glaucous-winged gull, Chowiet I. +0.5% p.a. (-1.6% p.a.) -0.3% p.a. (+3.3% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (225 nests) Percent of Maximum (4468 birds) 0 0 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 Year Year

Glaucous-winged gull, St. Lazaria I. +8.1% p.a. (+7.6% p.a.)

100

50 Percent of Maximum (161 nests) 0 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 Year

Figure 19. Trends in populations of glaucous-winged gulls at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

29 Common murre (Uria aalge)

Table 15. Hatching chronology of common murres at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Paul I. 30 Jul (39)a 3 Aug (27)a Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 29 Jul (58) 3 Aug (30) Mudge et al. 2015 Aiktak I. 14 Aug (8) 12 Aug (6) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 20 Jul (141) 23 Jul (18) Soucie et al. 2014 Puale Bay 16 Aug (16) 21 Aug (8) Welfelt et al. 2014 E. Amatuli I. 23 Aug (52) 12 Aug (19) A. Kettle Unpubl. Data St. Lazaria I. 23 Aug (6) 12 Aug (20) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 16. Reproductive performance of common murres at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference St. Paul I. 0.53 3 (116)b 0.50 (27)b Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 0.61 7 (174) 0.50 (30) Mudge et al. 2015 Aiktak I. 0.73 6 (33) 0.20 (18) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.61 10 (300) 0.51 (19) Soucie et al. 2014 Puale Bay 0.65 NAc (357) 0.50 (8) Welfelt et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 0.17 1 (47) 0.50 (20) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSince murres do not build nests, nest sites were defined as sites where eggs were laid. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average. cNot applicable or not reported.

30 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. Lazaria (12 Aug) St. Lazaria (12 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 + 1 0 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 COMU 0 5 Hatching N - = + Chronology 0 9 5 1 0 9 0 0 5 8 5 0 8 0 9 5 E. Amatuli (12 Aug) 7 5 9 0 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 8 5 8 0 + Puale Bay (21 Aug) Puale Bay (21 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 - = 1 0 0 0 5 0 = 9 5 9 0 8 5 - - 8 0 Chowiet (23 Jul) 0 7 5 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 1 0 8 5 0 5 St. Paul (3 Aug) St. Paul (3 8 0 0 0 7 5 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 9 5 - 1 0 - 2 0 0 0 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 Aiktak (12 Aug) 9 5 8 0 9 0 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 8 5 - 1 0 - 2 0 8 0 St. George (3 Aug) St. George (3 7 5 0 2 0 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0

Figure 20. Hatching chronology of common murres at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

31 1 1 6 0 1 0 6 9 1 9 6 8 1 8 St. Lazaria (0.50) St. 6 7 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 1 1 6 0 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 COMU 1 0 N Productivity 6 9 1 9 6 8 1 1 1 8 6 0 Puale Bay (0.50) Bay Puale

1 6

1 7 1

0 0 0 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 0

6 . . . . .

0 1 6 9

0 1 9

9 6 8

9 1 Chowiet (0.51) Chowiet 8

8 6 7 Round (0.19)

1 0 5 0 5 0

8 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1

0 7

. .

1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 9 1 1 1 9 6 6 0 8 Aiktak (0.20) Aiktak 1 1 0 8 6 6 9 7 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 1 . . . . . 9 1 6 8 St. Paul (0.50) Paul St. 1 8 0 6 1 7 0 1 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 1 6 1 0 6 0 1 0 1 0 6 9 6 9 1 9 1 9 6 8 6 Buldir (0.42) 8 1 8 1 8 6 St. George (0.50) St. 7 6 0 5 0 5 0 7 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 5 0 5 0 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1

Figure 21. Productivity of common murres (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

