Hi Amy,
Thanks for posting the note.

Can you tell us what it means for conservation here in New Zealand?

Any chance of American tax dollars supplmenting our meagre efforts?

Regards
Bruce

It's official - 3 'species' of NZ penguin are now protected under US law.

And coming soon from the 2010 syposium ...

• Global Penguin Society: the penguin advocacy for the oceans - Pablo Borboroglu
• Setting up a monitoring regime for blue penguins on Matiu/Somes Island, Wellington Harbour - Reg Cotter
• Comparing the costs and benefits of flipper bands versus transponders in monitoring blue penguin breeding activity on Somes Island, Wellington - Graeme Taylor
• Penguin population developments at Flea Bay from 2000 to 2008 - Thomas Stracke, Francis Helps
• Mortality in little blue penguins (Eudyptula minor) from New Zealand: the role of starvation, parasites and other diseases   - Monique van Rensburg
• Breeding success and divorce and their consequences on mate and nest retention in Blue penguins, Eudyptula minor - Hiltrun Ratz
• Research outline: Determining dietary shifts caused by at-sea events using stable isotope analysis   - Scott Flemming
• Research outline: Foraging behaviour, reproductive performance and population growth in an increasing population of blue penguins (Eudyptula minor) at Oamaru, New Zealand - Philippa Agnew
• A reduction in population size of the Snares crested penguin   - Dave Houston
• Magellanic penguins in Patagonia: Conservation and management challenges -Pablo Borboroglu
• Away out to A Zero - Graeme Loh
• Synopsis of Penguins in the fourth edition of "Checklist of the birds of New Zealand" 2010 - Graeme Loh
• Hospitalisation of Yellow Eyed Penguins at the New Zealand Wildlife Health Centre, Massey University -   Bridey White
• Craniofacial deformities recorded in hoiho (yellow-eyed penguin) chicks at Okia Reserve (Otago Peninsula, NZ) during the 2008/09 breeding season - David Agnew
• Auckland Island yellow-eyed penguin distribution survey 2009 - Leith Thomson
• A survey of Yellow-eyed penguin distribution in the sub-Antarctic Auckland Islands - Kate Beer
• Breeding success of yellow-eyed penguins on Stewart and Codfish Island / Whenua Hou 2008-09 - Sue Murray
• Yellow-eyed penguin nest productivity 2004-2009: Boulder Beach and Sandfly Bay, Otago Peninsula   - Bruce McKinlay
• Sandfly Bay Revisited: A study of visitor attitudes, awareness and activities at the Sandfly Bay Wildlife Refuge, Otago Peninsula   - Aviva Stein
• Management techniques to protect hoiho (yellow-eyed penguin) from human disturbance: a review of the measures adopted at Sandfly Bay and Boulder Beach since 2006   - David Agnew

Cold and rain kills 600 endangered penguins.  Things just seem to get worse for African penguins,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/16/penguins-die-south-africa-cold

Source: Oregon State University
http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2010/jun/study-finds-ad%C3%A9lie-penguins-more-adaptable-change-previously-thought

Adélie penguins live a long time, have a high survival rate, and as adults breed in the same location where they were raised as young, but when a change in their environment becomes severe enough, they aren’t afraid to get out of Dodge and raise their own offspring elsewhere.

In a new study published in Proceedings of the National Academy, scientists document how the grounding of two enormous icebergs caused sufficient disruption to the lives of penguin colonies living on islands in the Ross Sea to force them to move to different locations to breed.

While this doesn’t sound like a startling response, such behavioural adaptation among Adélie penguins, which are notoriously philopatric – or bound to their own birthplace when it comes to breeding – had only rarely been documented. It provides evidence about how these birds coped with past environmental change – and may cope with changes in the future.

“The study shows that the Adélie penguins have the capacity to radically alter their patterns – and that is welcome news,” said Katie Dugger, an Oregon State University wildlife biologist and lead author on the study. “Obviously, they dealt with the advance of ice sheets in the past and thus have the ability to adjust to climate change in the future. Now we have some idea about how they do this.”

Dugger and her colleagues had been studying Adélie penguins in the southwestern Ross Sea for several years as part of a long-term research project funded by the National Science Foundation when two large icebergs sheared off the Ross Ice Shelf in March of 2000 and lodged against Ross Island. In addition to forming a physical barrier, it also kept sea ice from breaking up in the southwest Ross Sea during some years.

