Fall 2008: The State of our Seabirds - American Bird Conservancy

BIRD CONSERVATION
The Magazine of American Bird Conservancy FALL 2008
the
State
of our
Seabirds

BIRD’S EYE VIEW
White-capped Albatross: P. Milburn
By Carl Safina
Albatrosses embody the wonders of Earth’s oceans. These nomadic voyagers of the
high seas rarely come within sight of land, and so, magnificent as they are, go
virtually unnoticed by all but the fishermen and sailors (and the occasional highly
motivated birdwatchers) who venture out beyond the protective embrace of our coastlines.
As a result, their tragic decline has for decades gone widely unnoticed as well.
As a result of past exploitation, introduced rodents, and drowning
on fishing gear, certain albatrosses are teetering on the brink of
extinction. Nineteen out of the 22 albatross species are listed by
IUCN-World Conservation Union as globally threatened (Critically
Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable); the other three are
considered Near Threatened. This is astonishing given that we are
talking about an entire family of bird species whose distribution
spans the planet. This is not some small set of endemic birds
plagued by regional habitat loss or localized mortality threats.
This is a matter of global scale.
Thankfully though, the plight of the world’s seabirds is beginning
to gain some attention. Groups such as American Bird
Conservancy, the Blue Ocean Institute, and many others, have
raised awareness of albatross and other seabird declines, and as a
consequence, there have been some improvements. For example,
government-mandated regulations have resulted in a significant
drop in the bycatch of seabirds by longline fishing vessels operating
in waters off Alaska, Hawaii, New Zealand, the Falklands, South
Georgia Island, the Sub-Antarctic, and elsewhere. Islands that form
the restricted breeding sites for some seabird species are beginning
to be purged of the introduced predators such as rats and cats that
have decimated populations in recent decades.
While the United States has demonstrated leadership on some
fronts in the global effort to conserve threatened seabirds, we can
do much more. Not least, but perhaps most simply, is to add our
signature to the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and
Petrels. ACAP is the leading international agreement bringing
countries together to reduce threats and ensure the future of
highly migratory albatross and petrel species. To date, 12 leading
fishing nations—Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador,
Uruguay, France, New Zealand, Peru, South Africa, Spain, and
the United Kingdom—have signed ACAP. Far from ignoring this
key accord, the United States was a significant player in the negotiation
of ACAP, and has since attended meetings as an observer.
Yet it has fallen short of adding its signature and becoming a full
party to the Agreement. Without this final commitment, the
United States cannot directly influence priority setting and policy
to protect the 28 seabird species covered by ACAP.
Given that America already implements all the Agreement’s provisions,
signing ACAP would place no additional burden on us.
Rather it would give us a seat at the table as opposed to our current
perch outside the window, and present us with the chance to
push our domestic agenda of seabird conservation internationally.
It would also enable us to level the playing field for our fishermen,
who must currently observe U.S. regulations that are far more
stringent than the laws that govern the actions of many of their
foreign competitors.
President Bush must make it a priority to sign ACAP before he
leaves office in January 2009. In 2007, he presided over the designation
of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument
that surrounds the Northwest Hawaiian Islands—nesting grounds
to the largest albatross population in the world. The creation of
the single largest conservation area under the U.S. flag, and one
of the largest marine conservation areas in the world, demonstrated
a real commitment to marine protection. Now he must
bring this commitment to the international arena, and send a
clear signal to the rest of the world that seabird conservation is a
global problem that demands collaborative global solutions.
The fight to preserve the Arctic wilderness against the push for the
extraction of its oil reserves has proven just how much people care
about places that most will likely never visit. The struggle to prevent
the mass extinction of our seldom seen albatrosses is going to
take a similar investment on a global scale. The developing public
interest in seabird conservation gives us hope that it is possible,
and with the United States fully on-board with ACAP, we can help
make it happen.
Carl Safina is the author of Eye of the
Albatross and Song for the Blue Ocean,
and is President and co-founder of the
Blue Ocean Institute.
Carl Safina and Waved Albatrosses:
Blue Ocean Institute
2 bird conservation • FALL 2008
COVER PHOTOS: (Left) Wandering Albatross and chick: A. Angel and R. Wanless/VIREO;
(Right, top to bottom) Black-browed Albatrosses: R. Saldino/VIREO; biologists tracking radio-tagged
birds on Adak Island: Steve Ebbert/FWS; Xantus’s Murrelet chick: National Park Service.

Bird Conservation is the magazine of
American Bird Conservancy (ABC), and
is published three times yearly.
American Bird Conservancy (ABC) is the
only 501(c)(3) organization that works
solely to conserve native wild birds and
their habitats throughout the Americas.
A copy of the current financial statement
and registration filed by the organization
may be obtained by contacting: ABC, P.O.
Box 249, The Plains, VA 20198. Tel: (540)
253-5780, or by contacting the following
state agencies:
Sooty Albatross: Mike Danzenbaker
The State of Our Seabirds
7 The State of Our Seabirds
10 Toothfish Revisited
BirdConservation
FALL 2008
PAGE 7
Tristan Albatross and chick: Angel Wanless
Florida: Division of Consumer Services,
toll-free number within the State:
800-435-7352.
