Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Paper addressing Resolution 5 (2015) request to: ‘provide an update to the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting on the extent to which these Important Bird Areas are, or should be, represented within the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPA), in particular those areas that might qualify as “major colonies of breeding native birds”’.

Harris, C.M., Lorenz, K. & Syposz, M. 22 February 2017

Financially supported by the Governments of New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Contents 1. Introduction ...... 3 2. Designation criteria ...... 3 2.1 ASPA designation criteria ...... 4 2.2 IBA designation criteria ...... 4 3. Current Status ...... 7 3.1 Current status of ASPAs ...... 7 3.2 Current status of IBAs ...... 7 3.3 IBAs represented in the current ASPA network ...... 11 3.4 IBAs not represented in the current ASPA network ...... 15 3.4.1 Emperor penguin ...... 16 3.4.2 Adélie penguin ...... 17 3.4.3 Chinstrap penguin ...... 18 3.4.4 Gentoo penguin ...... 19 3.4.5 Macaroni penguin ...... 19 3.4.6 Imperial shag ...... 20 3.4.7 South polar skua ...... 21 3.4.8 Southern giant petrel ...... 22 3.4.9 Antarctic petrel ...... 23 3.4.10 Southern fulmar ...... 24 4. Representation of IBAs in the ASPA network ...... 25 4.1 Method A: Using population numbers as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’...... 25 4.2 Method B: Using species diversity as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’...... 27 4.3 Method C: Using a combination of population numbers and species diversity as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’...... 28 5. Discussion ...... 31 6. Conclusion ...... 33 7. References ...... 35 Appendix A: List of Important Bird Areas in Antarctica ...... 39 Appendix B: List of all colonies identified through Method C ...... 54 Appendix C: List of Important Bird Areas in Antarctica meeting criteria by Method...... 56

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

1. Introduction

Antarctic wide census data for several bird species have been published over a number of years. One of the first comprehensive penguin inventories was compiled by Croxall and Kirkwood (1979) for the Antarctic Peninsula, South Shetland, South Orkney and the South Sandwich islands. This work was built on to include the remainder of the Antarctic region in Woehler (1993), which compiled census information from more than 100 publications. More recently Fretwell et al. (2012) and Lynch & LaRue (2014) derived population numbers for Emperor and Adélie penguins using satellite imagery. It is recognised that populations derived from satellite observations can be subject to considerable error (e.g. Barber-Meyer et al. 2007; Fretwell et al. 2012; Schwaller et al. 2013; Lynch & LaRue 2014; Lynch & Schwaller 2014; Southwell et al in press). Antarctic-wide compilations have also been made for flying bird species: van Franeker et al. (1999) on breeding colonies of Antarctic petrel; Hodum et al. (2004, unpublished) on breeding colonies of Cape petrel; Creuwels et al. (2007) on breeding colonies of Southern fulmar; and Patterson et al. (2008) on breeding colonies of Southern giant petrel. Until now, no systematic appraisal of these Antarctic wide census data has been undertaken to consider which of these colonies are, or should be, included within the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPA). Work recently completed to identify Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Antarctica (Harris et al. 2015) has enabled a further analysis of the bird population data to contribute towards answering these questions. The results of this initial analysis are reported in this paper. At the XXXVIII Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) a Working Paper and Information Paper was presented by Australia, New Zealand, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States describing the recently completed analysis identifying IBAs in Antarctica, defined as the area south of 60° South. The IBA initiative was developed through collaboration between BirdLife International and the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) that started in 1998 and was recently renewed with the support of a number of Antarctic Treaty Parties and several charitable organisations. Following the presentation of the papers the ATCM adopted Resolution 5 (2015), which includes the recommendation to: request the Committee for Environmental Protection to provide an update to the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting on the extent to which these Important Bird Areas are, or should be, represented within the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPA), in particular those areas that might qualify as “major colonies of breeding native birds”. This paper aims to address this recommendation by examining the representation of IBAs in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs), and identifying those IBAs that might qualify as “major colonies of breeding native birds”. 2. Designation criteria

Antarctic Specially Protected Areas (ASPAs) and IBAs are designated according to different criteria, a summary of which is given below.

Page 3 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

2.1 ASPA designation criteria As stated in Article 3 of Annex V of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, any area, including any marine area, may be designated as an ASPA to protect outstanding environmental, scientific, historic, aesthetic or wilderness values, any combination of those values, or ongoing or planned scientific research. Furthermore, the article states that Parties should seek to include in the series of ASPAs, inter alia, ‘areas with important or unusual assemblages of species, including major colonies of breeding native birds or mammals’ 2.2 IBA designation criteria The global (Level A) IBA criteria were standardised for global application following extensive consultation amongst experts in the BirdLife International Partnership and related fields (Fishpool & Evans 2001) and are also used to identify IBAs in Antarctica. In some parts of the world additional criteria based on less stringent thresholds are used to identify IBAs of regional significance, although to date these have not been used in Antarctica. The following definitions of the IBA selection criteria are based on Fishpool & Evans (2001) and were applied in Antarctica: A1: Globally threatened species. “The site is known or thought regularly to hold significant numbers of a globally threatened species, or other species of global conservation concern”. The site qualifies if it is known, estimated or thought to hold a population of a species categorized by the IUCN Red List as Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN) or Vulnerable (VU). In general, the regular presence of a CR or EN species, irrespective of population size, at a site may be sufficient for a site to qualify as an IBA. For VU species, the presence of more than threshold numbers at a site is necessary to trigger selection. The site may also qualify if it holds more than threshold numbers of species in the Near Threatened (NT) category. Thresholds are set regionally, often on a species by species basis. A4: Globally important congregations. A4i: “The site is known or thought to hold, on a regular basis, 1% or more of a biogeographic population of a congregatory waterbird species.” A4ii: “The site is known or thought to hold, on a regular basis, 1% or more of the global population of a congregatory seabird or terrestrial species.” A4iii: “The site is known or thought to hold, on a regular basis, at least 20 000 waterbirds, or at least 10 000 pairs of seabirds, of one or more species.”

Table 1 lists the species included in the IBA assessment for Antarctica (Harris et al. 2015). The estimated global populations are defined by BirdLife International in consultation with their partners worldwide, and are based on the most recent population estimates at the time of the IBA assessment.

Page 4 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Table 1: Bird species of Antarctica included in this assessment and associated population thresholds required for IBA designation (table reproduced from Harris et al. 2015)

Name Latin Name Red List IBA Criteria Pop Threshold Global Population Global Population Source Status (pairs)1 (individuals) (pairs) Emperor penguin Aptenodytes forsteri NT A1, A4ii 2380 238 000 Fretwell et al. 2012

Gentoo penguin Pygoscelis papua NT A1, A4ii 3900 387 000 Lynch 2013

Adélie penguin Pygoscelis adeliae NT A1, A4ii 37 900 3 790 000 Lynch & La Rue 2014

Chinstrap penguin Pygoscelis antarctica LC A4ii 27 000 8,000,000 ~2 666 667 World Bird Database, BirdLife Int.

Macaroni penguin Eudyptes chrysolophus VU A1, A4ii 1500 (A1) 6 300 000 Crossin et al. 2013 63 000 (A4ii)

Wilson's storm- Oceanites oceanicus LC A4ii 70 000 12-30 000 000 ~4-10 000 000 Brooke 2004 petrel

Black-bellied Fregetta tropica LC A4ii 1600 500 000 ~160 000 Brooke 2004 Storm-petrel

Light-mantled Phoebetria palpebrata NT A1, A4ii 10 (A1), 87 000 ~20 000 ACAP 2010a albatross 200 (A4ii)

Southern giant Macronectes giganteus LC A4ii 500 ~50 000 ACAP 2010b petrel

Southern fulmar Fulmarus glacialoides LC A4ii 10 000 1 000 000 1 000 000 Creuwels el al. 2007

Antarctic petrel Thalassoica antarctica LC A4ii 30 000 10-20 000 000 ~ 3 – 7 000 000 Brooke 2004

1 In some cases the same species may trigger more than one IBA criterion, for which the appropriate population thresholds may differ. Thus, the threshold for triggering IBA selection for a globally threatened species under criterion A1 may be lower than the threshold for the same species under category A4. Where A1 and A4 thresholds are identical the number given applies to both. The threshold of 10 000 pairs for category A4iii may be made up of one or more species.

Page 5 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Name Latin Name Red List IBA Criteria Pop Threshold Global Population Global Population Source Status (pairs)1 (individuals) (pairs) Cape petrel Daption capense LC A4ii 6700 2 000 000 ~670 000 Brooke 2004

Snow petrel Pagodroma nivea LC A4ii 13 000 4,000,000 ~1 300 000 Brooke 2004

Antarctic prion Pachyptila desolata LC A4ii 166 000 50 000 000 ~16 600 000 Brooke 2004

Imperial (Antarctic) Phalacrocorax LC A4i 133 40 000 ~13333 Waterbirds Population Estimates shag [atriceps] IV - bransfieldensis treated as a bransfieldensis subsp of atriceps

Snowy (Greater) Chionis albus LC A4ii 100 10 000 10 000 Handbook of the Birds of the sheathbill World

Kelp gull Larus dominicanus LC A4i 140 30 – 60 000 ~10-20 000 Waterbirds Population Estimates V [Antarctic Peninsula & Atlantic sub-Antarctic Islands]

Antarctic tern Sterna vittata LC A4i 366 110 000 ~36 666 Waterbirds Population Estimates III [S. v. gaini Antarctic Peninsula and S Shetland Islands?]

South polar skua Catharacta LC A4ii 50 10 000-19 999 ~3000-7500 World Bird Database, BirdLife Int. maccormicki

Brown skua Catharacta antarctica LC A4ii 75 10 000-19 999 ~3000-7500 World Bird Database, BirdLife Int.

Seabirds (including all species of penguin, A4iii 10 000 N/A N/A procellariiform, sheathbill and skua)

Waterbirds (including all species of shag, gull A4iii 10 000 N/A N/A and tern)

Page 6 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3. Current Status

3.1 Current status of ASPAs Currently the series of ASPAs comprises a total of 72 sites. Because ASPAs can be designated for various values, not just wildlife values, an analysis was undertaken to identify those ASPAs that are specially protected for their avifauna value. Out of 72 sites, 39 listed avifauna as a primary or secondary value to be protected, with 33 sites designated for other values. Birds may or may not be present within those ASPAs, although their presence did not warrant an inclusion in the description of values to be protected. 3.2 Current status of IBAs Relatively detailed and complete species data are available for only 10 of the approximately 20 bird species breeding in Antarctica (see Table 1 for a listing of the 20 bird species). Those species are: Emperor penguin, Adélie penguin, Chinstrap penguin, Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Imperial shag, Antarctic petrel, Southern fulmar and South polar skua. For the remaining 10 species, data availability is very poor. Therefore, for species such as Antarctic tern, Kelp gull, Wilson's storm-petrel, Brown skua, Antarctic prion, Greater sheathbill and Cape petrel, IBAs could only be identified where more detailed breeding information was available on those species, for example where situated in an ASPA or close to a station. Table 2 summarises the populations in the Antarctic and the percentages of the estimated global population that are breeding in Antarctica for the ten species where more detailed data are available.