This effectively cut off the population of penguins living at one of four study colonies (Cape Royds) from having easy access to the open ocean.

“Some of these birds had to walk up to 70 kilometres in some years just to get to the open water,” Dugger pointed out. “Under normal conditions, Adélie penguins return to the nest every two to four days to feed their young. The addition of a long walk increased the time it took adults to get food, which didn’t bode well for the survivability of the nests.”

Though moving to a new colony for breeding has rarely been documented among Adélie penguins, scientists have suspected such behaviour takes place because genetic tests on individuals from different colonies show more homogeneity than if distinct colonies had no intermixing.

Still, such behaviour is rare and perhaps episodic, and the scientists plan to evaluate the breeding success of the penguins that have relocated, said Dugger, an assistant professor in OSU’s Department of Fisheries and Wildlife. They also have many birds banded as chicks and are in the process of trying to understand how the iceberg affected movements of birds before their first breeding season, which happens between three and seven years of age.

“There are definite long-term benefits to staying in one place,” Dugger said. “You learn the food resources, you know the nesting resources, you interact with the same neighbours – even in sub-colonies within the larger colony. To abandon all that requires a significant stressor, such as a change to the environment. But if the change is big enough, the penguins will move.”

Other authors on the study include David Ainley, H.T. Harvey and Associates of Los Gatos, Calif; Phil Lyver and Kerry Barton, Landcare Research of New Zealand; and Grant Ballard, of PRBO Conservation Science in Petaluma, Calif., and the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

About the OSU College of Agricultural Sciences: The college contributes in many ways to the economic and environmental sustainability of Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. The college’s faculty are leaders in agriculture and food systems, natural resources management, life sciences and rural economic development research.

Heres an update on this process.

It looks as if New Zealand penguins, amongst others, are going to receive effort from the US Governemnt because of the impact of climate change.

http://sfappeal.com/alley/2010/06/sf-based-court-settlement-mean-new-protections-for-seven-penguin-species.php

A bit of a shame that the latest checklist does not recognise white flippered penguins

Bruce

BirdLife South Africa press release
26 May 2010
Source: http://www.birdlife.org.za/page/5841/press_releases

CAPE TOWN - Each year BirdLife International revises the Red List for the bird species of the world. Today they announced that the African Penguin has gone from Vulnerable to Endangered. This assessment is based on rigorous criteria; for the penguin, the population has crashed by more than 50% in the past 30 years, signalling a strong warning to conservationists.

BirdLife International report that recent data have revealed that the African Penguin is undergoing a very rapid population decline, probably as a result of commercial fisheries and shifts in prey populations. Worryingly, the assessment notes that this trend shows no sign of reversing, and immediate conservation action is required to prevent further declines.

In 1956, the first full census of the species was conducted, and ~150 000 pairs were counted. These were the birds that had survived more than a century of sustained persecution, principally from egg collecting and guano scraping. In 2009, after another decrease (the global population fell another 10% from the 2008 count), there were only 26 000 pairs. Those numbers represent a loss of more than 80% of the pairs in just over 50 years, equivalent to around 90 birds a week, every week since 1956!

“The colonies around our coast have shrunk to dangerously small numbers.” said Dr Ross Wanless, Seabird Division Manager for BirdLife South Africa. “Now the colonies are very vulnerable to small-scale events, such as bad weather, seal predation or seagulls taking eggs. In a large, healthy population these events were trivial. Now, they have potentially serious consequences. We’re almost at the point of managing individual birds.” he continued.

Dr Rob Crawford, chief scientist for Marine & Coastal Management, the government department responsible for monitoring and protecting seabirds, has worked on the African Penguins for more than 30 years. He said “While it’s difficult to prove exactly what has caused the decreases, all the indications are that the penguins are struggling to find enough sardines and anchovies. A huge amount is done to protect penguins from other threats, but the decreases have continued unabated.”

Earlier this year, research lead by Dr Lorien Pichegru, from the Percy FitzPatrick Institute at the University of Cape Town, reported on preliminary results from a study on the impacts of closing fishing areas around key penguin breeding islands. Their study suggests that preventing fishing directly around the penguin islands may well provide benefits to the penguins. Marine and Coastal Management has commissioned a team to consider how closures could be implemented to benefit the penguins while minimising the impacts on the fishing industry and fishers' livelihoods.

Thanks for putting these online, Cynthia, they will make for interesting reading! If you find the missing issue let us know.