32 Murres, Cape Lisburne Common murre, Hall I. +2.7% p.a. (+3.0% p.a.) -1.8% p.a. (-1.9% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (3957 birds) 0 Percent of Maximum (3875 birds) 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Thick-billed murre, Hall I. Common murre, St. Paul I. -2.6% p.a. (+4.0% p.a.) -2.7% p.a. (2.9% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (3903 birds) Percent of Maximum (3014 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Thick-billed murre, St. Paul I. Common murre, St. George I. -1.3% p.a. (+1.9% p.a.) -0.4% p.a. (+2.1% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (3239 birds) Percent of Maximum (10,223 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Figure 22. Trends in populations of murres at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

33 Thick-billed murre, St. George I. Common murre, Cape Peirce +0.6% p.a. (+1.3% p.a.) -1.9% p.a. (-2.8% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (4490 birds)

Percent of Maximum (23,596 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Common murre, Round I. Murres, Buldir I. +0.4% p.a. (-1.8% p.a.) +8.6% p.a. (+4.8% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (1432 birds) 0 Percent of Maximum (3203 birds) 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Murres, Ulak I. Murres, Koniuji I. +2.0% p.a. (N/A) +7.1% p.a. (N/A)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (5732 birds) Percent of Maximum (3771 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Figure 22 (continued). Trends in populations of murres at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses). “NA” indicates that insufficient data were available.

34 Murres, Aiktak I. Murres, Chowiet I. -4.0% p.a. (-2.9% p.a.) +1.2% p.a. (+1.1% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (4283 birds) Percent of Maximum (3101 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year Murres, Puale Bay Murres, St. Lazaria I. +3.6% p.a. (N/A) -0.9% p.a. (-0.1% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (975 birds) Percent of Maximum (1907 birds) 0 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year

Figure 22 (continued). Trends in populations of murres at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses). “NA” indicates that insufficient data were available.

35 Thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia)

Table 17. Hatching chronology of thick-billed murres at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Paul I. 4 Aug (78)a 5 Aug (29)a Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 28 Jul (117) 1 Aug (33) Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 25 Jul (4) 18 Jul (26) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak 13 Aug (4) 10 Aug (5) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 20 Jul (46) 20 Jul (17) Soucie et al. 2014 Puale Bay 18 Aug (21) 20 Aug (8) Welfelt et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 18. Reproductive performance of thick-billed murres at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference St. Paul I. 0.46 12 (257)b 0.46 (29)b Thomson et al. 2014 St. George I. 0.55 12 (372) 0.52 (33) Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 0.42 12 (100) 0.68 (26) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.43 3 (30) 0.25 (13) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.44 6 (173) 0.41 (19) Soucie et al. 2014 Puale Bay 0.67 NAc (20) 0.46 (8) Welfelt et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 0.20 1 (10) 0.46 (20) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSince murres do not build nests, nest sites were defined as sites where eggs were laid. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average. cNot applicable or not reported.

36 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. Lazaria (10 Aug) St. Lazaria (10 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 TBMU Hatching N - = + Chronology 1 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 Puale Bay (20 Aug) Puale Bay (20 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 = 0 0 = 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 = Chowiet (20 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 - = 1 0 1 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 9 5 9 5 9 0 9 0 8 5 8 5 1 0 Aiktak (10 Aug) 8 0 8 0 St. Paul (5 Aug) St. Paul (5 0 5 7 5 7 5 0 8 0 0 8 0 8 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 1 5 - 1 5 - 9 5 0 + 9 0 8 5 8 0 1 0 St. George (1 Aug) St. George (1 7 5 0 0 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 0 9 5 9 0 0 8 5 Buldir (18 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 8 - 1 5 1 5 -

Figure 23. Hatching chronology of thick-billed murres at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

37 1 1 6 0 1 0 6 9 1 9 6 8 1 8 St. Lazaria (0.46) St. 6 7 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 1 0 6 0 1 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 2014 TBMU 9 6 N Productivity 9 1 1 1 8 6 6 0 8 1 1 0 Puale Bay (0.46) Bay Puale 6 7 6 9 . 9 0 . 6 0 . 3 0 . 0 1 9 6 8 1 Chowiet (0.41) Chowiet 8 6 7 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 1 1 6 9 6 0 1 9 1 0 6 8 Aiktak (0.25) Aiktak 6 1 9 8 1 6 9 7 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 6 1 8 1 St. Paul (0.46) Paul St. 6 1 0 8 1 6 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 9 . . . . 6 9 1 1 1 9 6 0 6 8 1 0 1 8 St. George (0.52) St. 6 9 6 7 1 0 0 0 0 9 9 6 3 0 . . . . 6 8 Buldir (0.68) 1 8 6 7 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . .

Figure 24. Productivity of thick-billed murres (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

38 Pigeon guillemot (Cepphus columba)

Pigeon guillemot, Pr. William Snd. Pigeon guillemot, St. Lazaria I. -3.3% p.a. (+2.2% p.a.) -0.5% p.a. (-1.5% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (134 birds) Percent of Maximum (6625 birds) 0 0 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 Year Year

Figure 25. Trends in populations of pigeon guillemots at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

39 Ancient murrelet (Synthliboramphus antiquus)

Table 19. Hatching chronology of ancient murrelets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Aiktak I. 28 Jun (74)a 4 Jul (17)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 20. Reproductive performance of ancient murrelets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledged/Egga Plots Average Reference Aiktak I. 0.88 NAb (189)c 0.78 (17)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data aTotal chicks fledged/Total eggs. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of eggs used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

40 Parakeet auklet (Aethia psittacula)

Table 21. Hatching chronology of parakeet auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 10 Jul (13)a 4 Jul (22)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 2 Jul (20) 4 Jul (9) Soucie et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 22. Reproductive performance of parakeet auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.25 NAb (55)c 0.53 (22)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.44 NA (45) 0.37 (9) Soucie et al. 2014 aNest site is defined as a site where an egg was laid. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

41 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 PAAU Hatching N - = + Chronology 0 0 1 0 0 5 = 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 Chowiet (4 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 1 0 0 5 0 9 5 0 + 9 0 8 5 Buldir (4 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5

Figure 26. Hatching chronology of parakeet auklets at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

42 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 PAAU N Productivity 1 1 6 0 1 0 6 9 Chowiet (0.37) Chowiet 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 4 2 0 0 ...... 1 1 1 6 0 1 0 0 Buldir (0.53) 6 9 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 4 2 0 0 ...... 1

Figure 27. Productivity of parakeet auklets (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

43 Least auklet (Aethia pusilla)

Table 23. Hatching chronology of least auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. George I. 2 Jul (53)a 17 Jul (6)a Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 24 Jun (29) 27 Jun (24) J. Williams Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 24. Reproductive performance of least auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference St. George I. 0.73 NAb (59)c 0.70 (6)c Mudge et al. 2015 Buldir I. 0.60 NA (75) 0.59 (25) J. Williams Unpubl. Data aNest site is defined as a site where an egg was laid. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

Least auklet, St. George I. +0.6% p.a. (+9.9% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (1482 birds) 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year

Figure 28. Trends in populations of least auklets at Alaskan sites. Error bars (90% confidence intervals) are shown for years with multiple counts. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

44 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 LEAU Hatching N - = + Chronology - 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 St. George (17 Jul) 7 5 1 0 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 5 9 5 0 0 = 9 0 9 5 0 8 5 9 0 Kiska (30 Jun) 8 0 8 5 Buldir (27 Jun) 7 5 8 0 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5

Figure 29. Hatching chronology of least auklets at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

45 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 2014 LEAU N Productivity 3 1 8 0 3 0 8 9 Kiska (0.46) 3 9 3 8 1 8 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 8 0 3 0 8 3 9 1 3 8 St. George (0.70) St. 9 0 8 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 8 9 Buldir (0.59) 3 9 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 9 . . . .