Page 7 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Table 2: Summary population status of bird species breeding in Antarctica for which detailed data are available.

Bird Species Population in Percentage of Comment Sources Antarctica estimated global (breeding pairs)1 population breeding in Antarctica Emperor 272 670 100 The global population of 238K ASPA No.127 Haswell Island, Ancel et al. 2014, Barbroud, Delord & penguin pairs (Table 1) is an Weimerskirch pers. comm., Fretwell et al. 2012, Kooyman pers. underestimate, as data in the comm. 2012 & 2014, Robertson et al. 2012, Wienecke 2012, references at right give an Wienecke pers. comm. 2014 estimated global population as 272,670. Adélie 4 004 200 100 The global population of 3.79m ASPA 117 Avian Island, ASPA 127 Haswell Island, ASPA 136 Clark penguin pairs (Table 1) is probably an Peninsula, ASPA 167 Hawker Island, ASPA 170 Marion Nunataks, underestimate, and recent work Barbraud et al. 1999, Barbraud, Delord & Weimerskirch pers. by Southwell et al. (in press) comm., Casanovas et al. 2015, Coria et al. 2005, Coria et al. 2011, suggests the global breeding Low et al. 2007, Lynch pers. comm. 2015, Lynch & LaRue 2014, population is closer to 4.75m Lynch & LaRue pers. comm. 2014, Lynch & Schwaller 2014, Lynch pairs. Some census data are old et al. 2013, Lyver et al. 2014, Naveen 2003, Poncet & Poncet 1985, and need updating. Data in the Poncet & Poncet pers. comm., Southwell & Emmerson 2013, US references at right give an AMLR program unpublished data, Whitehead & Johnstone 1990, estimated global population as Wilson et al. 2009, Woehler 1993 4,004,200. Breeding also occurs on South Sandwich Islands and Bouvetoya Island which are situated outside the study area. Chinstrap 2 184 414 82 Breeding also occurs on Sub-

Page 8 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Bird Species Population in Percentage of Comment Sources Antarctica estimated global (breeding pairs)1 population breeding in Antarctica penguin Antarctic islands. Gentoo 122 359 31 Breeding also occurs on Sub- penguin Antarctic islands. Macaroni 6 714 0.1 Breeding also occurs on Sub- penguin Antarctic islands and South American offshore islands. Southern 10 684 21 Some census data are old and giant petrel need updating. Breeding also occurs on Sub- Antarctic islands which are outside the study area. Imperial shag 14 958 100 The global population (Table 1) ASPA No. 117 Avian Island, ASPA No. 149 Cape Shirreff, Bruce & might be an underestimate, also Furse 1973, Casanovas et al. 2015.,Hahn et al. 1998, Lynch et al. some census data are old and 2008, Lynch et al. 2013, Naveen & Lynch 2011, Shuford & Spear need updating. Data in the 1988, Silva et al. 1998, Fijn pers. comm. 2011, S. Poncet pers. references at right give an comm. 2005 estimated global population as 14,958. Antarctic 430 759 9 Antarctic petrel breeding colonies petrel are poorly documented. It is assumed there remain undiscovered colonies, some of which may be quite large. South polar 7621 100 The global population of ~3000 – ASPA No. 105 Beaufort Island, ASPA No. 106 Cape Hallett, ASPA

Page 9 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Bird Species Population in Percentage of Comment Sources Antarctica estimated global (breeding pairs)1 population breeding in Antarctica skua 7500 pairs (Table 1) is most likely No. 113 Litchfield Island, ASPA No. 117 Avian Island, ASPA No. 121 an underestimate. ERA’s Cape Royds, ASPA No. 127 Haswell Island, ASPA No. 128 Western database contains ~7620 shore of Admiralty Bay, ASPA No. 133 Harmony Point, ASPA No. breeding pairs, which is an 134 Cierva Point and offshore islands, ASPA No. 142 Svarthamaren, underestimate, as no census data ASPA No. 150 Ardley Island, ASPA No. 162 Mawson’s Huts, Cape are available for 19 breeding Denison, ASPA No. 164 Scullin and Murray Monoliths, ASPA No. locations. Some census data are 165 Edmonson Point, ASPA No. 169 Amanda Bay, Ainley et al. old and need updating. Data in 1986, Barbraud & Baker 1998, Barbraud et al. 1999, Bonner & the references at right give an Lewis Smith 1985, Esponda et al. 2000, Harper et al. 1984, Harris estimated global population as 2001, Mehlum et al. 1988, Naveen & Lynch, 2011, Norman & Ward 7621. 1999, Ritz et al. 2006, Robertson et al. 1980, Schneider Costa & Alves 2008, van Franeker, Bell & Montague 1990, Wilson et al. in prep. Southern 191 977 19 This is an underestimate, as for fulmar many breeding locations in Antarctica no census data are available. Breeding also occurs on South Sandwich Islands and Bouvetoya Island which are situated outside the study area. 1. Data based on bird population estimates compiled by ERA, which are more recent and comprehensive for Antarctica than the estimated global populations given in Table 1. 2. See Table 1 for estimated global population data.

Page 10 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

The assessment of bird breeding colonies in Antarctica identified a total of 204 IBAs (Harris et al. 2015). The list of the IBAs identified is provided in Appendix A, and a more detailed description on the methodology and the IBA site accounts can be found in Important Bird Areas in Antarctica 2015 (Harris et al. 2015). For the ten bird species where more detailed data are available, an analysis has been conducted to identify the percentage of the estimated global population situated within identified IBAs (Table 3). One species that stands out is the Emperor penguin with 96% of its population being situated inside 36 IBAs. Other species that have more than 75% of their population situated inside IBAs are Adélie penguin with 76% inside 98 IBAs and South polar skua with 82% inside 56 IBAs. Species that have more than 50% of their population situated inside IBAs are Chinstrap penguin with 64% inside 63 IBAs and Imperial shag with 56% inside 34 IBAs. The remaining five species, Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Antarctic petrel and Southern fulmar, have less than 20% of their estimated global population inside IBAs. This is due to several reasons, e.g. in the case of the Macaroni penguin, the majority of its breeding distribution lies outside the study area, in the case of the Antarctic petrel, it is assumed that many large colonies remain undiscovered to this day.

Table 3: Number of IBAs per species including percentage of estimated global population

Bird Species Numbers of IBAs where bird species % of estimated global population2 present1 Emperor penguin 36 96 Adélie penguin 97 77 Chinstrap penguin 62 63 Gentoo penguin 25 14 Macaroni penguin 9 0.1 Southern giant petrel 22 11 Imperial shag 35 56 Antarctic petrel 10 9 South polar skua 57 82 Southern fulmar 19 13 1. Includes IBAs where the species is not a trigger species. 2. Where the bird population data compiled by ERA (see Table 2) was larger than the estimated global population previously specified (see Table 1), the global population estimated by ERA was used to calculate the percentage because these data are more comprehensive than the earlier global population assessment adopted by BirdLife International.

3.3 IBAs represented in the current series of ASPAs An analysis was undertaken to identify how the IBAs are represented in the current series of ASPAs. Of 204 IBAs, 27 are ASPAs, two encompass ASPAs, and one partly encompasses an ASPA. Seven IBAs

Page 11 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

are situated within ASMAs, with two out of those seven sites being designated as Restricted Zones within the ASMA. The 27 IBAs that are already designated as ASPAs were examined more closely to identify whether the values for ASPA designation are related to the avifauna present. Avifauna was one of the primary or secondary values to be protected in all of these sites. In 24 ASPAs the IBA trigger species was a subset of the species listed as being an ASPA value, e.g. in many cases the diverse assemblage of bird species was listed as the ASPA value, whereas in the IBA it was only one or two of those species that functioned as the IBA trigger. In the remaining three cases, at least one of the IBA trigger species was not mentioned as an ASPA value. This is the case for Ant047 Potter Peninsula, Ant097 Dion Islands and Ant176 Cape Washington. A detailed comparison of IBA trigger species and ASPA avifauna value is presented in Table 4.

Table 4: List of all IBAs that are ASPAs and comparison of the IBA trigger species against ASPA avifauna values.

IBA IBA trigger ASPA ASPA value Ant015 Southern Chinstrap penguin, ASPA 111. Southern Diverse assemblage of bird species Powell Island and Gentoo penguin, Powell Island and – including Chinstrap penguin, adjacent islands Adélie penguin, adjacent islands, South Gentoo penguin, Adélie penguin, Imperial shag, and Orkney Islands Macaroni penguin, Wilson's storm- Southern giant petrel , Cape petrel, Dominican petrel gulls, Southern giant petrel, Black- bellied storm petrel, Imperial shag, Brown skua, Sheathbill, Snow petrel and possibly Antarctic prions Ant020 Moe Island Chinstrap penguin ASPA 109. Moe Island, Birds not primary reason, but they South Orkney Islands form part of the environmental values – breeding birds include Chinstrap penguin, Cape petrel and Antarctic prion Ant046 West Admiralty Gentoo penguin, ASPA 128. Western shore Diverse assemblage of bird species Bay, King George Island Adélie penguin, of Admiralty Bay, King – including Adélie penguin, Gentoo Chinstrap penguin George Island, South penguin, Chinstrap penguin, Shetland Islands Southern giant petrel, Cape petrel, Wilson's storm-petrel , Black- bellied storm petrel, Sheathbill, South polar skua, brown skua, Dominican gull and Antarctic tern Ant047 Potter South polar skua ASPA 132. Potter Adélie and Gentoo penguins. Peninsula, King George Peninsula, King George South polar skua not mentioned in Island Island, South Shetland values Islands Ant048 Ardley Island, Gentoo penguin ASPA 150. Ardley Island, Diverse assemblage of bird species King George Island Maxwell Bay, King George – including Gentoo penguin, Adélie Island penguin, Chinstrap penguin, Southern giant petrel, Wilson's storm-petrel, Antarctic tern and Brown skua.