I am an editor/proofreader by day so if any penguin workers are keen to get Penguin Conservation started again I am happy to help out with those aspects of publishing it.

Lisa

I still have a few spaces available for people if they would like to present at the penguin symposium next month. Email me if interested: research@penguins.co.nz

Cheers,
Philippa

?ENCOUNTER BAY PENGUIN BREEDING MONITORING PROGRAM 2009-2010

Natalie Gilbert


INTRODUCTION

The Encounter Bay Penguin Breeding Monitoring Program was initiated in 1990 as an indicator of the health of the penguin colonies on Granite and West Islands.  The monitoring program assists in the responsible management of tourist operations on Granite Island. A balance between conservation and tourism is vital in ensuring the preservation of penguin colonies in the Encounter Bay region and an ecologically sustainable eco-tourism business. 

A number of factors have appeared to influence breeding success of penguins since monitoring commenced 1990.  These factors have changed over time and will continue to change into the future with the implementation of new management strategies and as penguins face new environmental challenges.

• It is recognised that penguin breeding success is likely to be impacted by other local populations that predate on penguins.  These populations include the New Zealand Fur Seal Arctocephalus forsten which are increasing in number, Black Rats Rattus rattus and Water Rats Hydromys chrysogaster.  Both species of rat experience population fluctuations, and population explosions are not uncommon.
• Human impact includes activities such as direct pressure from people seeking to have penguin experiences and indirect pressure from visitors carrying out activities such as fishing, walking, sightseeing, whale watching, etc., within the penguin colony.  In the past human impact appears to have been responsible for lower breeding success in areas where human visitation is higher (North Shore, Granite Island). In recent years management strategies have reduced human impact and it no longer appears to be a major cause of lower breeding success.  Since 2005 results have shown breeding success to be similar to greater in higher human visitation areas to those recorded in lower human visitation areas (South and West Shores of Granite Island).  This suggests that pressures from tourism and visitation are being balanced with penguin conservation.  It appears that the penguin protection management strategies (Listed in this Introduction) have been successful and have had a positive influence on the breeding success of the North Shore Granite Island penguins.
• In years where Construction and development of tourist facilities have been carried out, it appears to have had a negative effect on the success of penguin breeding colony within the construction zone.
• Impacts linked to global warming include increasing water temperatures and altering fish stocks and species.  These impacts are expected to effect penguins. Further studies need to be carried out to determine the extent of these impacts.

Monitoring in 2009-10 has been conducted in three locations; Granite Island North Shore (High Tourist Impact Zone); Granite Island South Shore and Granite Island West Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zone).   It was recommended in 2008-09 Encounter Bay Breeding Monitoring program that West Island (Low Tourist Impact Zone) be monitored whenever practical. Observations from Natalie Bool (SARDI) identified penguin numbers to be lower on West Island than on Granite Island in 2006.  Monitoring in the 2007/08 established that the penguin population on West Island had crashed and minimal penguins remain residing on West Island. No observations / monitoring were possible during the 2009-10 period due to transport availability.

The Encounter Bay Penguin Breeding Monitoring Program between 1991 and 2006 indicated low chick survival rates, often on the North Shore of Granite Island.  In locations where chick survival rates are low, this indicates the health of the colony is lower.  In response to findings from the monitoring program, management strategies have been put in place in an attempt to reduce tourist pressure on the penguins, whilst maximising visitor experiences.