Maryland: For the cost of copies and
postage: Office of the Secretary of State,
Statehouse, Annapolis, MD 21401.
New Jersey: Attorney General, State
of New Jersey: 201-504-6259.
New York: Office of the Attorney General,
Department of Law, Charities Bureau,
120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271.
Pennsylvania: Department of State,
toll-free number within the state:
800-732-0999.
Virginia: State Division of Consumer
Affairs, Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer
Services, P.O. Box 1163, Richmond, VA
23209.
West Virginia: Secretary of State, State
Capitol, Charleston, WV 25305.
11 Gillnets
13 Islands: No Guarantee of Safe Haven
18 Saving the Waved Albatross
21 Marine Contaminants
PAGE 21
PAGE 10
Photo: Mike Parr
PAGE 18
Registration does not imply endorsement,
approval, or recommendation by any state.
American Bird Conservancy is not
responsible for unsolicited manuscripts
or photographs. Approval is required
for reproduction of any photographs or
artwork.
Victims of an oil spill: FWS.
PAGE 6
DEPARTMENTS
Waved Albatross: Hara Woltz
Editors:
Jessica Hardesty, Steve Holmer,
Michael J. Parr, David Pashley,
Gemma Radko, Gavin Shire,
George E. Wallace.
For information contact:
American Bird Conservancy
4249 Loudoun Avenue
P.O. Box 249
The Plains, VA 20198
Creating handicrafts for sale:
Fundación ProAves,
www.proaves.org
2 Bird’s Eye View
4 On The Wire
24 Species Profile
Peruvian Tern
Peruvian Tern chick: Patricia Saravia
PAGE 24
ABC’s Bird Conservation magazine brings you the best in bird conservation news and features. For more information on
American Bird Conservancy, please visit our website at www.abcbirds.org or call 1-888-BIRD-MAG.
bird conservation • FALL 2008
3

ON THE WIRE
Hawaiian Petrel: Jack Jeffrey
Pilot Hi-Tech Study Searches for Rare Hawaiian Birds
Detecting rare Hawaiian birds
using conventional methods
is difficult due to the rough,
mountainous terrain, dense
vegetation, and remote locations of
intact Hawaiian rainforests. ABC
and the Conservation Endowment
Fund of the Association of Zoos
and Aquariums are supporting
Hawaiian partners on the island of
Kauai in a pilot study to determine
the feasibility of using Autonomous
Recording Units (ARUs) to detect
rare bird species. ARUs are small,
battery-powered recording devices
containing a microphone, software,
and built-in disk drive that turn
on automatically to record bird
calls. The devices are very low-
maintenance, can sit unattended
for weeks or even months, and
collect up to 80 gigabytes of digital
recordings.
Although ARUs are a relatively new
technology, they have already been
successfully used to monitor Golden-cheeked
Warblers and Blackcapped
Vireos at Fort Hood, Texas,
in areas where military exercises
would pose a threat to researchers.
ARUs are also being deployed in Arkansas
to search for the Ivory-billed
Woodpecker.
Two ARUs have been leased from
the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, and
are being field tested by the Kauai
Endangered Forest Bird Recovery
Project and the Kauai Endangered
Seabird Recovery Project. The study
is being funded and directed by
the Hawaii Division of Forestry and
Wildlife. ARUs have been deployed
in four different areas on Kauai in an
attempt to detect four species: the
Hawaiian Petrel, Newell’s Shearwater,
Band-rumped Storm-Petrel, and
Puaiohi (Small Kauai Thrush).
Because of the difficulty of accessing
some research locations on
Kauai, use of ARUs could save thousands
of dollars in helicopter transport
charges and study time. ARUs
will also help in better understanding
the singing and calling behavior
of Hawaiian landbirds, allowing
researchers to fine-tune monitoring
protocols to increase native bird
detection success. ARUs could
also help detect cryptic species—
perhaps even species that have not
been reported for years.
Once the field portion of the study
ends in August 2008, the ARUs will
be sent back to Cornell, where the
data will be analyzed and the quality
of the sound evaluated. “ARUs have
tremendous promise for monitoring
rare Hawaiian species while saving
time and money in areas with very
challenging logistics,” said George
Wallace, ABC’s Vice President for
International Programs. “We eagerly
await the results of the pilot study.”
ABC Campaigns for Green Building Standards to Save Birds
American Bird Conservancy is
advocating for green building
standards to include
provisions that reduce bird
collisions.
ABC, the Bird-Safe Glass Foundation,
New York City Audubon, and
architect Hillary Brown recently met
with the U.S. Green Building Council
to discuss changes to the LEED
standards. LEED (Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design)
is the most widely accepted benchmark
for environmentally-friendly
buildings, but does not currently take
bird collisions into account. In June,
this coalition submitted suggested
changes to the proposed LEED2009
standards. These changes were
endorsed by the Chicago Audubon
Society, Chicago Bird Collision Monitors,
Birds and Buildings Forum,
Fatal Light Awareness Program
(FLAP), and collisions expert Dr.
Daniel Klem, Jr.