Page 12 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA IBA trigger ASPA ASPA value Ant049 Harmony Point, Chinstrap penguin ASPA 133. Harmony Point, Chinstrap penguin, Gentoo Nelson Island Nelson Island, South penguin, Southern giant petrel Shetland Islands Ant054 Byers Antarctic tern, Kelp ASPA 126. Byers Diverse assemblage of bird species Peninsula, Livingston gull Peninsula, Livingston – including Chinstrap penguin, Island Island, South Shetland Gentoo penguin, Antarctic tern, Islands Wilson's storm-petrel, Cape petrel, Kelp gull, Southern giant petrel, Black-bellied storm petrel, Imperial shag, Brown skua and Sheathbills. Ant081 Cierva Point South polar skua ASPA 134. Cierva Point Diverse assemblage of bird species and offshore islands and offshore islands, – including Chinstrap penguin, Danco Coast, Antarctic Gentoo penguin, Southern giant Peninsula petrel, Cape petrel, Wilson's storm- petrel, Imperial shag, Sheathbill, South polar skua, Kelp gull and Antarctic tern Ant086 Litchfield Island, South polar skua ASPA 113. Litchfield Diverse assemblage of bird species Arthur Harbor Island, Arthur Harbor, – including Southern giant petrel, Anvers Island, Palmer Wilson's storm-petrel, Kelp gull, Archipelago South polar skua, Brown skua and Antarctic tern Ant095 Avian Island Adélie penguin, ASPA 117. Avian Island, Diverse assemblage of bird species Imperial shag, Marguerite Bay, Antarctic – including Adélie penguin, South polar skua Peninsula Imperial shag, Southern giant petrel, Kelp gull, Wilson's storm- petrel, South polar skua and Brown skua Ant097 Dion Islands Imperial shag ASPA 107. Emperor Island, Emperor penguin – MP needs Dion Islands, Marguerite revision as Emperor penguins are Bay, Antarctic Peninsula not breeding here anymore Ant098 Lagotellerie Imperial shag ASPA 115. Lagotellerie Adélie penguin, Imperial shag, Island Island, Marguerite Bay, Brown skua and South polar skua Graham Land Ant112 Svarthamaren Antarctic petrel, ASPA 142. Svarthamaren Antarctic petrel, Snow petrel and South polar skua South polar skua Ant119 Taylor Rookery Emperor penguin ASPA 101. Taylor Rookery, Emperor penguin Mac. Robertson Land Ant121 Rookery Islands Adélie penguin ASPA 102. Rookery Diverse assemblage of bird species Islands, Holme Bay, Mac. – including Adélie penguin, Cape Robertson Land petrel, Snow petrel, Southern giant petrel and Antarctic skua Ant126 Scullin Monolith Adélie penguin, ASPA 164. Scullin and Diverse assemblage of bird species / Murray Monolith Antarctic petrel Murray Monoliths, Mac. – including Antarctic petrel, Cape Robertson Land petrel, Southern fulmar, Snow petrel, Wilson's storm-petrel,

Page 13 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA IBA trigger ASPA ASPA value Adélie penguin and South polar skua Ant128 Amanda Bay Emperor penguin ASPA 169. Amanda Bay, Emperor penguin, South polar Ingrid Christensen Coast, skua, Wilson's storm-petrel Princess Elizabeth Land, East Antarctica Ant141 Haswell Island Emperor penguin, ASPA 127. Haswell Island Diverse assemblage of bird species Adélie penguin, – including Emperor penguin, South polar skua Antarctic petrel, Southern fulmar, Cape petrel, Snow petrel, Wilson's storm-petrel, South polar skua and Adélie penguin, Ant145 Ardery / Odbert Southern fulmar, ASPA 103. Ardery Island Diverse assemblage of bird species Island Snow petrel, and Odbert Island, Budd – including Antarctic petrel, Adélie penguin Coast, Wilkes Land, East Southern fulmar, Cape petrel, Antarctica Snow petrel, Wilson's storm-petrel, South polar skua and Adélie penguin Ant147 Clark Peninsula Adélie penguin ASPA 136. Clark Peninsula, Adélie penguin and South polar Budd Coast, Wilkes Land, skua East Antarctica Ant150 Pointe Géologie Emperor penguin, ASPA 120. Pointe- Diverse assemblage of bird species Adélie penguin Geologie Archipelago, – including Emperor penguin, Terre Adélie South polar skua, Adélie penguin, Wilson's storm-petrel, Southern giant petrel, Snow petrel and Cape petrel Ant157 Cape Denison Adélie penguin ASPA 162. Mawson’s Adélie penguin, Wilson's storm- Huts, Cape Denison, petrel, Snow petrel and South polar Commonwealth Bay, skua George V Land, East Antarctica Ant170 Seabee Hook, Adélie penguin ASPA 106. Cape Hallett, Adélie penguin Cape Hallett Northern Victoria Land, Ross Sea Ant175 Edmonson South polar skua ASPA 165. Edmonson Adélie penguin, South polar skua Point Point, Wood Bay Ant176 Cape Emperor penguin, ASPA 173. Cape Emperor penguin Washington South polar skua Washington and Silverfish Bay, Terra Nova Bay, Ross Sea Ant187 Cape Crozier, Adélie penguin, ASPA 124. Cape Crozier, Adélie penguin, Emperor penguin Ross Island South polar skua Ross Island and South polar skua Ant188 Beaufort Island Adelié penguin ASPA 105. Beaufort Island, Adélie penguin, Emperor penguin, McMurdo Sound, Ross South polar skua and Snow petrel. Sea

Page 14 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

In the three cases where the IBA completely or partly encompasses the ASPA, the ASPA was designated for historical values (ASPA 165 Cape Adare, ASPA 166 Port-Martin, Terre-Adélie) or values related to its flora (ASPA 116 New College Valley). For the ten bird species where more detailed data are available, an analysis has been conducted to identify what percentage of the estimated global population is situated in IBAs that are already designated as an ASPA (Table 5). With the exception of South polar skuas, relatively low percentages of the populations of other species are included within ASPAs. For South polar skuas more than half of the population that is situated inside IBAs are specially protected by the ASPA status, which is 45% of the total estimated global population. For all other species, less than 20% of the estimated global population is specially protected for Emperor penguin, Adélie penguin and Imperial shag and less than 10% of the estimated global population is specially protected for Chinstrap penguin, Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Antarctic petrel and Southern fulmar.

Table 5: Percentage of total population by species that breed within ASPAs

Bird Species Numbers of IBAs that are already % of total population designated as ASPAs where bird species is present Emperor penguin 7 18 Adélie penguin 20 16 Chinstrap penguin 8 6 Gentoo penguin 7 8 Macaroni penguin 1 0 Southern giant petrel 11 5 Imperial shag 8 11 Antarctic petrel 4 4.4 South polar skua 21 45 Southern fulmar 4 0.8

3.4 IBAs not represented in the current series of ASPAs The 27 IBAs that are already specially protected as ASPAs do not always correspond with the IBAs that have a high proportion of the estimated global population of a species present. An analysis has been conducted for the ten bird species for which more detailed information is available. Charts have been prepared for all species (apart from Macaroni penguins) listing the IBAs in their order of size, highlighting those that are already protected as ASPAs (Figures 1- 9). The charts also include those IBAs where a certain bird species is present but not responsible for triggering the IBA.

Page 15 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.1 Emperor penguin For the Emperor penguin (Figure 1) the two largest colonies, Cape Wadworth (Coulman Island) hosting ~9.3% and Brunt Ice Shelf (‘Halley Bay’) hosting ~8.3% of the estimated global population, are not specially protected as ASPAs. However, the 3rd, 4th and 7th largest colonies, Cape Washington with ~6.2%, Haswell Island with ~4.8% and Amanda Bay with ~3.7%, are part of the series of ASPAs. The 5th and 6th largest Emperor penguin colonies (Dibble Glacier and Cape Colbeck) are not ASPAs. Two ASPAs (Pointe Géologie and Taylor Rookery) also qualified as IBAs with ~1% of the estimated global population, although are ranked 26 and 32 respectively in terms of colony size. The Beaufort Island and Cape Crozier ASPAs each comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status was not triggered on the basis of the size of their Emperor penguin colonies.

Figure 1: Emperor penguin colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 16 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.2 Adélie penguin The largest Adélie penguin (Figure 2) colony is Cape Crozier, which hosts almost 7% of the estimated global population and is already part of the series of ASPAs. However, none of the other larger colonies (2nd to 10th largest) are specially protected. The next colonies in order of size that are specially protected are the 11th and 12th largest, being Scullin Monolith / Murray Monolith and Pointe Géologie, both with ~1.4% of the estimated global population. There are four further ASPAs that qualify as IBAs, each of which comprise ~1% of the estimated global Adelie penguin population. There are 12 other ASPAs with Adélie penguin colonies that are IBAs, although each of these comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species and/or on the basis of seabird status.

Figure 2: Adélie penguin colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 17 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.3 Chinstrap penguin Of the ten largest Chinstrap penguin colonies in Antarctica, one is specially protected (Harmony Point, Nelson Island, the 4th largest with ~3.8% of the global population) (Figure 3). The three largest colonies together comprise ~15.5% of the estimated global population, being Cape Wallace (Low Island), Larsen Islands/Moreton Point, and Cape Bowles, Clarence Island. Southern Powell Island hosts the 11th largest Chinstrap penguin colony, with ~1.8% of the estimated global population, and is specially protected. There are six other ASPAs with Chinstrap penguin colonies that are IBAs, each of which comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species and/or on the basis of seabird status.

Figure 3: Chinstrap penguin colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 18 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.4 Gentoo penguin Of the ten largest Gentoo penguin colonies in Antarctica, six are specially protected which together comprise ~6% of the estimated global population (Figure 4). The four colonies ranked in the top-ten that are not specially protected together comprise ~4.5% of the estimated global population. The largest colony is Cuverville Island containing ~1.5% of the estimated global population, which is not an ASPA. There is one ASPA (Southern Powell Island) with a Gentoo penguin colony comprising <1% of the estimated global population and its IBA status is triggered by other species. Only 31% of the estimated global population breeds in Antarctica, and 45% of those breed within IBAs. Seven percent of the estimated global population breeds within ASPAs that are IBAs, which is 26% of the breeding population of Gentoo penguins in Antarctica. These results suggest that the breeding population of Gentoo penguins in Antarctica are relatively well-represented within ASPAs.

Figure 4: Gentoo penguin colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

3.4.5 Macaroni penguin The largest Macaroni penguin colonies in Antarctica are not specially protected. However, even the largest Macaroni penguin colony in Antarctica designated as an IBA, Craggy Point (IBA 026), Clarence Island, contains only 0.05% of the estimated global population. Only one of the nine Macaroni penguin colonies in Antarctica is specially protected (IBA Ant015, ASPA No. 111 Southern Powell

Page 19 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Island and adjacent islands). However, only “a few” Macaroni penguins have been recorded breeding at the location, and the species was not responsible for triggering IBA status. Only 0.1% of the global Macaroni penguin population breeds within Antarctica.

3.4.6 Imperial shag Of the ten largest Imperial shag colonies in Antarctica, three are specially protected which together comprise ~9.2% of the estimated global population (Figure 5). The seven largest IBAs that are not ASPAs comprise almost 29% of the estimated global population. The largest colony is on Signy Island, hosting ~6.7% of the estimated global population and is not specially protected. The 2nd largest colony, Emperor Island (Dion Islands), is designated as an ASPA and comprises ~5.4% of the estimated global population. However, this ASPA was designated for values related to the Emperor penguin colony that probably no longer breeds at the site, and Imperial Shags are not identified in the management plan as an important value for special protection. Two ASPAs in Marguerite Bay, Avian Island (ranking 8th) and Lagotellerie Island (ranking 9th), together host 3.8% of the estimated global population. Southern Powell Island hosts ~1% of the global Imperial shag population and is designated as an ASPA. There are four other ASPAs with Imperial shag colonies that are IBAs, although each of these comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species.

Figure 5: Imperial shag colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 20 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.7 South polar skua The three largest South polar skua colonies, Cape Crozier (Ross Island) hosting ~15.7%, Avian Island hosting ~11.5% and Cierva Point and offshore islands hosting ~ 6.2% of the estimated global population are all designated ASPAs (Figure 6). Together these three sites comprise almost 34% of the South polar skua global breeding population. The next four largest colonies are currently not specially protected. Four other IBAs triggered by the South polar skua are designated ASPAs (Beaufort Island, Edmonson Point, Svarthamaren and Lagotellerie Island), together comprising a further 6.6% of the estimated global population. Nineteen other ASPAs host South polar skua colonies that are IBAs, although each of these comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species.