Penguin protection management strategies include

Monitoring and Research - The ENCOUNTER BAY PENGUIN BREEDING MONITORING PROGRAM, ANNUAL PENGUIN CENSUS and NIGHTLY PENGUIN COUNT are ongoing and monitor changes in penguin breeding success and population.  Other studies through universities and Research Institutes are regularly undertaken and encouraged.
Guided interpretive tours - Guided tours focusing on interpreting penguin behaviours and adaptations are conducted nightly.  This is a fantastic opportunity for visitors to gain an experience with wild penguins in a safe and supervised environment.  Visitors are informed in the management of penguins (the balance between conservation and tourism).  Guide/tourist ratios are 1:25 and limited to 200 people each night.
Penguin Centre - This building incorporates a rehabilitation facility and a penguin viewing experience. The rehabilitation facility boasts a 70% success rate with penguins being successfully released back to the sea.  The centre also enables tourists to view the penguins and see them being hand fed during the day. Tourists gain valuable knowledge regarding penguin behaviour, adaptations and ecology.  It is expected that the opportunity for tourists to have a penguin experience during the day in the Penguin Centre will reduce pressure from tourists interfering with penguins in the wild.
Visitor access restrictions - Visitor access restrictions apply in the two hours after dark when the penguins are most vulnerable and when there is the highest demand to view them.  Security personnel are trained penguin guides.  All persons wishing to view penguins on the North Shore in the two hours after dark are required to be on a Guided Penguin Tour.
Penguin Security Guards - In the two hours after dark and for the whole night on designated ‘at risk’ weekends, public and school holidays and ‘Schoolies Week’, penguin security guards are positioned on the North Shore of Granite Island to regulate and provide information to island visitors.  This initiative has also been effective in deterring wilful vandalism, molestation and killing of penguins, with very few suspicious penguin deaths record since 2000 when penguin security was introduced.
Boardwalks and trails - Boardwalks have allowed penguins large safe areas to access their burrows without physical human interference.  It has also given visitors better views of the penguins coming home and going about their night time activities in the vicinity of their burrows.  Fenced human walkways have provided penguins with safe areas without the threat of human intrusion.  In response to this, penguins have been noted to have displayed changes in behaviour in these locations.  These behaviour changes include free flowing penguin movement on route to access their burrows and penguins now portraying less cautious behaviour.
Habitat and home site construction – since 2001, areas unsuitable for penguin habitat due to unsuitable soil and rock, weed invasion and manicured lawns have been reclaimed for penguin habitat.  These areas have been transformed with introduced soil, the planting of penguin friendly native vegetation, artificial penguin burrows strategically placed within the area and fencing to restrict human access.  Penguins are continuing to take up residence in these areas and using the burrows for breeding purposes.  Further work is ongoing in these areas to maintain penguin access routes by controlling native vegetation growth and weed control. 

 METHODOLOGY

The methodology of this study replicates that of past breeding monitoring programs in the Encounter Bay since 1990 with the exception to the method in which penguins are tagged.  The study uses breeding success to measure the health of the penguin colonies in three locations within Encounter Bay; Granite Island North Shore (High Tourist Impact Zone); Granite Island South Shore and Granite Island West Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zone).  Monitoring on West Island is limited to field investigations when opportunities arise as no regular transport is available and penguin numbers are extremely low.

Liaisons with researchers at Philip Island Nature Park, Victoria, and South Australian National Parks and Wildlife have assisted in the initial implementation and methodologies of this study.  All banding procedures and penguin handling aim to minimise bird disturbance and only trained personnel assist.  This project is licensed with a Scientific Research Permit and has Ethics Approval with the Animal Ethics Committee, both through Department for Environment and Heritage, South Australia.

Penguin Identification
The Monitoring Program on Granite Island has historically used flipper tags to identify penguins, and was licensed through the Australian Bird and Bat Banding scheme. Flipper tagging ceased in 2005.  The Australian Bird and Bat Banding Scheme placed a moratorium on the approval of penguin banding projects. This decision was made based on the results of a study at Phillip Island (Victoria) that demonstrated that banded penguins have reduced survival rates compared with non-banded individuals. In other penguin species, flipper-bands are known to cause sufficient drag, which increases energy expenditure whilst swimming (Culik and Wilson 1991) and bands can also cause physical injury (Sallaberry and Valencia 1985). The disadvantages of flipper banding have led to the search for alternative marking techniques for penguins and other seabirds.

A grant was obtained by the Wildlife Conservation Fund in 2005 to convert from flipper tagging to the use of implantable transponders.  Transponders provide a long-term means of identifying individual animals. The major benefit of using transponders to identify individuals comes from the reduced disturbance needed to read transponders.  Importantly, transponders do not impair birds' swimming or flying ability because they are implanted.  Furthermore, remote logging devices can be utilised to passively record birds' arrival and departure times, causing no disturbance to the birds at all.

Methodology - TIRIS INJECTION
Transponders will be soaked in Betadine TM prior to being implanted.  Transponders will be implanted subcutaneously, midway down the back. This location was chosen because it minimised the extent of transponder migration in Adelie penguins (Judy Clarke pers. comm.). Transponders are injected using a purpose-built applicator, which allows injection without direct handling of the implant.  The needle will be cleaned with Betadine TM between each application to minimise risk of infection.