Figure 30. Productivity of least auklets (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

46 Whiskered auklet (Aethia pygmaea)

Table 25. Hatching chronology of whiskered auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 16 Jun (29)a 22 Jun (23)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data a Sample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 26. Reproductive performance of whiskered auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.55 NAb (78)c 0.64 (24)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data aNest site is defined as a site where an egg was laid. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

47 Crested auklet (Aethia cristatella)

Table 27. Hatching chronology of crested auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 26 Jun (14)a 29 Jun (24)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 28. Reproductive performance of crested auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks Fledged/ No. of Long-term Site Nest Sitea Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.33 NAb (86)c 0.66 (25)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data aNest site is defined as a site where an egg was laid. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

48 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 CRAU Hatching N - = + Chronology 1 0 0 5 0 0 9 5 9 0 1 0 8 5 Kiska (2 Jul) 0 5 8 0 0 0 = 7 5 0 9 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 0 9 0 8 5 Buldir (29 Jun) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5

Figure 31. Hatching chronology of crested auklets at Alaskan. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

49 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 2014 CRAU N Productivity 3 1 8 0 3 0 8 9 Kiska (0.57) 3 9 8 8 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . . 3 1 8 0 3 0 8 9 Buldir (0.66) 3 9 8 8 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 . . . .

Figure 32. Productivity of crested auklets (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

50 Rhinoceros auklet (Cerorhinca monocerata)

Table 29. Hatching chronology of rhinoceros auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference St. Lazaria I. 17 Jun (14)a 26 Jun (19)a L. Slater Unpubl. Data aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean or median hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 30. Reproductive performance of rhinoceros auklets at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledged/Egg Plots Average Reference Chowiet I. 0.74 NAa (62)b 0.57 (2)b Soucie et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 0.91 NA (188) 0.60 (20) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aNot applicable or not reported. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of burrows used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

Rhinoceros auklet, St. Lazaria I. +4.7% p.a. (+4.5% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (Density 1.07) 0 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 Year

Figure 33. Trends in populations of rhinoceros auklets at Alaskan sites. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

51 4 1 0 1 6 0 2 0 8 9 St. Lazaria (0.60) 4 9 0 0 5 0 5 0 2 5 7 0 . . . . . 1 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 2014 RHAU N Productivity 4 1 9 0 4 0 9 9 Chowiet (0.57) 4 9 0 5 0 5 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1

Figure 34. Productivity of rhinoceros auklets (chicks fledged/nest site) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

52 Horned puffin (Fratercula corniculata)

Table 31. Hatching chronology of horned puffins at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 26 Jul (33)a 25 Jul (24)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 26 Jul (10) 1 Aug (9) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 27 Jul (48) 1 Aug (10) Soucie et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 32. Reproductive performance of horned puffins at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledged/Egg Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.52 NAa (47)b 0.46 (26)b J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.51 NA (29) 0.59 (12) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.54 NA (74) 0.36 (9) Soucie et al. 2014 aNot applicable or not reported. bSample size in parentheses represents the number of eggs used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

53 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 HOPU Hatching N - = + Chronology 0 1 0 0 5 0 - 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 Chowiet (1 Aug) 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 - 1 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 9 5 0 5 9 0 0 0 8 5 Aiktak (1 Aug) 0 9 5 8 0 9 0 7 5 = 8 0 - 8 1 5 8 5 - 1 5 Buldir (25 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5

Figure 35. Hatching chronology of horned puffins at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

54 3 1 8 0 3 0 8 9 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0.26 - 0.50 HOPU 3 N Chowiet (0.36) Chowiet Productivity 9 8 8 8 6 4 2 0 . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 8 0 3 0 8 9 Aiktak (0.59) Aiktak 3 9 8 8 3 8 6 4 2 0 . . . . . 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 3 0 8 9 Buldir (0.46) 3 9 8 8 8 6 4 2 0 . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0

Figure 36. Productivity of horned puffins (chicks fledged/egg) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

55 Tufted puffin (Fratercula cirrhata)

Table 33. Hatching chronology of tufted puffins at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Long-term Site Mean Average Reference Buldir I. 9 Jul (6)a 13 Jul (19)a J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 23 Jul (47) 31 Jul (17) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 15 Jul (23) 25 Jul (9) Soucie et al. 2014 aSample size in parentheses represents the number of nest sites used to calculate the mean hatch date and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not included in long-term average.