Figure 6: South polar skua colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 21 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.8 Southern giant petrel The largest Southern giant petrel colony lies on Signy Island, comprising ~4.7% of the estimated global population and is not currently specially protected (Figure 7). The next three largest Antarctic IBA colonies, Southern Powell Island and adjacent islands, Avian Island and Harmony Point are designated ASPAs and together comprise almost 3% of the estimated global population. Only the first (Signy Island) and second largest colony (Southern Powell Island) has a population large enough to trigger IBA status, and all other IBAs ranked in the top ten sites by size were triggered by other species. Outside of the top ten there are seven other IBAs that are ASPAs with Southern giant petrel colonies, although each of these comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species.

Figure 7: Southern giant petrel colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 22 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.9 Antarctic petrel The two largest Antarctic petrel colonies in Antarctica are Scullin Monolith / Murray Monolith with ~ 3.2% and Svarthamaren with ~3.0% of the estimated global population, both of which are designated ASPAs (Figure 8). The next six largest Antarctic petrel colonies in the series of IBAs are not currently specially protected. The colonies ranked 9th and 10th largest in Antarctica, Ardery Island / Odbert Island and Haswell Island, are designated ASPAs although each comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species. Of the total estimated population of 3 – 7 million pairs, breeding sites are known for only ~9 % (430,000 pairs), all of which lie within Antarctica. As a result, only a small proportion of the estimated estimated global population is included within either IBAs or ASPAs.

Figure 8: Antarctic petrel colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 23 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

3.4.10 Southern fulmar Of the ten largest IBA colonies of Southern fulmar in Antarctica, none are designated ASPAs (Figure 9). There are four ASPAs with Southern fulmar colonies that are IBAs (Ardery Island / Odbert Island, Haswell Island, Scullin and Murray Monoliths and Cape Denison), although each of these comprise <1% of the estimated global population and their IBA status is triggered by other species. The majority of the Southern fulmar population (~81%) breeds outside of Antarctica.

Figure 9: Southern fulmar colonies by proportion of estimated global population.

Page 24 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

4. Representation of IBAs in the series of ASPAs

Resolution 5 (2015) requested the CEP to consider which IBAs may constitute “major colonies of native breeding birds” in accordance with Article 3.2(c) of Annex V, and which might warrant consideration for ASPA designation. One method could be simply to apply the IBA criteria, and assume that all colonies that exceed the IBA threshold should be classified as ‘major colonies’ and qualify as candidates for special protection. If this method was applied, this would suggest that 177 of the 204 IBAs would need to be proposed as ASPAs (27 IBAs are already ASPAs), increasing the current number of ASPAs from 72 to 249. This approach would seem neither necessary nor practical, and therefore more discriminating criteria are needed to define ‘major colonies’ that might qualify as candidates for consideration for special protection. Emperor penguin, Adélie penguin, Chinstrap penguin, Imperial shag and South polar skua, which entirely or mainly breed within Antarctica, have the majority of their estimated global population inside an IBA (see Table 3) and trigger 179 out of the 204 IBAs. All other species trigger 14 IBAs, and 11 IBAs are triggered by a combination of those species. The reason why only a small percentage of IBAs is triggered by Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Southern fulmar and Antarctic petrel is because a large proportion of their populations breed outside of Antarctica or because a significant number of colonies still remain undiscovered. Three methods are explored below that may help to improve discrimination of ‘major colonies’. 4.1 Method A: Using population numbers as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’. This method aggregates the population numbers for IBAs so that in combination they comprise a certain percentage of the estimated global population of a species. All sites that comprise a combined population for a species up to a set threshold would be classified a ‘major colonies’. The threshold can be varied, for example 25% or 50% of the estimated global population present in IBAs, and other percentages could also be applied. 25% threshold: Here we classify as ‘major colonies’ those IBAs that are the largest sites and together comprise a combined population of at least 25% of the estimated global population (Table 7, Figure 10). For Emperor penguin, Adélie penguin, Chinstrap penguin and South polar skua only ~10% of the IBAs for those species would be considered ‘major colonies’. For Imperial shags ~20% of the identified IBAs would be considered ‘major colonies’. For the other five species (Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Antarctic petrel and Southern fulmar) all IBAs triggered by those colonies would be classified as ‘major colonies’ because the combined population for each species within these IBAs remains below the 25% threshold (Table 7, Figure 10). In total 45 IBAs would be classified as ‘major colonies’, with 14 of those already being designated as ASPAs. A complete list of IBAs that would qualify as ‘major colonies’ using this method is provided in Appendix C. 50% threshold: Here we classify as ‘major colonies’ those IBAs that are the largest sites and together comprise a combined population of at least 50% of the estimated global population (Table 6, Figure

Page 25 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

10). Fewer IBAs would be classified as ‘major colonies’ than if the criteria for qualification was simply whether it was an IBA, although more sites would be classified as ‘major’ than if the 25% threshold was used (Table 6, Figure 10). For Emperor penguin, Adélie penguin and South polar skua ~30% of the IBAs for those species would be considered ‘major colonies’. For Chinstrap penguin ~50% and for Imperial shag ~90% of the IBAs would be considered ‘major colonies’. For the other five species (Gentoo penguin, Macaroni penguin, Southern giant petrel, Antarctic petrel and Southern fulmar) all IBAs triggered by those colonies would be classified as ‘major colonies’ because the combined population for each species within these IBAs remains below the 50% threshold. In total 100 IBAs would be considered ‘major colonies’, with 20 of those already being designated ASPAs. A complete list of IBAs that would qualify as ‘major colonies’ using this method is provided in Appendix C.

Table 6: Selection of IBAs that would be considered ‘major colonies’ based on Method A

Threshold No threshold set 25% 50% % of estimated global population Designation IBAs ASPAs IBAs ASPAs IBAs ASPAs Species Emperor penguin 34 5 4 2 10 3 Adélie penguin 83 14 6 1 27 7 Chinstrap penguin 50 3 6 1 23 2 Gentoo penguin 8 3 8 3 8 3 Macaroni penguin 2 0 2 0 2 0 Southern giant petrel 2 1 2 1 2 1 Imperial shag 23 4 5 1 20 4 Antarctic petrel 6 2 6 2 6 2 South polar skua 27 11 2 2 7 3 Southern fulmar 9 1 9 1 9 1

Page 26 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Figure 10: IBA colony size percentage calculated against estimated global population per species highlighting 25% (yellow) and 50% (yellow and orange) thresholds applied in Method A

4.2 Method B: Using species diversity as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’. Another method to identify ‘major colonies’ would be to consider the number of breeding bird species present. The number of breeding bird species within an IBA range from one to 14. ‘Major colonies’ could be defined by having at least a certain number of breeding bird species present. The threshold is arbitrary, so we illustrate the method below by two examples using ‘6 or more’ and ‘5 or more’ breeding species to define ‘major colonies’. ≥ 6 species: A total of 30 IBAs would be identified as ‘major colonies’ if selected based on the criteria of containing at least six different breeding bird species (Table 7). Of these, 15 are already designated ASPAs and a complete list of IBAs identified is provided in Appendix C. ≥ 5 species: A total of 41 IBAs would be identified as ‘major colonies’ if selected based on the criteria of containing at least five different breeding bird species (Table 7). Of these, 18 are already designated ASPAs and a complete list of IBAs identified is provided in Appendix C.

Page 27 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Table 7: Selection of IBAs that would be considered ‘major colonies’ based on Method B.

Threshold No threshold set ≥ 6 species ≥ 5 species % of estimated global population Designation IBAs ASPAs IBAs ASPAs IBAs ASPAs Species Emperor penguin 34 5 2 2 3 3 Adélie penguin 83 14 16 7 23 8 Chinstrap penguin 50 3 6 3 7 3 Gentoo penguin 8 3 5 3 5 3 Macaroni penguin 2 0 0 0 0 0 Southern giant petrel 2 1 2 1 2 1 Imperial shag 23 4 4 3 7 4 Antarctic petrel 6 2 1 1 2 1 South polar skua 27 11 8 6 8 6 Southern fulmar 9 1 1 1 1 1 Snow petrel 1 0 0 0 0 0 Wilson's storm-petrel 1 0 1 0 1 0 Brown skua 1 0 1 0 1 0 Antarctic tern 1 1 1 1 1 1 Kelp gull 1 1 1 1 1 1 Snowy sheathbill 1 1 1 1 1 1

4.3 Method C: Using a combination of population numbers and species diversity as a discriminator of ‘major colonies’. An alternative method would be to rank sites according to their relative population size by species and by their diversity, and to score the sites according to rank to derive a priority listing of sites. Table 8 ranks the top ten sites by their size for each species and by their diversity as measured by the number of species breeding at each site. The scores for each site by species and diversity were added to give a total score by site. A list of 77 sites emerged which were ranked by their scores, with the highest score achieved being 30 and the lowest score achieved being 1 (Appendix B). Table 9 presents a priority listing of sites from Appendix B that scored at least 10 in terms of their ranked size and diversity as the criteria set to be considered a ‘major colony’. This cut-off score of 10 is arbitrary, and for this reason a comparison is made to results when the cut-off is altered to scores of at least 12, 14, 16, 18 and 20. The results of this prioritisation process may be summarised as follows:

Page 28 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

 Cut-off score of at least ten: 19 sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which 9 are currently designated ASPAs. The ten sites identified as ‘major colonies’ that are not currently designated as ASPAs are: Signy Island, Cape Adare, Possession Island, Paulet Island, Cuverville Island, Sugarloaf Island, Aspland Island / Eadie Island, Cape Wadworth, Cape Wallace and Larsen Islands / Moreton Point.  Cut-off score of at least 12: 11 sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which 7 are currently designated ASPAs. The four sites identified as ‘major colonies’ that are not currently designated as ASPAs are: Signy Island, Cape Adare, Possession Island, and Paulet Island.  Cut-off score of at least 14: 10 sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which 7 are currently designated ASPAs. The three sites identified as ‘major colonies’ that are not currently designated as ASPAs are: Signy Island, Cape Adare and Possession Island.  Cut-off score of at least 16: six sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which five are currently designated ASPAs. The one site identified as a ‘major colony’ that is not currently designated as an ASPA is Signy Island.  Cut-off score of at least 18: five sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which four are currently designated ASPAs. The one site identified as a ‘major colony’ that is not currently designated as an ASPA is Signy Island.  Cut-off score of at least 20: four sites are identified as ‘major colonies’, of which three are currently designated ASPAs. The one site identified as a ‘major colony’ that is not currently designated as an ASPA is Signy Island.

Page 29 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Table 8: IBAs ranked in order by the size of colonies for each bird species and by bird diversity (10 largest and most diverse).