Transponders will be injected with the needle pointed toward the tail.  Transponders will be massaged well under the skin to prevent them being lost before the wound heals. After the transponder is implanted it is read using a portable reader and the bird is released at the site of capture. The procedure takes approximately 3 minutes per bird.  For the 2009-2010 season a wand/stick tool has been acquired and will be an option to scan penguins.  This device can be placed into burrows to scan micro chipped penguins.  This will allow unreachable birds that are tagged to be scanned and reduce stresses associated with removal of penguins during monitoring.
To further reduce unnecessary handling of Penguins, or to observe penguins with minimal disturbance who are vulnerable (incubating eggs), or have deep, unreachable burrows, a periscopic optical tool is in use.  This tool allows a camera to send images of penguins deep in the burrow and can be observed via a hand help screen.
 
In addition to the Breeding Monitoring Program, two other studies of relevance to this study are also being conducted on Granite Island, these being Granite Island Penguin Census and Nightly Penguin Counts.

Granite Island Penguin Census has been carried out biannually in 2001, 02 and 03 and annually from 2004. The study involves volunteers counting penguins over the whole island.
The Nightly Penguin Count Study involves penguins counted by Penguin Tour Guides on the North shore.  This study began in 2000 and is ongoing.  Actual numbers each night are averaged for the month.

 RESULTS

TABLE 1  2009-2010 Breeding Summary

    Area A – North Shore   Area B –South Shore   Area D – West Shore   Total
Number of burrows monitored   31   21   17   69
Number of burrows used for breeding   22   12   12   46
Number of clutches produced   25   18   14   57
Number of burrows with chicks   18   11   10   39
Number of eggs recorded   50   36   28   114
Number of chicks recorded   37   30   20   87
Number of chicks fledged   27   16   15   58
    72.97%   53.33%   75.00%   66.60%
% of eggs producing fledglings   54.00%   44.44%   54%   50.87%
Number of clutches producing at least one fledgling   15   8   9   32
    60.0%   44.44%   64.28%   56.10%
number of failed clutches   10   10   5   25
    40.00%   55.55%   35.71%   43.85%
fledging rate per burrow   1.22   1.33   1.25   1.26

  FIGURE 1 Comparison between estimated total number of chicks fledging with total number of burrows used for breeding and total number of Breeding Adults on Granite Island between 2001 and 2009 (data not collected for 2004)

 

FIGURE 2 Fledgling rate per breeding pair on Granite Island between 1990 / 2009 (data not collected for all years)
 
FIGURE 3 Average monthly penguin numbers from ‘Nightly Penguin Counts’ 2000 -10


 
FIGURE 4  Penguin Census results 2001-09 displaying total number of Adult Penguins
 

FIGURE 5 Comparison of percentage of Chicks Fledged between Granite Island North, West and South Shores between 1990 - 2007 (Data not collected for all years)

 DISCUSSION

Penguin numbers on Granite Island have continued to decrease during 2009-10 with an estimate of 166 penguins on Granite Island; this is 192 less than last year (Figure 1, 3 and 4).  Breeding success has remained high. During the Penguin Breeding Monitoring Program for 2007-2010, breeding success is the highest recorded since monitoring began in 1990.  Comparing the ‘fledgling rate per burrow’ averages for the all three monitored zones on Granite Island, I.48 fledglings were produced per burrow in 2007-08, 1.37 fledglings were produced per burrow in 2008-09 and 1.26 fledglings were produced per burrow in 2009-10 breeding season.  The closest previous result was in 1995-96 and 1997-98 when 1.08 Fledglings were produced per burrow (Figure 2).  This is a considerable increase. Even with the higher levels of breeding success, due to the lower numbers of breeding penguins in the colony, estimated numbers of chicks fledged on the island is the lowest recorded since data collection began. 105 chicks were estimated to have fledged from the island this season, 140 less than last season (Figure 1).

In the years leading up to and including 2005, breeding success has tended to be noticeably greater on Granite Island South Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zone), than on Granite Island North Shore (High Tourist Impact Zone), (Figure 5).  Penguins on the North Shore have expended more energy producing eggs and raising chicks to achieve poorer results in fledgling success when compared to the Southern Shore (ENCOUNTER BAY PENGUIN BREEDING MONITORING PROGRAM, 2005-2007).  Since 2006 Granite Island North Shore (High Tourist Impact Zone) penguins have produced higher fledgling numbers than those on the South Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zones), with the greatest difference being in 2009-10. This indicates that pressures from tourism and visitation are being balanced with penguin conservation.  It appears that the Penguin protection management strategies are successful and have had a positive influence on the breeding success of the North Shore Granite Island penguin colony. Penguins on the Southern Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zone) appear to be displaying the least successful breeding results, and penguins on the Western Shore (Moderate Tourist Impact Zone) are similar to the North Shore penguins (Figure 5).