ABC also submitted comments to
suggest bird-safe changes to the
Green Building Initiative’s proposed
American National Standard for
Green Building. A similar group of
bird-safe building advocates signed
on to support these comments.
According to Dr. Klem, some 975
million birds die every year from
building collisions in the United
States alone. At night, migrating
birds are attracted to, and disoriented
by, the light emanating from
the interiors of tall buildings and the
outside vanity lighting and floodlights
on buildings of any height. Trapped
in these “light fields” and unable to
view the stars by which they navigate,
the birds fly in circles
until they collide with each
other or the building, or
fall to the ground from
exhaustion. The problem is
particularly acute on nights
with abundant low-altitude
cloud cover or inclement
weather. During the day,
birds are at risk from collisions
with reflective and
transparent windows,
which they cannot see.
One of the unintended
consequences of green
building certification programs
has been the promotion of large
expanses of glass that increase
daylight and reduce the need for
artificial daytime lighting. This saves
energy, but increases the danger
of bird collisions. However, there
are examples of high-performance
green buildings that are also bird
safe because they incorporate
additional architectural elements.
For example, the New York Times
Building is covered by a network
of exterior ceramic rods, which
create enough “visual noise” to warn
birds away from the windows, yet
still allow daylight to the reach the
building’s occupants.
ABC’s goal is to integrate bird safety
into the definition of a green building,
and to have this reflected in specific
performance standards to reduce
collision hazards. Such standards
will encourage innovative designs
by architects, and stimulate marketdriven
solutions to the problem by
increasing demand for new products,
such as glass that is visible to
birds but not to people—perhaps
the ultimate high-tech solution to
bird collisions with windows.
It is clear that the debate should
no longer be whether birds require
these protections, but rather what
are the most effective ways to design
and operate buildings to prevent
bird deaths. ABC will continue
to work for bird-friendly buildings
so they become the norm rather
than the exception.
A building in Toronto that has a variety of
collision deterrent films and netting in place
to prevent bird collisions. Photo courtesy of
FLAP (Fatal Light Awareness Program)
4 bird conservation • FALL 2008

ABC Report Finds Many Species of Migratory Birds in Decline
Act for Songbirds Campaign Underway to Boost Conservation
American Bird Conservancy has released a
report revealing how the threats faced by
Neotropical migratory birds are impacting their
populations. Habitat loss and fragmentation
are the greatest threats, but other hazards contribute
towards population declines, including pesticide poisoning,
collisions with buildings and communications
towers, cat predation, invasive species, and global
warming.
The report, Saving Migratory Birds for Future
Generations: The Success of the Neotropical Migratory
Bird Conservation Act, reveals a disturbing trend:
nearly half of the species for which we have information
are in long-term decline. Of the 178 continental bird
species included on the American Bird Conservancy/
Audubon WatchList of birds of highest conservation
concern, over one-third –71 species – are Neotropical
migrants. Two studies referenced in the report show
that between 118 and 127 Neotropical migrant species have experienced
persistent population declines over the last 40 years, including 60 species
with declines of 45% or more.
Fortunately, the report also finds that carefully targeted conservation efforts,
such as projects supported by the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation
Act (NMBCA), can help turn the tide for declining species.
Representatives Ron Kind (D-WI) and Wayne Gilchrest
(R-MD) have introduced legislation in the House (H.R.
5756) to reauthorize NMBCA at a significantly higher
funding level to help conservationists build on past and
current successes. These include establishing a network
of monitoring stations and bird reserves in Colombia,
restoring dwindling oak habitats for birds from Guatemala
to Washington State, and protecting threatened
stopover habitat in the Gulf of Mexico.
American Bird Conservancy has launched the Act for
Songbirds Campaign to support this reauthorization
bid, and is encouraging citizens to take part by contacting
their Representatives through ABC’s newly created
online action center. Already, the Campaign has generated
more than 4,000 letters to members of Congress
in support of reauthorizing the Act. Organizations in the
Bird Conservation Alliance, a broad network of ornithological societies,
bird clubs, science, and conservation groups, are also working as part of
the campaign to engage their members in supporting the legislation.
If you have not already taken action in support of the NMBCA reauthorization,
please do so. It is the one simple thing that we can all do to help our migratory
songbirds. Visit www.abcbirds.org/action to Act for Songbirds today.
Western Bluebird Reintroduction
–Second Year Successes
An ABC partnership project to return Western Bluebirds to one of their
ancestral breeding territories on the San Juan Islands of northwestern
Washington State is nearing completion of the second year of its fiveyear
timeline, with a number of important advances.
The project got underway in the fall of 2006 (see Bird Conservation,
Spring 2007), with support from the Disney Wildlife Conservation Fund, in
collaboration with the San Juan Preservation Trust, Ecostudies Institute, and
San Juan Islands Audubon Society, plus many other local partners.
This year marked the first time in at least 40 years that a Western Bluebird
that fledged on San Juan Island is known to have returned there to breed.
The bird successfully paired and nested, providing an encouraging early
indication of potential long-term success. The first translocation of Western
Bluebird pairs with nestlings was also accomplished. Two pairs were taken
from their breeding site 100 miles away at Fort Lewis Military Installation
in Olympia, Washington, and placed in an aviary on San Juan for ten days
while their young fledged. The adults and eight fledglings were subsequently
released successfully.