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Score 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Species Site Emperor Wadworth Brunt Washington Haswell Dibble Colbeck Amanda Atka Roget Hummer penguin Adélie Crozier Adare Danger Possession Paulet Hope MacKellar SW Franklin Edwards Cape Jules penguin Island Islands Chinstrap Wallace Larsen Bowles Harmony Garry Heywood Pottinger Sugarloaf Bailey Head False penguin Island Round Point Gentoo Cuverville Yankee West Ardley Island Potter Duroch Harmony Cierva Point Petermann Islet S of penguin Admiralty Peninsula Island Point Island Gerlache Bay Southern Signy Powell Avian Harmony Stinker Watson North Byers Ferguslie Armstrong giant Point Peninsula Foreland Peninsula Peninsula Reef petrel Imperial Signy Emperor Cockburn Cormorant Paulet Atriceps Ginger Avian Lagotellerie Joubin shag Islands Antarctic Scullin Svarthamaren Jutulsessen Coalseam Mount Cape Hop Island Way Ardery Haswell petrel Cliffs Paterson Hunter Archipelago Island Island South Crozier Avian Cierva Point Possession Foyn Adare Blue Glacier Beaufort SW Franklin Caughley polar Island Island Beach, skua Cape Bird Southern Aspland Sturge Island Sugarloaf Craggy Point Gibbs Return Inaccessible Cape O’Brien Larsen fulmar Island Island Island Point / Island Wollaston Island Island Cheal Point Diversity Signy Powell Potter West Byers Cierva Ardley Island Harmony Half Moon Cuverville Peninsula Admiralty Peninsula Point Point Island Island Bay

Page 30 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Table 9: Priority listing of IBAs based on a size and diversity ranking score of at least 10

Site ranking IBA No. Location Score ASPA No. 1 019 Signy Island 30 2 049 Harmony Point, Nelson Island 21 133 3 095 Avian Island 20 117 3 187 Cape Crozier, Ross Island 20 124 5 015 Southern Powell Island and adjacent Islands 18 111 6 081 Cierva Point and offshore islands 16 134 7 046 West Admiralty Bay, King George Island 15 128 8 047 Potter Peninsula, King George Island 14 132 8 165 Cape Adare 14 8 167 Possession Island 14 11 066 Paulet Island 12 12 048 Ardley Island, King George Island 11 150 12 083 Cuverville Island 11 12 024 Sugarloaf Island, Clarence Island 11 15 126 Scullin Monolith/Murray Monolith 10 164 15 035 Aspland Island / Eadie Island 10 15 173 Cape Wadworth, Coulman Island 10 15 057 Cape Wallace, Low Island 10 15 001 Larsen Islands / Moreton Point 10

5. Discussion

All three methods applied have identified possible ‘major colonies’ of breeding birds. However, the number of IBAs identified as ‘major’ might still be impractical for the implementation of additional ASPAs, especially in Method A using a threshold of 50% which identified 100 IBAs that could be considered ‘major’. Method A selects ‘major colonies’ based on a certain percentage of the population, and the number of colonies that are classified as ‘major’ depends very much on the percentage threshold cut-off used to determine ‘major’. In this method, the way in which a bird population is distributed can influence substantially the number of IBAs are selected. For example, Emperor penguins and Adélie penguins require ~30% of their identified IBAs to achieve the threshold of 50% of their estimated global population, whereas Imperial shags require nearly 90% to achieve the threshold of 50% of their estimated global population. Criteria that result in selecting 90% of the IBAs for a species might not be considered sufficiently discriminating to select ‘major colonies’ for consideration as ASPAs. For species that have large proportions of their populations either breeding outside of the Antarctic or for which there is a large proportion of their population breeding at unknown locations, the results might alter considerably should data on all colonies be known. For example, those colonies in the Antarctic for which data are available may not meet the criteria of being ‘major’ should other colonies of larger size outside of the Antarctic be taken into account. This is because the colony population sizes being considered in this analysis are restricted to those in Antarctica, and information on the size of colonies outside of the Antarctic is not being taken into account.

Page 31 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method B determines ‘major colonies’ based on the number of breeding species. The Emperor penguin and several flying bird species tend to breed in mono-specific colonies, and for this reason they will be under-represented using this criterion alone. Method C applied an approach that scored and ranked IBAs based on their size and diversity. While this method has the advantage of combining criteria related to both size and diversity in a single measure of whether the colony would be considered as ‘major’, a possible weakness lies in the score given to the rankings of diversity vs colony size. The score of the diversity ranking is given an equal weight to the size ranking for a given species, and yet some may argue that the diversity of a site should carry more weight than the size of colonies when considering whether a colony is ‘major’. This remains an open question, and we have not examined the sensitivity of the method to different weightings that could be assigned to the diversity ranking. Methods such as those employed above can be applied as a means to discriminate which sites in the series of IBAs might be classified as ‘major colonies’. While the identification of those sites that might be considered as ‘major colonies’ is useful to provide guidance on those sites that should be given more consideration for designation as ASPAs, we should recognise that other criteria may also play an important role in decision-making over whether any particular site should be designated. For example, the level of human activity at a site might be one factor to be taken into account. As a preliminary illustration of how pressure from human activity could be taken into account, Table 10 ranks the 10 Antarctic sites where the most tourists landed in the 2014-15 season. Against these are listed those sites identified as ‘major colonies’ using the methods explored above. Cuverville Island is one of the most visited sites, and was also identified by all methods as a ‘major colony’. Half Moon Island, Petermann Island and Brown Bluff were also identified as ‘major colonies’ by Methods A or B.

Table 10: Ranking of 10 Antarctic sites where the most tourists landed in 2014-15 (Source: IAATO) against ‘major colonies’.

Site Number of tourists IBA No. Identified as ‘major landed colonies’ by Methods A, B or C Goudier Island 16742 Neko Harbor 16676 Cuverville Island 13686 083 A, B, C Half Moon Island 13025 052 B Whalers Bay 12980 Petermann Island 8304 089 A, B Almirante Brown Station 8230 Brown Bluff 7182 073 B Danco Island 7035 Jougla Point 6506

Given the high levels of ‘pressure’ occurring at some sites that have been identified as ‘major colonies’, studies may be warranted to examine whether these sites are being subjected to impacts

Page 32 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

as a result of that pressure, and indeed whether they should be considered for designation as ASPAs. More detailed analysis of these types of associations should be carried out. As an additional method, or perhaps to be incorporated into methods explored above, the percentage of the Antarctic population for each species, rather than the estimated global populations as has been undertaken here, could also be assessed. Such analysis could help reveal more about the relative importance of colonies within Antarctica by setting aside consideration of the status of a site in the context of overall estimated global population. Extending this concept further, it may also be useful to conduct analyses on a regional basis (for example east Antarctica, the Ross Sea and the Antarctic Peninsula, or to use the ‘Antarctic Conservation Biogeographic Regions’), where the populations within these regions could be considered to identify those colonies that would be ‘major’ within that specific regional context, and thereby take into account the variability of breeding habitat and environments across Antarctica. Such analyses would introduce a more regional perspective to defining which colonies are ‘major’. In terms of overall species conservation, however, it remains useful to develop a perspective that considers how ‘major’ colonies are in terms of their important in the context of global species populations. 6. Conclusion

Of 204 IBAs, 27 are currently included within the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas, which equates to ~13% of the listed IBAs. Several methods have been explored using population size and species diversity as criteria to discriminate whether particular sites might be considered ‘major colonies’. Recalling Article 3.2(c) of Annex V to the Madrid Protocol, which calls on Antarctic Treaty Parties to include within the series of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas… “important or unusual assemblages of species, including major colonies of breeding native birds…”, the methods explored in this paper incorporating elements of both colony size and species diversity have potential to offer a means to discriminate those sites that could be classified as ‘major colonies’. In particular, the method that combines these criteria by rankings has potential for application to identify potential candidates for consideration as ASPAs. Colony size and the number of breeding species are worthy of consideration, although there are other factors that need to be taken into account when making decisions about which sites might be suitable for ASPA designation. These characteristics include, for example, the scientific importance of a colony (e.g. a long time-series of data have been acquired), the locality (e.g. the most southerly example), uniqueness and rarity. The representation of species and the extent to which ‘major colonies’ are included within the series of specially protected areas are other important considerations. In addition, a more holistic perspective could also be applied, where values other than those related to birds could be considered, such as other fauna, flora, geology, geomorphology, glaciology, science etc. could be taken into account to help identify sites that merit designation as ASPAs. The amount of human activity within or in close proximity to the site may also need to be taken into account, in particular whether any impacts on the values of the site are occurring, although threats posed by human activity are not in themselves a prerequisite for determining whether or not a site should be considered for special protection (for example, the

Page 33 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

representativeness of the protected area system should be a criteria for designation irrespective of any actual or perceived human threat). It is worth noting that the methods suggested in this paper for determining which IBAs might meet the Annex V criteria for ASPA designation are exploratory at this stage, and a range of other factors, including geographic spread (e.g. southern limits, regional influences), climate, accessibility, activity levels, representativeness, the treatment of endemics vs those that also breed outside of the Antarctic and other factors will need to be taken into account when selecting those IBAs that might merit ASPA designation. This is indicative of the complexity of analysis that needs to go into the selection process. The results presented in this paper also indicate that for some existing ASPAs it would be useful to consider identifying additional values related to bird species in future management plan reviews. The identification of ‘major colonies’ of birds should play an important part in this work, and IBAs can be helpful in that process. However, it should also be recognised that IBAs themselves are recognised according to a defined and limited set of criteria, and bird breeding sites that are not recognised as IBAs may also warrant consideration as ASPAs for reasons other than those captured under the IBA assessment process.