It is of concern that the Granite Island penguin population appears to continue to decline (Figure 1, 3 &4).  The ‘Nightly Penguin Count’ and the ‘Annual Penguin Census’ are concerned with penguin numbers and both indicate a decline. Results from the Nightly Penguin Counts (Figure 3) suggest penguin numbers on the North Shore are in decline. The Annual Penguin Census (Figure 4) suggests that the overall population appears to have declined with a significant drop in 2002-03, followed by a more stable, but still declining population until the present.  (The Nightly Penguin Counts confines itself to the Northern Shore Penguin population and the Annual Penguin Census concerns itself to the entire island Penguin population).


The West Island Penguin Colony has not been monitored during 2009-10. The penguin population crash on West Island was documented in ENCOUNTER BAY PENGUIN BREEDING MONITORING PROGRAM, 2008-2009.  It would seem unlikely that the population will recover.
 
FURTHER RESEARCH

Further monitoring of the penguins in 2010-11 on Granite Island is essential to measure the success of management strategies put in place to reduce threats on the colony.  The data from the breeding / monitoring program enables us to keep check on the health of the penguin colony.

Granite Island management has identified and corrected many potential impacts by human on the penguins in recent years.  It is vital that potentially threatening activities relating to visitor activities and management practices continue to recognise and minimise impacts on penguins.

West Island needs to be monitored whenever practical by either NPWS or myself.  It is suggested that a Penguin Register / Diary is created and left in the West Island Shed for all visitors to comment on Penguin observations.

Future research will continue to monitor the penguin breeding success.  Two studies, ‘Nightly Penguin Counts’ and ‘Annual Penguin Census’ will monitor changes in penguin abundance.

Granite Island is prone to fluctuations in population of the Water Rat Hydromys chrysogaster and Black Rat Rattus rattus.  This can lead to population explosions that impact on Penguins.  Water Rats and Black Rats are responsible for eating Penguin chicks and erosion of Penguin burrows and soil around Penguin burrows due to the Black Rats digging up bulbs.  Rat populations remained in check with no abnormally high populations recorded on this monitoring period; however continued effort is required to control the number of Black Rats. More dietary information is needed on both species of rat and their specific impacts on Penguins.

The relationship between the presence of the New Zealand Fur Seal Arctocephalus forsten and the arrival time of penguins to shore needs to be determined.  The apparent increase in Seal numbers needs to be documented and systems put in place to monitor seal numbers.

The Encounter Penguin Management Group has not meet throughout this monitoring period.  The group is formulated between three locations that run Penguin Tours (Granite Island, Kingscote and Penneshaw) and representatives from SARDI, NPWS and Natural Resource Management Board.  The function of the group is to network, exchange information and promote interest in a joint research project to study the decline in Penguin numbers in our region.  It is recommended that efforts are made to meet in the following monitoring season.

Acknowledgments
Thank you to Keith and Dorothy Longden who purchased a Periscopic Optical Tool and donated it to the project.  This visual aid allows viewing of penguins deep in burrows that twist and turn through a hand held screen.

Thanks also to support from Paul Unsworth and the Victor Harbor National Parks and Wildlife Service and Granite Island Nature Park Pty. Ltd..  Their support, suggestions and assistance with administration and fieldwork have been very much appreciated.

Thank you to Kerri Ann Bartley (Flinders University), who through a Degree in Biodiversity and Conservation has assisted in the study of the Penguins on Granite Island. Kerri has been a fantastic help, and her assistance and dedication has been very much appreciated



REFERENCES

Gilbert (1995-2009) ENCOUNTER BAY PENGUIN BREEDING MONITORING PROGRAM

Peters, Gilbert and Carpenter (2002) Monitoring the Effect of Human Activities on the Breeding Success of Little Penguins on Granite Island


HOPE THE ABOVE IS OF INTEREST TO YOU DAVE, CHEERS JOHN AYLIFFE..KANGAROO ISLAND
PENGUIN@SKYMESH.COM.AU