Including these eight chicks, 21 bluebirds have fledged so far this year on
San Juan, and four pairs are re-nesting, making up for an unseasonably cold
start to the season that resulted in the complete loss of one nest with five
young, and the loss of three young from another brood of four.
Project coordinator Bob Altman, ABC’s Northern Pacific Rainforest Bird
Conservation Region Coordinator, commented: “Despite some nest losses
due to record-setting cold weather, we were able to save several nests, and
now with some pairs re-nesting, we hope to be able to successfully fledge
approximately 30 young on San Juan Island this year.”
Project partners and arriving Western Bluebirds (adults in cage and nestlings in covered bowl) at the
Cady Mountain release site. Left to right are: Bob Altman, Kathleen Foley, Nicole McAllister, Gary Slater,
and Eliza Habegger. Photo: Shaun Hubbard.
Banding of an approximately 10-day-old Western
Bluebird nestling from Uhlir’s farm, San Juan
Island, WA. Photo: Kathleen Foley.
Western Bluebird aviary amid large oak trees
on Cady Mountain, San Juan Island, WA. Photo:
Bob Altman.
bird conservation • FALL 2008 5

Women in Conservation Initiative
Assists Colombian Communities
Colombian partner, Fundación ProAves, is expanding
its successful pilot program, Women in Conservation,
to help protect six of its bird reserves by promoting
business opportunities for women living in the nearby rural communities.
Many of the local communities present a challenge to reserve management
because they often cut forests to create food plots or for lumber to sell, and
hunt wildlife. Women in particular lack job opportunities, and often have to
resort to illegal poaching or wood-cutting to provide food for their families.
A successful pilot program, begun by ProAves in 2004, trained women from
four villages to use natural, non-threatened resources to create handicrafts
such as macramé, hand-painted objects, and embroidered bracelets and
bookmarks. ProAves sells the finished products at shops on their reserves,
and at events, exhibitions, and ornithological meetings worldwide. The money
goes directly to the community, generating both income and a positive attitude
towards the reserves among the local community. ProAves also employs local
men as forest guards and guides, field assistants, and to help with reforestation
activities, further benefiting the community, and designs environmental
education programs to involve local children in conservation efforts.
With ABC’s support, ProAves is now expanding the program to other
communities (see map), helping to alleviate pressure on the reserves’
protected resources. For more information, contact Sara Lara, Executive
Director, Fundación ProAves, www.proaves.org.
ProAves Reserves
Photos by Fundación ProAves, www.proaves.org
Laysan Albatross chick: Mary Hughes
As you will read in this issue of Bird Conservation
magazine, the threats to some of
the world’s most beautiful seabirds have
reached critical proportions, to the point
where 19 out of 22 species of albatross, as well
as several species of petrels and alcids, are now
threatened with extinction.
But solutions are possible, and ABC has already
had tremendous success in getting some
implemented, with dramatic results. There is
much more to be done to alleviate the threat
of gillnets, longlines, pollution, and introduced
species, and you can help.
Support ABC’s Seabird Program and help us
safeguard key seabird nesting islands, work
with regulators to reduce fisheries impacts, and
collaborate with partners to find new solutions to
existing threats.
Send in your special donation today using the
enclosed envelope, and we will put it to the best
use possible to ensure that albatrosses and the
other magnificent seabirds are protected for
future generations.
Thank you,
6 bird conservation • Fall 2008

The State of
OUR SEABIRDS
Laysan (left) and Black-footed (right) Albatrosses nest side-by-side on Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge: Mary Hughes.
In 2002, American Bird Conservancy produced the
report, Sudden Death on the High Seas: Longline Fishing,
a Global Catastrophe. The report detailed the tremendous
impact that longlining was having on albatross
and some other seabird populations, and outlined simple,
proven measures that could help reverse the situation. For
this magazine, we take a look at longline fishing today
to see how things have changed in the six years since our
report, and what progress has been made.
Seabirds and fishermen are both after the same thing –
fish – so wherever you find fishing boats on the open ocean,
albatrosses, petrels, and other “pelagic” seabirds (those that
spend most of their lives far out to sea) are never far away.
The birds congregate around a boat and wait patiently. At
some point, fish, squid, and other enticing fare will drop
from the stern into the water, and for a moment will float
tantalizingly on the surface. For the birds, it’s a bonanza
of free food that they can’t resist. What they don’t know,
however, is that each morsel is actually bait that is pierced
through with a large metal hook attached to a longline that
can be many miles in length. The easy meal quickly turns
into a death sentence for any bird unfortunate enough to
take the bait. The bird is impaled by the hook and dragged
under to drown. So why don’t the birds learn that the free
fish is a death trap Fishermen also dispose of fish waste
(offal) over the sides of their boats, and this food carries
no fatal consequences. For the birds, it’s a game of Russian
roulette.
Longline fishing has been responsible for disastrous declines
in populations of seabirds around the world over the last
30 years or so, and this continues today. Largely because
of longlining, 18 out of 22 species of albatrosses are now
considered threatened with extinction (Vulnerable, Endangered,
or Critically Endangered) under IUCN-World
Conservation Union criteria. This is up from 16* in 2002.