Table 34. Reproductive performance of tufted puffins at Alaskan sites monitored in 2014. Chicks No. of Long-term Site Fledgeda/Egg Plots Average Reference Buldir I. 0.67 NAb (37)c 0.39 (26)c J. Williams Unpubl. Data Aiktak I. 0.84 NA (80) 0.55 (18) J. Williams Unpubl. Data Chowiet I. 0.76 NA (48) 0.31 (8) Soucie et al. 2014 St. Lazaria I. 0.74 NA (54) 0.51 (51) L. Slater Unpubl. Data aFledged chick defined as being still alive at last check in August or September. bNot applicable or not reported. cSample size in parentheses represents the number of burrows used to calculate productivity and the number of years used to calculate the long-term average. Current year not used in long-term average.

56 Late Average Early No Hatch 2014 TUPU Hatching N - = + Chronology 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 - 0 9 5 9 0 8 5 8 0 Chowiet (25 Jul) 7 5 - 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5 0 1 0 0 5 0 9 5 0 1 0 9 0 0 5 8 5 Aiktak (31 Jul) 0 8 0 9 5 0 7 5 - 8 0 - 8 1 5 9 0 - 1 5 8 5 Buldir (13 Jul) 8 0 7 5 8 0 - 8 1 5 - 1 5

Figure 37. Hatching chronology of tufted puffins at Alaskan sites. Graphs indicate the departure in days (if any) from the site mean (in parentheses; current year not included). Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years.

57 3 1 8 0 3 0 0 8 9 3 9 St. Lazaria (0.51) St. 8 8 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 3 1 8 0 3 0.01 - 0.25 <0.01 2014 0.76 - 1.00 0.51 - 0.75 0 0.26 - 0.50 TUPU N Productivity 8 9 3 9 Middleton (0.44) 8 8 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 3 1 0 8 0 3 0 8 9 3 9 Chowiet (0.31) Chowiet 3 1 8 8 5 0 5 0 0 8 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 3 0 8 9 Aiktak (0.55) Aiktak 3 9 3 1 8 8 8 5 0 5 0 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1 3 0 8 9 Buldir (0.39) 3 9 8 8 5 0 5 0 0 7 5 2 0 0 . . . . . 1

Figure 38. Productivity of tufted puffins (chicks fledged/egg) atAlaskan sites. Lack of bars indicates that no data were gathered in those years. Blue line is the mean productivity at the site (in parentheses; current year not included). Color of symbol indicates how current year’s success compared to the site mean (red is >20% below, black is within 20% and green is >20% above site mean).

58 Tufted puffin, Aiktak I. Tufted puffin, E. Amatuli I. -0.1% p.a. (+0.6% p.a.) -3.3% p.a. (-2.9% p.a.)

100 100

50 50 Percent of Maximum (Density 0.62) 0 Percent of Maximum (199 burrows) 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Year

Tufted puffin, St. Lazaria I. -1.6% p.a. (-1.2% p.a.)

100

Percent of Maximum (Density 0.79) 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year

Figure 39. Trends in populations of tufted puffins at Alaskan sites. Percent per annum (p.a.) changes are indicated for all years and for just the last decade (2005-2014, in parentheses).

59 E E E TUPU E E A HOPU E RHAU A CRAU E WHAU E A LEAU L A PAAU TUPU=tufted puffin. E ANMU L E A A A A TBMU L L E E E A A COMU E E E A A GWGU E E A RLKI compared to averages for past years. Only sites for which there were data from compared to averages for past years. Only sites which E E E A A a BLKI E RFCO E E LHSP b E FTSP Site St. Paul I. St. George I. Aiktak I. Buldir I. Chowiet I. Puale Bay E. Amatuli I. St. Lazaria I. Region SE Bering SW Bering Gulf of Alaska Southeast FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s storm-petrel, RFCO=red-faced cormorant, BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s Codes: GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, ANMU=ancient murrelet, PAAU=parakeet auklet, LEAU=least ANMU=ancient murrelet, PAAU=parakeet TBMU=thick-billed murre, GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, WHAU=whiskered auklet, CRAU=crested RHAU=rhinoceros HOPU=horned puffin, 2014 are included. Table 35. Seabird relative breeding chronology Table a b “E” and red cell color indicate hatching chronology was > 3 days earlier than the average for this site. “A” and yellow cell color indicate hatching chronology was within 3 days of average. “L” and green cell color indicate hatching chronology was > 3 days later than the average for this site.