Page 34 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

7. References

ASPA No. 105 Beaufort Island, McMurdo Sound, Ross Sea: Management Plan 2010. ASPA No. 106 Cape Hallett, Northern Victoria Land, Ross Sea: Management Plan 2010. ASPA No. 113 Litchfield Island, Arthur Harbour, Anvers Island, Antarctic Peninsula: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 117 Avian Island, off Adelaide Island, Antarctic Peninsula: Management Plan 2013. ASPA No. 121 Cape Royds, Ross Island: Mangement Plan 2014. ASPA No. 127 Haswell Island: Management Plan 2011. ASPA No. 128 Western shore of Admiralty Bay, King George Island: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 133 Harmony Point, Nelson Island, South Shetland Islands: Management Plan 2005. ASPA No. 136 Clark Peninsula, Budd Coast, Wilkes Land, East Antarctica: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 134 Cierva Point and offshore islands, Danco Coast, Antarctic Peninsula: Management Plan 2006. ASPA No. 142 Svarthamaren: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 149 Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island, South Shetland Islands: Management Plan 2011. ASPA No. 150 Ardley Island, Maxwell Bay, King George Island: Management Plan 2009. ASPA No. 162 Mawson’s Huts, Cape Denison, Commonwealth Bay, George V Land, East Antarctica: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 164 Scullin and Murray Monoliths, Mac.Robertson Land: Management Plan 2010. ASPA No. 165 Edmonson Point, Wood Bay, Victoria Land, Ross Sea: Management Plan 2011. ASPA No. 167 Hawker Island, Princess Elizabeth Land: Management Plan 2016. ASPA No. 169 Amanda Bay, Ingrid Christensen Coast, Princess Elizabeth Land, East Antarctica: Management Plan 2014. ASPA No. 170 Marion Nunataks, Charcot Island, Antarctic Peninsula: Management Plan 2013. Ainley, D.G., Morrell, S.H. & Wood, R.C. 1986. South Polar Skua breeding colonies in the Ross Sea region. Notornis 33: 155-63. Ancel, A., Cristofari, R., Fretwell, P.T., Trathan, P.N., Wienecke, B., Boureau, M., Morinay, J., Blanc, S., Le Maho, Y. & Le Bohec, C. 2014. Emperors in hiding: when ice-breakers and satellites complement each other in Antarctic exploration. PLoS ONE 9(6): 1-8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100404. Barber-Meyer, S.M., Kooyman, G.L. & Ponganis, P.J. 2007. Estimating the relative abundance of Emperor Penguins at inaccessible colonies using satellite imagery. Polar Biology 30: 1565-70. Barbraud, C. & Baker, S.C. 1998. Short Communication: Fulmarine petrels and South Polar Skua Catharacta maccormicki populations on Ardery Island, Windmill Islands, Antarctica. Emu 98: 234-36. Barbraud, C., Delord, K.C., Micol, T. & Jouventin, P. 1999. First census of breeding seabirds between Cap Bienvenue (Terre Adélie) and Moyes Islands (King George V Land), Antarctica: new records for Antarctic seabird populations. Polar Biology 21: 146-50. Bonner, W.N. & Lewis Smith, R.I. (eds) 1985. Conservation areas in the Antarctic. Review prepared by the Sub- Committee of Conservation, Working Group on Biology. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, Cambridge. Brooke, M. de L. 2004. Albatrosses and petrels across the world. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Bruce, G. & Furse, C. 1973. Elephant Island Joint Services Expedition 1970-71. Ornithological Report. BAS Archives Doc. 1999/33/45. Casanovas, P., Naveen, R., Forrest, S., Poncet, J. & Lynch, H.J. 2015. A comprehensive coastal seabird survey maps out the front lines of ecological change on the western Antarctic Peninsula. Polar Biology 38(7): 927-40. Coria, N.R., Favero, M., Silva.P. & Caseux, R.J. 1995. Breeding birds at Duthoit Point, Nelson Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica. Marine Ornithology 23:61-64

Page 35 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Coria, N.R., Montalti, D., Rombola, E.F., Santos, M.M., Garcia Betoño, M.I. & Juares, M.A. 2011. Birds at Laurie Island, South Orkney Islands, Antarctica: breeding species and their distribution. Marine Ornithology 39: 207-13. Croxall, J.P. & Kirkwood, E.D. 1979. The distribution of penguins on the Antarctic Peninsula and Islands of the Scotia Sea. British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge. Creuwels, J.C.S., Poncet, S., Hodum, P.J. & van Franeker, J.A. 2007. Distribution and abundance of the Southern Fulmar Fulmarus glacialoides. Polar Biology 30: 1083-97. Esponda, C.M., Coria, N.R. & Montalti, D. 2000. Breeding birds at Halfmoon Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica, 1995/1996. Marine Ornithology 28:59-62. Fishpool, L.D.C. & Evans, M.I. (eds) (2001) Important Bird Areas in Africa and associated islands. Priority sites for conservation. Pisces Publications, Cambridge: BirdLife International. Fretwell, P.T., LaRue, M.A., Morin P., Kooyman, G.L., Wienecke, B., Ratcliffe, N., Fox, A.J., Fleming, A.H., Porter, C. & Trathan, P.N. 2012. An Emperor Penguin population estimate: The first global, synoptic survey of a species from space. PLoS ONE 7(4): e33751. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033751 Hahn, S., Peter, H.-U., Quillfeldt, P. & Reinhardt, K. 1998. The birds of the Potter Peninsula, King George Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica, 1965-1998. Marine Ornithology 26: 1-6. Harper, P.C., Knox, G.A., Spurr, E.B., Taylor, R.H. Wilson, G.J & Young, E.C. 1984. The status and conservation of birds in the Ross Sea sector of Antarctica. In: Croxall, J.P., Evans, P.G.H. & Schreiber, R.W. (eds) Status and Conservation of the World’s Seabirds. ICBP Technical Publication 2: 593-608. Harris, C.M. 2001. Revision of Management Plans for Antarctic protected areas originally proposed by the United States of America and the United Kingdom: Field visit report. Unpublished report for the US National Science Foundation and the UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office. Environmental Research & Assessment, Cambridge. Harris, C.M., Lorenz, K., Fishpool, L.D.C., Lascelles, B., Cooper, J., Coria, N.R., Croxall, J.P., Emmerson, L.M., Fijn, R.C., Fraser, W.L., Jouventin, P., LaRue, M.A., Le Maho, Y., Lynch, H.J., Naveen, R., Patterson-Fraser, D.L., Peter, H.-U., Poncet, S., Phillips, R.A., Southwell, C.J., van Franeker, J.A., Weimerskirch, H., Wienecke, B., & Woehler, E.J. 2015. Important Bird Areas in Antarctica 2015. BirdLife International and Environmental Research & Assessment Ltd., Cambridge. Hodum, P., Croxall, J.P., Poncet, S. & Woehler, E. 2004. Breeding distribution of the Cape Petrel Daption capense. Unpublished draft manuscript Low, M., Meyer, L. & Southwell, C. 2007. Number and distribution of Adélie penguin (Pygoscelis adeliae) breeding sites in the Robinson Group of islands, Mac.Robertson Land coast, East Antarctica. Polar Record 43: 225-29. Lynch, H.J. 2013. The Gentoo Penguin (Pygoscelis papua). In: García Borboroglu, P. & Boersma P.D. (eds) Biology and Conservation of the world’s penguins. University of Washington Press, Seattle. Lynch, H.J. & LaRue, M.A. 2014. First global census of the Adélie Penguin. The Auk 131(4): 457-66. doi:10.1642/AUK-14-31.1 Lynch, H.J., Naveen, R. & Casanovas, P.V. 2013. Antarctic Site Inventory breeding bird survey data 1994 – 2013. Ecology (Data Paper) 94(11): 2653. doi: 10.1890/13-1108.1 Lynch, H., Naveen, R. & Fagan, W. 2008. Censuses of Penguin, Blue-eyed Shag Phalacrocorax atriceps and Southern Giant Petrel Macronectes giganteus populations on the Antarctic Peninsula, 2001-2007. Marine Ornithology 36: 83-97. Lynch, H.J. & Schwaller, M.R. 2014. Mapping the abundance and distribution of Adélie Penguins using Landsat- 7 : first steps towards an integrated multi-sensor pipeline for tracking populations at the continental scale. PLoS ONE 9(11): 5–12. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0113301 Lyver, P.O’B., Barron, M., Barton, K.J., Ainley, D.G., Pollard, A., Gordon, S., McNeill, S., Ballard, G. & Wilson, P.R. 2014. Trends in the breeding population of Adélie Penguins in the Ross Sea, 1981–2012: a

Page 36 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

coincidence of climate and resource extraction effects. PLoS ONE 9(3): e91188. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0091188 Mehlum, F., Gjessing, Y., Haftorn, S. & Bech, C. 1988: Census of breeding Antarctic Petrels Thalassoica antarctica and physical features of the breeding colony at Svarthamaren, Dronning Maud Land, with notes on breeding Snow Petrels Pagodroma nivea and South Polar Skuas Catharacta maccormicki. Polar Research 6: 1-9. Naveen, R. 2003. Compendium of Antarctic Peninsula visitor sites (2nd edition): A Report to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Oceanites, Chevy Chase, MD. Naveen, R. & Lynch, H. 2011. Compendium of Antarctic Peninsula visitor sites (3rd edition): A Report to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Oceanites, Chevy Chase, MD. Norman, F.I. & Ward, S.J. 1999. Aspects of the Ecology of South Polar Skuas Catharacta maccormicki at Hop Island, Rauer Group, East Antarctica. Emu 99(3): 176-190. doi: 10.1071/MU99021 Patterson, D.L., Woehler, E.J., Croxall, J.P., Cooper, J., Poncet, S., Peter, H.-U., Hunter, S. & Fraser, W.R. 2008. Breeding distribution and population status of the Northern Giant Petrel Macronectes halli and the Southern Giant Petrel M. giganteus. Marine Ornithology 36: 115-24. Poncet, S. & Poncet, J. 1985. A survey of penguin breeding populations at the South Orkney Islands. British Antarctic Survey Bulletin 68: 71-81. Ritz, M.S., Hahn, S., Janicke, T. & Peter, H.-U. 2006. Hybridisation between South polar skua (Catharacta maccormicki) and Brown skua (C. antarctica lonnbergi) in the Antarctic Peninsula region. Polar Biology 29: 153-59. doi:10.1007/s00300-005-0034-0 Robertson, C.J.A., Gilbert, J.R. & Erickson, A.W. 1980. Birds and seals of the Balleny Islands, Antarctica. National Museum of New Zealand Records 1 (16): 271-79. Robertson, G., Wienecke, B., Emmerson, L. & Fraser, A.D. 2013. Long-term trends in the population size and breeding success of Emperor Penguins at the Taylor Glacier colony, Antarctica. Polar Biology 37 (2): 251-59. doi:10.1007/s00300-013-1428-z Schneider Costa, E. & Alves, M.A.S. 2008. The breeding birds of Hennequin Point an ice-free area of Admiralty Bay (Antarctic Specially Managed Area) King George Island, Antarctica. Revista Brasileira de Ornitologia 16(2), 137-41. Schwaller, M.R., Southwell, C.J. & Emmerson, L.M. 2013. Continental-scale mapping of Adélie penguin colonies from Landsat imagery. Remote Sensing of Environment 139: 253-64. Shuford, W.D. & Spear, L.B. 1988a. Surveys of breeding penguins and other seabirds in the South Shetland Islands, Antarctica, January-February 1987. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/NEC-59. Silva P., Favero, M., Casaux, R. & Baroni, A. 1998. The status of breeding birds at Harmony Point, Nelson Island, Antarctica, in summer 1995–96. Marine Ornithology 26: 75-78. Southwell, C. & Emmerson, L.M. 2013. Large scale occupancy surveys in East Antarctica discover new Adélie penguin breeding sites and reveal an expanding breeding distribution. Antarctic Science 25(4): 531- 35. Southwell, C., Emmerson, L., Takahashi, A., Kato, A., Barbraud, C., Delord, K. and Weimerskirch, H. in press. Recent studies over-estimate colonization and extinction events for breeding Adélie penguins. To appear in The Auk: Ornithological Advances. van Franeker, J.A., Bell, P.J. & Montague, T.L. 1990. Birds of Ardery and Odbert Islands, Windmill Islands, Antarctica. Emu 90: 74-80 van Franeker, J.A., Gavrilo, M., Mehlum, F., Veit, R.R. & Woehler, E.J. 1999. Distribution and abundance of the Antarctic Petrel. Waterbirds 22 (1): 14-28. Whitehead, M.D. & Johnstone, G.W. 1990. The distribution and estimated abundance of Adélie Penguins breeding in Prydz Bay, Antarctica. NIPR Symposium on Polar Biology: 91-98.