Fourteen are considered to be declining, two have unknown
trends, and five are “stable”, which leaves just one albatross
species in the world, the federally endangered Short-tailed
Albatross, that is considered to be increasing.
There have, however, been some improvements in the last
six years, most notably in the United States. In our 2002
report, ABC noted the high number of seabirds that were
being killed in the Alaskan and Hawaiian longline fisheries.
An estimated 20,000 seabirds were killed each year in
bird conservation • FALL 2008
7

Black-browed Albatross: ClipArt.com
Black-footed Albatross: ClipArt.com
Shy Albatross: Mike Double
Change in IUCN Red List Status of Albatross Species, 2002-2008
Species Status 2008 Status 2002 Trend 2008
Amsterdam Albatross CR CR Declining
Antipodean Albatross VU VU Unknown
Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross EN NT Declining
Black-browed Albatross EN VU Declining
Black-footed Albatross EN VU Declining
Buller’s Albatross VU VU Stable
Campbell Albatross VU VU Stable
Chatham Albatross CR CR Stable
Grey-headed Albatross VU VU Declining
Indian Yellow-nosed Albatross EN VU Declining
Laysan Albatross VU LC Declining
Light-mantled Albatross NT NT Declining
Northern Royal Albatross EN EN Declining
Salvin’s Albatross VU VU Stable
Short-tailed Albatross VU VU Increasing
Shy Albatross NT NT Unknown
Sooty Albatross EN VU Declining
Southern Royal Albatross VU VU Stable
Tristan Albatross EN EN Declining
Wandering Albatross VU VU Declining
Waved Albatross CR VU Declining
White-capped Albatross NT
* Declining
Red indicates a negative change in status from 2002 to 2008.
Wandering Albatross: Mark Jobling/wikipedia.com
*White-capped and Shy Albatrosses were formerly considered the same species but later split, so the total
number of albatross species has increased from 21 to 22.
Alaskan waters, including Black-footed, Laysan, and Shorttailed
Albatrosses. On average 1,051 albatrosses were caught
each year between 1993 and 2000 in that fishery. Similar
figures were reported in Hawaiian waters, which averaged
2,377 albatrosses killed each year in 1999 and 2000.
Today the picture looks very different. In 2006, only 88
albatrosses (15 Laysan and 73 Black-footed) were killed off
the Hawaiian Islands, and 291 (57 Laysan and 134 Blackfooted)
off Alaska. Between 2002 and 2006, the average
annual albatross toll decreased to 185 and 136 for Alaska
and Hawaii respectively—a reduction of 82% for Alaska
and 94% for Hawaii; this despite a near doubling of the
number of hooks set in Hawaii.
The reason behind these dramatic bycatch decreases is the
mitigation measures that ABC advocated for, and that it
promoted in its 2002 seabird report. The pressure from
ABC and other groups paid off, and in 2004, the federal
government required all U.S. longline vessels over 55 feet
long fishing in Alaskan waters to use paired streamer lines
that keep birds away from baited hooks. Smaller vessels
must use at least a single streamer line. In anticipation of
the regulations, many boats began voluntarily using the
streamers ahead of the mandatory deadline, and immediately,
their benefit was felt. The government complimented
these regulations with a streamer line giveaway program
that has so far provided more than 5,000 free lines. Cumulatively,
these lines alone have been credited with reducing
overall seabird bycatch in Alaska by nearly 70%.
In Hawaii, albatrosses received a reprieve when the swordfish
fishery was closed in 2000 due to excessive bycatch of
turtles. The fishery was reopened in 2004, but, along with
all other Hawaiian longline fisheries, now mandates strict
mitigation measures for the avoidance of seabird bycatch,
The reason behind these dramatic bycatch decreases is
the mitigation measures that ABC advocated for, and that
it promoted in its 2002 seabird report.
8 bird conservation • FALL 2008
Tori lines, set beside longlines, scare seabirds away from baited
hooks and prevent millions of albatross deaths. Photo: Liz Mitchell.

…tenuous as the future of all albatross species remains
today, the reduction in the international threat of
longlining over the last six years has certainly benefited
albatross species worldwide.
Laysan Albatross: Glen Tepke
that can include nighttime-only line setting, setting lines
off the side of the boat instead of the stern, use of devices
called line shooters that keep bait away from the surface
and out of reach of seabirds, and rules on how fish offal is
discharged.
Internationally, there have been advances in the last six
years too. Since 1990, the Commission on the Conservation
of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR–one
of many Regional Fisheries Management Organizations
that bring together fishing nations to set fishery policy)
has mandated strict avoidance measures in waters under its
jurisdiction, which includes the ranges of the Wandering,
Black-browed, and Grey-headed albatrosses, among others.
Vessels must set lines at night when many birds are less
active, must use a streamer line, and are prohibited from
discharging offal when lines are being set. These rules have
been so successful that in both 2005 and 2006, the Commission
reported no known albatross deaths in its waters.
CCAMLR has more power than other Fisheries Management
Organizations, because Antarctica is administered by
a treaty with specific regulations, but there has also been
progress in some of the others.