60 H H H H TUPU A A H HOPU H H RHAU L CRAU A WHAU A A LEAU L A PAAU A ANMU L L A A A H H TBMU L A A H H H COMU A H H H GWGU H H H RLKI L L H H H H H H BLKI compared to averages for past years. Only sites for which there were data from 2014 to averages for past years. Only sites which compared a L A A H H H PECO L H H H RFCO A A H LHSP b L A H FTSP Site St. Paul I. Buldir I. Chowiet I. St. Lazaria I. St. George I. C. Peirce Round I. Aiktak I. Puale Bay E. Amatuli I. Will. Snd. Pr. Region SE Bering SW Bering Gulf of Alaska Southeast FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s storm-petrel, RFCO=red-faced cormorant, PECO=pelagic BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, LHSP=Leach’s Codes: RLKI=red-legged kittiwake, GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, ANMU=ancient murrelet, PAAU=parakeet PAAU=parakeet ANMU=ancient murrelet, murre, TBMU=thick-billed GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged TUPU=tufted puffin. WHAU=whiskered auklet, CRAU=crested RHAU=rinoceros HOPU=horned puffin, auklet, LEAU=least Table 36. Seabird relative productivity levels Table a b “L” and red cell color indicate productivity was > 20% below the average for this site. “A” and yellow cell color indicate productivity was within 20% of average. “H” and green cell color indicate productivity was > 20% above the average for this site. are included.

61 D 1 1 1 A TUPU 1 1 i D h A RHAU h D h A LEAU 1 D 1 1 TUPU=tufted puffin. PIGU A 1 i D 1 1 1 h h N/A N/A N/A A 1 1 1 1 UNMU h h h i D 1 1 h A TBMU 1 1 1 D 1 1 1 1 1 A COMU 1 1 1 1 1 D 1 h h A 1 1 h GWGU D 1 1 h RLKI A 1 1 i D 1 1 1 1 h h i h h N/A N/A BLKI A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 h h i D i A UNCO i D i h h A PECO 1 i h D 1 i A RFCO 1 1 D 1 1 A STPE 1 1 for all available years (“A” columns), and the past decade (2005-2014, “D” columns). (“A” columns), and the past decade for all available years a D 1 A FTSP 1 b D 1 i h i A 1 1 1 1 NOFU Site Hall I. St. Paul I. St. George I. C. Peirce Round I. Aiktak I. Buldir I. Ulak I. Koniuji I. Chowiet I. Puale Bay E. Amatuli E. I. P. William Snd. P. St. Lazaria I. C. Lisburne NOFU=northern fulmar, FTSP=fork-tailed storm-petrel, STPE=unspecified RFCO=red-faced cormorant, PECO=pelagic NOFU=northern fulmar, Codes: Region SE Bering SW Bering Gulf of Alaska Southeast N. Bering/ Chukchi UNCO= unspecified cormorant, BLKI=black-legged kittiwake, RLKI=red-legged GWGU=glaucous-winged gull, COMU=common murre, TBMU=thick-billed murre, UNMU=unspecified PIGU=pigeon guillemot, LEAU=least auklet, RHAU=rhinoceros Table 37. Seabird population trends Table a b i and red cell color indicate a negative population trend of ≥3% per annum for this site. 1 and yellow cell color indicate no population trend. h and green cell color indicate a positive population trend of ≥3% per annum for this site. “N/A” indicates that there were insufficient data to determine a trend (see Methods).