Page 37 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Wienecke, B. 2012. Emperor penguins at the West Ice Shelf. Polar Biology 35 (9): 1289-96. doi:10.1007/s00300-012-1172-9. Wilson, D., Pike, R., Southwell, D. & Southwell C. 2009. Short Note: A systematic survey of breeding Adélie penguins (Pygoscelis adeliae) along the Mawson and Kemp Land coasts, East Antarctica: new colonies and population counts. Antarctic Science 21(6): 591-92. Wilson, D.J., Lyver, P.O’B., Whitehead, A.L., Greene, T.C., Dugger, K., Karl, B.J., Barringer, J.R.F., McGarry, R., Pollard, A.M. & Ainley, D.G. in prep. Adélie Penguin colony size predicts South Polar Skua abundance on Ross Island, Antarctica. The Condor. Woehler, E.J. (ed.) 1993. The distribution and abundance of Antarctic and sub-Antarctic penguins. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. Cambridge, UK.

Page 38 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Appendix A: List of Important Bird Areas in Antarctica

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 001 Larsen Islands / Moreton Point Chinstrap penguin (A4ii), Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 002 Gibbon Bay, Coronation Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 003 Eillium Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 004 Weddell Islands Seabirds – Pygoscelis penguin (A4iii) 005 Pirie Peninsula, Laurie Island Imperial shag (A4i) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 006 Ferguslie Peninsula, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 007 Watson Peninsula, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 008 Fraser Point, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 009 Buchanan Point, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 010 Ferrier Peninsula / Graptolite Island, Laurie Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 011 Cape Whitson, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 012 Point Martin, Laurie Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin, Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 013 Islet SW of Cape Davidson, Laurie Island Imperial shag (A4i) 014 Cape Robertson, Laurie Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 015 Southern Powell Island and adjacent islands Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 111 Chinstrap penguin (A4ii)

Page 39 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) Imperial shag (A4i) Southern giant petrel (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin , Adélie penguin(A4iii) 016 Atriceps Island, Robertson Islands Imperial shag (A4i) 017 Robertson Islands Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 018 Shingle Cove, Coronation Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 019 Signy Island Imperial shag (A4i) Southern giant petrel (A4ii) Wilson’s storm-petrel (A4ii) Brown skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie, Chinstrap penguin, Wilson's storm- petrel, Antarctic prion (A4iii) 020 Moe Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 109 021 Gosling Islands Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 022 Return Point / Cheal Point, Coronation Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin, Southern fulmar (A4iii) 023 Inaccessible Islands Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Southern fulmar (A4iii) 024 Sugarloaf Island, Clarence Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin, Southern fulmar (A4iii) 025 Cape Bowles, Clarence Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii)

Page 40 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 026 Craggy Point, Clarence Island Macaroni penguin (A1) Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin, Southern fulmar (A4iii) 027 Chinstrap Cove, Clarence Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 028 Seal Islands Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 029 Saddleback Point, Elephant Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 030 Point W of Walker Point, Elephant Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 031 Mount Elder, Elephant Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 032 Point W of Cape Lookout, Elephant Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 033 Stinker Point, Elephant Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 034 Gibbs Island Macaroni penguin (A1) Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 035 Aspland Island / Eadie Island Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Southern fulmar, Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 036 O'Brien Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) Stigant Point, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) delisted 037 Eastern Litwin Bay, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 038 Tartar Island, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii)

Page 41 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 039 Kellick Island, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 040 Owen Island, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 041 Pottinger Point, King George Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 042 False Round Point, King George Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 043 Milosz Point / Czeslaw Point, King George Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) Island 044 North Foreland, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) Cape Melville, King George Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) delisted Penguin Island, King George Island Southern giant petrel (A4ii) delisted Seabirds – Adélie & Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) Lions Rump, King George Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 151 delisted 045 Point Hennequin, King George Island South polar skua (A4ii) 001 046 West Admiralty Bay, King George Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 128 001 Seabirds – Adélie, Chinstrap & Gentoo penguin (A4iii) 047 Potter Peninsula, King George Island South polar skua (A4ii) 132 048 Ardley Island, King George Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 150 049 Harmony Point, Nelson Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) 133 Snowy sheathbill (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii)

Page 42 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 050 Heywood Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 051 Yankee Harbour, Greenwich Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 052 Half Moon Island South polar skua (A4ii) 053 Barnard Point, Livingston Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 054 Byers Peninsula, Livingston Island Antarctic tern (A4i) 126 Kelp gull (A4i) Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 149 delisted 055 Baily Head, Deception Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) 004 Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 056 Vapour Col, Deception Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 004 057 Cape Wallace, Low Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) ASPA 152 protects Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) adjacent marine area 058 Cape Hooker, Low Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) 059 Cape Garry, Low Island Chinstrap penguin (A4ii) ASPA 152 protects Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) adjacent marine area 060 Jameson Point, Low Island Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii) ASPA 152 protects adjacent marine area 061 Ambush Bay, Joinville Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 062 Danger Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii)

Page 43 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 063 Brash Island, Danger Islands Pygoscelis penguin (A1(?), A4ii) Seabirds – Pygoscelis penguin (A4iii) 064 Earle Island, Danger Islands Seabirds – Pygoscelis penguin (A4iii) 065 Eden Rocks Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 066 Paulet Island Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Imperial shag (A4i) Seabirds - Adélie penguin (A4iii) 067 D'Urville Monument, Joinville Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 068 Madder Cliffs, Joinville Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 069 Snow Hill Island Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 070 Penguin Point, Seymour Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 071 Cockburn Island Imperial shag (A4i) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 072 Devil Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 073 Brown Bluff Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 074 Hope Bay Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 075 Gourdin Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 076 Duroch Islands Seabirds – Adélie, Chinstrap & Gentoo penguin (A4iii) 077 Tupinier Islands Seabirds – Chinstrap penguin (A4iii)

Page 44 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 078 Pearl Rocks Imperial shag (A4i) 079 Cape Wollaston, Trinity Island Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Southern fulmar (A4iii) 080 SW Trinity Island Imperial shag (A4i) 081 Cierva Point & offshore islands South polar skua (A4ii) 134 082 Bluff Island Imperial shag (A4i) 083 Cuverville Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 084 Islet E of Guépratte Island Imperial shag (A4i) Pursuit Point Imperial shag (A4i) delisted 085 Cormorant Island Imperial shag (A4i) 007 Arthur Harbor North Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 007 delisted 086 Litchfield Island South polar skua (A4ii) 113 007 087 Joubin Islands Imperial shag (A4i) 007 Dream Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 007 delisted 088 Islet S of Gerlache Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 007 089 Petermann Island Gentoo penguin (A1, A4ii) 090 Uruguay Island Imperial shag (A4i) 091 Islet S of Bates Island Imperial shag (A4i) 092 Island N of Dodman Island Imperial shag (A4i) 093 Armstrong Reef Imperial shag (A4i)

Page 45 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 094 Cape Evensen Imperial shag (A4i) 095 Avian Island Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 117 Imperial shag (A4i) South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 096 Ginger Islands Imperial shag (A4i) 097 Emperor Island, Dion Islands Imperial shag (A4i) 107 098 Lagotellerie Island Imperial shag (A4i) 115 South polar skua (A4ii) 099 Stonington Island Imperial shag (A4i) 100 Smith Peninsula Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 101 NW Berkner Island (Gould Bay) Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 102 Coalseam Cliffs / Mount Faraway Seabirds – Antarctic petrel (A4iii) 103 Luitpold Coast Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 104 Dawson-Lambton Glacier Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 105 Brunt Ice Shelf (‘Halley Bay’) Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Emperor penguin (A4iii) 106 Stancomb-Wills Glacier Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 107 ‘Drescher Inlet’ (Dreschereisfrontkerbe) Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 108 Riiser-Larsen Ice Shelf Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 109 Atka Iceport Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii)

Page 46 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 110 Muskegbukta Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 111 Jutulsessen Mountain Antarctic petrel (A4ii) Seabirds – Antarctic petrel (A4iii) 112 Svarthamaren Antarctic petrel (A4ii) 142 South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Antarctic petrel (A4iii) 113 Gruber Mountains Seabirds – Snow petrel (A4iii) 114 Princess Ragnhild Coast Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 115 Riiser-Larsen Peninsula Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 116 Mount Biscoe Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 117 Cape Batterbee Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 118 Kloa Point Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 119 Taylor Rookery Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 101 120 Gibbney Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 121 Rookery Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 102 Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 122 Klung Island / Welch Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 123 Andersen Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 124 Kirton Island / Macklin Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 125 Auster Rookery Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 126 Scullin Monolith / Murray Monolith Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 164

Page 47 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) Antarctic petrel (A4ii) Seabirds – Antarctic petrel (A4iii) 127 Cape Darnley Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 128 Amanda Bay Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 169 129 Caro Island, Rauer Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 130 Hop Island, Rauer Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 131 Filla Island, Rauer Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 132 Kazak Island / Zolotov Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 133 Unnamed island at Donskiye Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 134 Warriner Island, Donskiye Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 135 Gardner Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 136 Magnetic Island and nearby islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 137 Lucas Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 138 Rookery Lake / W Long Peninsula Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 139 Tryne Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 140 West Ice Shelf Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 141 Haswell Island Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 127 South polar skua (A4ii)

Page 48 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 142 Shackleton Ice Shelf Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 143 Peterson Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 144 Holl Island / O'Connor Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 145 Ardery Island / Odbert Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin, Southern fulmar (A4iii) 103 146 Shirley Island / Beall Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 147 Clark Peninsula Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 136 148 Berkley Island / Cameron Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 149 Dibble Glacier Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Emperor penguin (A4iii) 150 Pointe Géologie Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 120 Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 151 Cape Bienvenue Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 152 Cape Jules Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 153 Île des Manchots / Empereur Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 166 IBA includes part of ASPA, ASPA protects historic features 154 Curzon Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 155 Cape Hunter Seabirds – Adélie penguin, Antarctic petrel (A4iii)

Page 49 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 156 MacKellar Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 157 Cape Denison Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 162 ASPA protects historic features, avifauna and other environmental values 158 Way Archipelago Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 159 Cape Pigeon Rocks Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 160 Mertz Glacier Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 161 Kartografov Island / Mount Archer Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 162 Arthurson Ridge Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 163 Sturge Island Southern fulmar (A4ii) Seabirds – Southern fulmar (A4iii) 164 Duke of York Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 165 Cape Adare Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 159 IBA encompasses South polar skua (A4ii) ASPA, ASPA protects historic features Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 166 Downshire Cliffs Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 167 Possession Island Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii)

Page 50 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 168 Foyn Island South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 169 Cape Roget Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 170 Seabee Hook, Cape Hallett Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 106 Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 171 Cotter Cliffs Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 172 Mandible Cirque Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 173 Cape Wadworth, Coulman Island Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Emperor penguin (A4iii) 174 Cape Main, Coulman Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 175 Edmonson Point South polar skua (A4ii) 165 176 Cape Washington Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 173 South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Emperor penguin (A4iii) 177 Adélie Cove Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 178 Inexpressible Island South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 179 Depot Island South polar skua (A4ii) 180 Gregory Island South polar skua (A4ii) 181 Dunlop Island South polar skua (A4ii)

Page 51 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 182 Blue Glacier to Cape Chocolate South polar skua (A4ii) 002 183 Dailey Islands South polar skua (A4ii) 184 Rocky Point, Ross Island South polar skua (A4ii) 185 Macdonald Beach, Cape Bird South polar skua (A4ii), Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 186 Caughley Beach, Cape Bird Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 116 IBA encompasses South polar skua (A4ii) ASPA, ASPA protects terrestrial ecology Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 187 Cape Crozier, Ross Island Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) 124 South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 188 Beaufort Island Adélie penguin (A1,A4ii) 105 South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 189 Bernacchi Head, Franklin Island Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 190 SW Franklin Island Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) South polar skua (A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 191 Cape Colbeck Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Emperor penguin (A4iii) 192 Mount Paterson Seabirds – Antarctic petrel (A4iii) 193 Worley Point, Shepard Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii)