Estimated Albatross Bycatch for the
Hawaii Longline Fleet, 1999-2006
to pressure from large fishing fleets. Nearly half of the 22
albatross species have at least part of their ranges within
WCPFC waters, making this a significant development.
Despite these successes, there are other international fisheries
and Regional Fisheries Management Organizations
spanning vast areas of ocean that still do not mandate
comprehensive bycatch mitigation restrictions. Some do
not even collect data, so that we simply do not know the
extent of the bycatch problem. The United States continues
to import fish caught in these fisheries, thus indirectly contributing
to the problem. In addition, illegal, unreported,
and unregulated (IUU) fishing continues in many fisheries,
by so-called “pirate” vessels that fish without any form of
seabird mitigation measures, further exacerbating the problem
(see article on page 10 on Patagonian toothfish).
Albatrosses are long-lived birds with slow reproductive
rates, and so there has been insufficient time to see whether
the progress that has been made translates into tangible
population increases. As you will read elsewhere in this
magazine, there are also other threats to albatrosses that
have yet to be addressed. Nevertheless, tenuous as the
future of all albatross species remains today, the reduction
in the international threat of longlining over the last six
years has certainly benefited albatross species worldwide.
Their long-term prospects will continue to improve the
more broadly changes to international fishing practices are
implemented and enforced.
Black-footed Albatrosses ClipArt.com
Source: NMFS PIRO
In late 2006, the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries
Commission (WCPFC) , which was established in 2004,
set similar restrictions to limit seabird deaths, although
introduction of these rules will be phased in gradually due
Estimated Albatross Bycatch for the
Alaska Longline Fleet, 1993-2006
Laysan Albatross caught on a baited hook: NOAA.
bird conservation • FALL 2008
9

Chilean sea bass: wikipedia.com
Toothfish Revisited
Where restaurants are concerned, I am not usually a
difficult customer. A pleasant smile to a waitress
goes a long way, I have found; but there is nothing
to change my demeanor from sweet to sour quicker than
seeing Chilean sea bass on a menu. More properly called
Patagonian toothfish, this prehistoric-looking species became
a restaurant favorite because of its delicate flavor and
highly forgiving oily flesh that stays tender even after being
frozen, overcooked, and left sitting under a warming lamp
for 15 minutes. Although relatively inexpensive to buy, the
price to be paid for eating this fish must be calculated in
more than just dollars and cents.
Back Then
What restaurant patrons did not know back in the 80s and
90s, when the fish was at its most popular, is that overfishing
of toothfish had caused severe population declines,
to the extent that many stocks had reached the point of
collapse. Strict limits were placed on the fishing of toothfish
in Antarctic waters under the Convention for the Conservation
of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR),
but fish were still caught in large numbers outside the reach
of this international agreement. More importantly, pirate
vessels simply ignored the restrictions and caught toothfish
illegally. They funneled them into the market place through
countries where restrictions were lax, and so consumers
could not distinguish the legally-caught from the illegal.
These pirate vessels did more than damage toothfish stocks.
Operating outside the law, they took no seabird avoidance
precautions, and so caught thousands of seabirds on their
longline hooks—by some estimates, 100,000 per year. In
1999, following reports that some 80% of toothfish sold in
the United States was being caught illegally, (and in anticipation
of a government ban that never materialized) Whole
Foods, a supermarket chain that markets to the environmentally
conscious, stopped selling Chilean sea bass. Many
other restaurants and retailers followed suit with the start of
the “Take a Pass on Chilean Sea Bass” campaign in 2001.
Led by the National Environmental Trust (now the Pew
Environment Group), the campaign called for a U.S. consumer
boycott of Chilean sea bass. Hundreds of top chefs
and retailers across the nation signed on to the campaign to
pledge that their restaurants and stores would not sell the
fish. Demand soon decreased, and, much to the relief of my
friends, I was able to put on hold my personal crusade to
take restaurant managers and chefs to task. By 2003, retail
giant Wal-Mart had agreed to stop selling toothfish, and
things were looking up.
Today
In 2006, the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) surprised
conservationists when they assessed the toothfish fishery
off South Georgia Island in Antarctica as sustainable and
not a threat to seabirds. Whole Foods reversed its boycott
and began to sell MSC-certified sea bass. Soon after, Wal-
Mart followed suit. Conservationists opposed the decision
because it stimulates demand and could undo much of the
good that has been accomplished by the boycott.
Research has clearly demonstrated that regulations imposed
by CCAMLR to protect seabirds within its jurisdictional
waters have been an astounding success. In 2007, it was
reported that no albatrosses had been killed in legal fisheries
in the previous two years, a dramatic contrast to bycatch
levels prior to the introduction of mitigation measures. Pirate
fishing is down drastically in the enforcement zone too.
Countries such as Australia have sent a clear message of zero
tolerance, chasing pirate vessels across thousands of miles of
open ocean on more than one occasion.
Outside of CCAMLR waters, however, pirate vessels still
fish with impunity. The Pew Environment Group is now
pursuing a binding treaty under the UN Food and Agriculture
Organization that would empower port authorities to
take action against illegal vessels, and require better reporting
of landings to help identify pirates. For now, however,
Chilean sea bass sold here not bearing the MSC seal of
approval should be avoided. With demand beginning to
creep back up, pirate vessels will have greater impetus to
find ways of bringing their catch to market, and once again,
when I go out to dinner, I may find myself demanding to
talk to the manager.