62 Acknowledgments

The data summarized in this report were gathered by many people, most of whom are cited in the references section. We appreciate their efforts. We thank Arthur Kettle (Alaska Maritime NWR), Leslie Salter (Alaska Maritime NWR), Michael Swaim (Togiak NWR), Ed Weiss (Alaska Dept. Fish and Game), and Jeff Williams (Alaska Maritime NWR) for the unpublished data they kindly provided. We would like to extend our thanks to the staff of the Alaska Maritime NWR for their assistance during both the data collection and writing phases of this project. All photographs used in this report are Fish and Wildlife Service pictures except those of the fork-tailed storm-petrel, parakeet auklet, least auklet, tufted puffin and horned puffin which were taken by Ian Jones, and the ancient murrelet taken by Fiona Hunter, and used with permission. Cover art by Susan Steinacher.

References

Byrd, G. V. 2007. Seabird monitoring on Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. Pp. 33-39 in Community-based coastal observing in Alaska: Aleutian life forum 2006, R. Brewer, Ed. Alaska Sea Grant College Program Report No. 07-03. University of Alaska Fairbanks.

_____, and D. E. Dragoo. 1997. Breeding success and population trends of selected seabirds in Alaska in 1996. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 97/11. Homer, Alaska.

_____, and D. B. Irons. 1998. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska in 1997. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 98/02. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 1999. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska in 1998. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 99/02. Homer, Alaska.

Dragoo, D. E., G. V. Byrd, and D. B. Irons. 2000. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska in 1999. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2000/02. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2001. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2000. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 01/07. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2003. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2001. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 03/05. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2004. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2002. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 04/15. Homer, Alaska.

63 _____. 2006. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2003. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 06/13. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2007. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2004. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 07/17. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2008. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2005. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 08/03. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2009. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2006. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 09/05. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2010. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2007. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2010/08. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2011. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2008. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2011/07. Homer, Alaska.

Dragoo, D. E., H. M. Renner, and David B. Irons. 2012. Breeding status, population trends and diets of seabirds in Alaska, 2009. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2012/01. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2013. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska, 2012. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2013/05. Homer, Alaska.

_____. 2014. Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska, 2013. U. S Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2014/03. Homer, Alaska.

Dragoo, D. Alaska Maritime NWR, USFWS. Unpublished Data, 2014. Homer, Alaska.

Irons, D. Migratory Bird Management, USFWS, Unpubl. Data 2014. Anchorage, Alaska.

Kettle, A. Alaska Maritime NWR, USFWS. Unpublished Data, 2014. Homer, Alaska.

Mudge, M. L., K. W. Pietrzak, B. A. Drummond and M. D. Romano. 2015. Biological monitoring at St. George Island, Alaska, in 2014. U. S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Rep., AMNWR 2015/02. Homer, Alaska.

Soucie, B. C., M. L. Henschen, B. A. Drummond, and N. A. Rojek. 2014. Biological monitoring at Chowiet Island, Alaska in 2014. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2014/11. Homer, Alaska.

Slater, L. Alaska Maritime NWR, USFWS. Unpublished Data, 2014. Homer, Alaska.

64 Swaim, M. Togiak NWR, USFWS. Unpublished Data, 2014. Dillingham, Alaska.

Thomson, G., B. A. Drummond, and M. D. Romano. 2014. Biological monitoring at St. Paul Island, Alaska in 2014. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2014/12. Homer, Alaska.

USFWS. 2014. Standardized protocols for annual seabird monitoring camps at Aiktak, Buldir, Cape Lisburne, Chowiet, St. George, St. Lazaria and St. Paul islands in the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge in 2014. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report AMNWR 2014/08. Homer, Alaska.

Weiss, E., Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Unpublished Data 2014. Anchorage, Alaska

Welfelt, J. L., J. J. Looze, C. M. Rice, and S. E. Wartman. 2014. Populations and reproductive success of seabirds on the Pacific coast of Becharof National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, 2014. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, Alaska Peninsula/Becharof National Wildlife Refuge Complex. King Salmon, Alaska.

Williams, J. Alaska Maritime NWR, USFWS. Unpublished Data, 2014. Homer, Alaska.