Page 52 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

IBA No. Location Trigger species ASPA No. ASMA No. Comment (IBA criteria) 194 Mathewson Point, Shepard Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 195 Maher Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 196 Thurston Glacier Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 197 Hummer Point, Bear Peninsula Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 198 Brownson Islands Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 199 Edwards Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 200 Schaefer Islands Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 201 Lindsey Islands Adélie penguin (A1, A4ii) Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 202 Sikorski Glacier, Noville Peninsula Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii) 203 Sims Island Seabirds – Adélie penguin (A4iii) 204 Scorseby Head, Smyley Island Emperor penguin (A1, A4ii)

Page 53 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Appendix B: List of all colonies identified through Method C

IBA No. Location Score ASPA No. 019 Signy Island 30 049 Harmony Point, Nelson Island 21 133 095 Avian Island 20 117 187 Cape Crozier, Ross Island 20 124 015 Southern Powell Island and adjacent Islands 18 111 081 Cierva Point and offshore islands 16 134 046 West Admiralty Bay, King George Island 15 128 047 Potter Peninsula, King George Island 14 132 165 Cape Adare 14 167 Possession Island 14 066 Paulet Island 12 048 Ardley Island, King George Island 11 150 083 Cuverville Island 11 024 Sugarloaf Island, Clarence Island 11 126 Scullin Monolith/Murray Monolith 10 164 035 Aspland Island / Eadie Island 10 173 Cape Wadworth, Coulman Island 10 057 Cape Wallace, Low Island 10 001 Larsen Islands / Moreton Point 10 097 Emperor Island, Dion Islands 9 107 054 Byers Peninsula, Livingston Island 9 126 112 Svarthamaren 9 142 105 Brunt Ice Shelf (‘Halley Bay’) 9 163 Sturge Island 9 051 Yankee Harbour, Greenwich Island 9 141 Haswell Island 8 127 176 Cape Washington 8 173 025 Cape Bowles, Clarence Island 8 071 Cockburn Island 8 062 Danger Islands 8 111 Jutulsessen Mountain 8 102 Coalseam Cliffs / Mount Faraway 7 085 Cormorant Island 7 026 Craggy Point, Clarence Island 7 059 Cape Garry, Low Island 6 149 Dibble Glacier 6 167 Foyn Island 6 034 Gibbs Island 6 192 Mount Paterson 6 033 Stinker Point, Elephant Island 6 016 Atriceps Island, Robertson Islands 5 191 Cape Colbeck 5 155 Cape Hunter 5 076 Duroch Island 5 050 Heywood Island 5 074 Hope Bay 5 022 Return Point / Cheal Point, Coronation Island 5 190 SW Franklin Island 5

Page 54 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

007 Watson Peninsula Laurie Island 5 128 Amanda Bay 4 169 182 Blue Glacier to Cape Chocolate 4 096 Ginger Islands 4 130 Hop Island, Rauer Islands 4 023 Inaccessible Island 4 156 MacKellar Islands 4 044 North Foreland, King George Island 4 041 Pottinger Point, King George Island 4 188 Beaufort Island 3 105 109 Atka Iceport 3 079 Cape Wollaston, Trinity Island 3 158 Way Archipelago 3 145 Ardery Island / Odbert Island 2 103 098 Lagotellerie Island 2 115 055 Baily Head, Deception Island 2 169 Cape Roget 2 199 Edwards Islands 2 006 Ferguslie Peninsula, Laurie Island 2 052 Half Moon Island 2 036 O'Brien Island 2 089 Petermann Island 2 093 Armstrong Reef 1 152 Cape Jules 1 186 Caughley Beach, Cape Bird 1 042 False Round Point, King George Island 1 197 Hummer Point, Bear Peninsula 1 088 Islet S of Gerlache Island 1 087 Joubin Islands 1

Page 55 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Appendix C: List of Important Bird Areas in Antarctica meeting criteria by Method

IBA IBA designated as ASPA

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

1 Larsen Islands / Moreton Point 2 Gibbon Bay, Coronation Island 3 Eillium Island 4 Weddell Island 5 Pirie Peninsula, Laurie Island 6 Ferguslie Peninsula, Laurie Island 7 Watson Peninsula, Laurie Island 8 Fraser Point, Laurie Island 9 Buchanan Point, Laurie Island Ferrier Peninsula / Graptolite Island, Laurie

10 Island 11 Cape Whitson, Laurie Island 12 Point Martin, Laurie Island 13 Islet SW of Cape Davidson, Laurie Island 14 Cape Robertson, Laurie Island 15 Southern Powell Island and adjacent islands 16 Atriceps Island, Robertson Islands 17 Robertson Islands 18 Shingle Cove, Coronation Island 19 Signy Island 20 Moe Island 21 Gosling Islands 22 Return Point / Cheal Point, Coronation Island 23 Inaccessible Islands 24 Sugarloaf Island, Clarence Island

2 Using a cut-off score of 10

Page 56 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

25 Cape Bowles, Clarence Island 26 Craggy Point, Clarence Island 27 Chinstrap Cove, Clarence Island 28 Seal Islands 29 Saddleback Point, Elephant Island 30 Point W of Walker Point, Elephant Island 31 Mount Elder, Elephant Island 32 Point W of Cape Lookout, Elephant Island 33 Stinker Point, Elephant Island 34 Gibbs Island 35 Aspland Island / Eadie Island 36 O'Brien Island 37 Eastern Litwin Bay, King George Island 38 Tartar Island, King George Island 39 Kellick Island, King George Island 40 Owen Island, King George Island 41 Pottinger Point, King George Island 42 False Round Point, King George Island 43 Milosz Point / Czeslaw Point, King George Island 44 North Foreland, King George Island 45 Point Hennequin, King George Island 46 West Admiralty Bay, King George Island 47 Potter Peninsula, King George Island 48 Ardley Island, King George Island 49 Harmony Point, Nelson Island 50 Heywood Island 51 Yankee Harbour, Greenwich Island 52 Half Moon Island 53 Barnard Point, Livingston Island 54 Byers Peninsula, Livingston Island 55 Baily Head, Deception Island 56 Vapour Col, Deception Island

Page 57 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

57 Cape Wallace, Low Island 58 Cape Hooker, Low Island 59 Cape Garry, Low Island 60 Jameson Point, Low Island 61 Ambush Bay, Joinville Island 62 Danger Islands 63 Brash Island, Danger Islands 64 Earle Island, Danger Islands 65 Eden Rocks 66 Paulet Island 67 D'Urville Monument, Joinville Island 68 Madder Cliffs, Joinville Island 69 Snow Hill Island 70 Penguin Point, Seymour Island 71 Cockburn Island 72 Devil Island 73 Brown Bluff 74 Hope Bay 75 Gourdin Island 76 Duroch Islands 77 Tupinier Islands 78 Pearl Rocks 79 Cape Wollaston, Trinity Island 80 SW Trinity Island 81 Cierva Point and offshore islands 82 Bluff Island 83 Cuverville Island 84 Islet E of Guépratte Island 85 Cormorant Island 86 Litchfield Island 87 Joubin Islands 88 Islet S of Gerlache Island

Page 58 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

89 Petermann Island 90 Uruguay Island 91 Islet S of Bates Island 92 Island N of Dodman Island 93 Armstrong Reef 94 Cape Evensen 95 Avian Island 96 Ginger Islands 97 Emperor Island, Dion Islands 98 Lagotellerie Island 99 Stonington Island 100 Smith Peninsula 101 NW Berkner Island (Gould Bay) 102 Coalseam Cliffs / Mount Faraway 103 Luitpold Coast 104 Dawson-Lambton Glacier 105 Brunt Ice Shelf ('Halley Bay') 106 Stancomb-Wills Glacier 107 'Drescher Inlet' (Dreschereisfrontkerbe) 108 Riiser-Larsen Ice-shelf 109 Atka Iceport 110 Muskegbukta 111 Jutulsessen Mountain 112 Svarthamaren 113 Gruber Mountains 114 Princess Ragnhild Coast 115 Riiser-Larsen Peninsula 116 Mount Biscoe 117 Cape Batterbee 118 Kloa Point 119 Taylor Rookery 120 Gibbney Island

Page 59 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

121 Rookery Islands 122 Klung Island / Welch Island 123 Andersen Island 124 Kirton Island / Macklin Island 125 Auster Rookery 126 Scullin Monolith / Murray Monolith 127 Cape Darnley 128 Amanda Bay 129 Caro Island, Rauer Islands 130 Hop Island, Rauer Islands 131 Filla Island, Rauer Islands 132 Kazak Island / Zolotov Island 133 Unnamed island at Donskiye Islands 134 Warriner Island, Donskiye Islands 135 Gardner Island 136 Magnetic Island and nearby islands 137 Lucas Island 138 Rookery Lake / W Long Peninsula 139 Tryne Islands 140 West Ice Shelf 141 Haswell Island 142 Shackleton Ice Shelf 143 Peterson Island 144 Holl Island / O'Connor Island 145 Ardery Island / Odbert Island 146 Shirley Island / Beall Island 147 Clark Peninsula 148 Berkley Island / Cameron Island 149 Dibble Glacier 150 Pointe Geologie 151 Cape Bienvenue 152 Cape Jules

Page 60 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

153 Ile des Manchots / Empereur Island 154 Curzon Islands 155 Cape Hunter 156 MacKellar Islands 157 Cape Denison 158 Way Archipelago 159 Cape Pigeon Rocks 160 Mertz Glacier 161 Kartografov Island / Mount Archer 162 Arthurson Ridge 163 Sturge Island 164 Duke of York Island 165 Cape Adare 166 Downshire Cliffs 167 Possession Island 168 Foyn Island 169 Cape Roget 170 Seabee Hook, Cape Hallett 171 Cotter Cliffs 172 Mandible Cirque 173 Cape Wadworth, Coulman Island 174 Cape Main, Coulman Island 175 Edmonson Point 176 Cape Washington 177 Adelie Cove 178 Inexpressible Island 179 Depot Island 180 Gregory Island 181 Dunlop Island 182 Blue Glacier to Cape Chocolate 183 Dailey Islands 184 Rocky Point, Ross Island

Page 61 of 62

Representation of Important Bird Areas in the network of Antarctic Specially Protected Areas

Method A Method B Method IBA No IBA Name ≥ 6 ≥ 5 C2 25% 50% species species

185 McDonald Beach, Cape Bird 186 Caughley Beach, Cape Bird 187 Cape Crozier, Ross Island 188 Beaufort Island 189 Bernacchi Head, Franklin Island 190 SW Franklin Island 191 Cape Colbeck 192 Mount Paterson 193 Worley Point, Shepard Island 194 Mathewson Point, Shepard Island 195 Maher Island 196 Thurston Glacier 197 Hummer Point, Bear Peninsula 198 Brownson Islands 199 Edwards Islands 200 Schaefer Islands 201 Lindsey Islands 202 Sikorski Glacier, Noville Peninsula 203 Sims Island 204 Scorseby Head, Smyley Island

Page 62 of 62