Gavin Shire
Director of Communications
American Bird Conservancy
10
bird conservation • FALL 2008
stock.xchng

Gillnets
Nets: stock.xchng
onglines receive the lion’s share of attention when it
comes to seabird bycatch—largely because globally
they pose the greatest threat to some of the most
endangered seabirds, including albatrosses and petrels.
But in U.S. waters, gillnet fisheries are now more of a
threat to birds, especially since the implementation of federally
mandated protection measures that have dramatically
reduced longline bycatch in most U.S. fleets (see page 7).
Gillnets are vertical mesh curtains, suspended in the water
using a combination of weights at the bottom and floats at
the top. They can be made to ‘hang’ at any depth, which,
in combination with their mesh size, means they can be
used to target a specific fish species. For example, nets for
cod and flatfish are weighted to touch the sea floor, whereas
nets for salmon, squid, or small pelagic fish hang down
from the ocean surface. Gillnets work when fish attempt to
swim through the curtain. Larger fish cannot pass through
the holes and must go around. Smaller fish can slip right
through the mesh. The target species try to swim through
the holes but cannot fit all the way through. They become
entangled when they attempt to back out, snagging their
gills on the mesh.
Although the fishermen target specific fish, non-target
fish, marine mammals, turtles, and diving birds may also
become entrapped. Birds are unable to see the fine nylon
mesh and swim straight into it. Although we might not
think of birds as swimmers, many alcids and diving ducks
can reach high speeds under water. Stocky little marine
birds are amazingly agile swimmers. Thick-billed Murres
can plunge to depths of over 400 feet in pursuit of fish. As
they speed through the water intent on their prey, hard-tosee
gillnets can be fatal. Nets are sometimes anchored just
beyond the surf zone for 24 hours a day, which means that
during spring migration, nets are deployed as new birds are
moving into the richest feeding areas. The problem is especially
acute at dawn and dusk, when birds are most actively
feeding, and when the nets are hardest for the birds to see.
Diving ducks, grebes, and loons are similarly vulnerable on
the East Coast of the United States and Canada. The highest
reports of accidental catch are of scaup, but mortality
includes Ruddy Ducks, goldeneyes, mergansers, Canvasbacks,
scoters, and Long-tailed Ducks, as well as Common
and Red-throated Loons, and, further north, shearwaters,
puffins, and gannets. One fisherman in North Carolina
reported catching up to 300 scaup in a single night, and another
said that he removed his nets after he began to catch
up to a hundred scaup per day for two or three days in a
row. Multiply this by the total number of fishermen, and it
is clear that the threat is potentially large.
The threat posed by gillnets is even more marked outside
of the United States. Large-scale gillnets or ocean driftnets
were used extensively on the high seas in the 1980s to target
tuna. Because of their devastating effect on whales and dolphins,
the United Nations banned their use in international
waters in 1993. Nevertheless, there are still significant gillnet
fisheries in national waters throughout the world.
In Peru, the endangered Humboldt Penguin is particularly
vulnerable to gillnets. Humboldt Penguins have been
clocked swimming at 25 miles per hour. At such speeds,
avoiding nets is virtually impossible. In the 1990s, biologists
at the fishing port of San Juan, near a large penguin
colony, observed approximately one thousand penguins
caught in nets over a six-year period.
“Ghost-fishing” is another hazard of gillnets. Gear that
is lost during storms or for other reasons can continue to
trap birds and other animals for years. Over time, the nets
become sufficiently dirty to be visible to even fast-moving
birds, but they continue to kill fish and litter the oceans.
Are there solutions
Technical solutions to bird bycatch in gillnet fisheries are
not easy to come by because they must also not reduce the
catch of the target fish. Ed Melvin and his research team at
Washington Sea Grant studied bycatch
of Common Murres and
Rhinoceros Auklets, and found
that solutions must be multifaceted.
“Pingers”, which are devices
that attach to the nets and make a
noise when animals approach, worked
relatively well, but were too expensive
to maintain. Changing the color of
the upper panel of the net also reduced
bird bycatch significantly, but by far the
best overall mitigation was achieved when
these gear modifications were combined
with restrictions on fishing in the early
morning, and limits on the number of days
that the nets were active.
Humboldt Penguin:
wikipedia.com
bird conservation • FALL 2008
11

Dead Diving Birds Found in Areas
With Nets and Without Nets
bycatch in the Western Aleutian Islands in the early 1980s
and along the Mid-Atlantic coast in the late 1990s: “We no
longer need exhaustive studies to measure the magnitude
of bird bycatch in gillnets. If nets and diving birds are in
the same waters at the same time and we do not change the
nets, the methods, or the fishing season, birds will continue
to die.”
Greater Scaup: Tom Grey
Source: Doug Forsell, FWS
Hence, thus far, more gillnet seabird bycatch has been
avoided by policy solutions than technical solutions. In
California, conservationists started paying attention to gillnets
when they began to hear reports of birds washing up
on beaches. From 1981 to 1986, Common Murre populations
declined from 210,000 to fewer than half that (based
on monitoring at Monterey Bay and in the Gulf of the Farallones).
In 1984, one scientist estimated that up to 10,000
birds were being killed each summer month. Sea otters were
also caught in the nets, which rallied a lot of public support
for reforms that also benefited birds. The problem was
addressed in the California legislature, thanks to the tireless
efforts of local activists led by PRBO Conservation Science.
Through a sequence of area closures, depth restrictions, and
season-setting, the bycatch problem was solved by the late
1980s, and the murre population rebounded.
Similarly, in Florida, conservationists achieved a policy
solution to their bycatch problems, which included heavy
take of turtles. A popular amendment to Florida’s constitution
in 1994 limited marine net fishing. Gillnets were
prohibited in all state waters, and a size limit was placed on
other types of nets.
For much of the East Coast, however, the problem requires
more work. Though we occasionally hear reports of largescale
bird mortality, most gillnet bycatch goes unreported.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) provides observers for some gillnetting operations,
but their objective is primarily to detect mammal bycatch,
and so is not optimal for birds. Finally, the fisheries are
quite variable in location, target, and gear, making both observation
and regulation more difficult. But there is support
for science-based change.
According to Doug Forsell, a seabird biologist with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who first studied gillnet
Strange Bedfellows
As migratory seabirds move from north to south in the
winter, many stop to feed in North Carolina’s inshore
waters. These same waters are home to winter gillnet fisheries
for shad, southern flounder, sea trout, monkfish, and
various other species. The commercial and recreational
gillnet fisheries in North Carolina are subject to some
regulations restricting fishing areas, seasons, and gear
specifications, primarily to protect sea turtles, but generally,
North Carolina lags behind its Atlantic seaboard neighbors
in mandating comprehensive restrictions. For example,
unattended gillnets are illegal in South Carolina, whereas in
North Carolina, attendance at gillnets is only mandatory in
certain locations and for certain sizes of mesh. As a result,
gillnets are often left unattended for long periods of time,
increasing the probability of both accidentally catching
birds, and the likelihood that entangled birds will drown.
Efforts to better monitor these deaths are hampered by gaps
in the commercial gillnet observer program, which lacks
long-term sustainable funding.
The Coastal Conservation Association and Audubon North
Carolina recently collaborated in a survey of their members,
organized by ABC and students from Duke University, on
the issue of bycatch from gillnets. The Coastal Conservation
Association is comprised primarily of recreational fishermen,
and so has historically been on the opposite side from
Audubon on many issues, such as beach use. However, the
survey showed overwhelming support from both groups for
stricter regulation in North Carolina’s gillnet fishery. Such
synergy offers hope that real change can be brought about
in the near future.
In coming years, American Bird Conservancy, NOAA, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the North Western
Atlantic Birds at Sea Conservation Cooperative will be
working together to pinpoint problematic areas along the
Eastern Seaboard, and develop conservation solutions that
will help reduce the threat. ABC will continue to work
with partners in Latin America to improve gillnet fisheries
throughout the Americas.
Thanks to Mallory Dimmitt, a graduate student in the Environmental
Management program at Duke University, for her
help in preparing this article.
12
bird conservation • FALL 2008

Laysan Albatrosses on Guadalupe Island, Mexico, where
invasive mammals have led to the probable extinction of
the Guadalupe Storm-Petrel and several other species.
Photo: Bill Henry.
No Guarantee of Safe Haven Islands
This time of year, many of us are thinking of islands for our vacations, where we can relax on deserted
beaches, surrounded by clear, sparkling waters. Seabirds often select islands for their breeding grounds
for many of the same reasons—good beach access and a low probability of disturbance. Because the only
denizens of remote oceanic islands are those able to fly or swim there, island communities tend to be relatively
simple, with less competition for resources from other species, and often free of mammalian predators.
Islands are frequently host to unique and delicate biological
communities. Millions of years of isolation have led to the
emergence of thousands of new species found nowhere else:
globally, islands represent only 3% of the earth’s land mass,
but over 15% of its biodiversity. Unfortunately, these oases
in the ocean are particularly vulnerable to disruption of
their fragile ecological balance. As part of their island adaptations,
many species have lost basic defensive skills such
as the fear of predators, and in the case of some birds such
as rails in the Pacific, the ability to fly. Island animals are
therefore disproportionately imperiled compared to their
mainland kin, and so it is not surprising that most of the
world’s extinctions have occurred on islands, and nearly half
of the world’s endangered species reside there. Introduced
species are the main factor behind these troubling statistics.
Species Introductions
Humans have learned that introducing species to islands
can have disastrous consequences, and so these days, most
island introductions are accidental. By far the most common
introduced species is the Norway rat, which arrives as
a stowaway on ships. More than 80% of the world’s islands
now have rats, which eat both eggs and helpless chicks.
Over 90% of bird extinctions in the past three centuries
were island birds, many of them made vulnerable or driven
extinct by introduced predators. In the past, however, many
introductions were intentional. For example, trappers and
fur traders introduced mink to the Aleutian Islands and
elsewhere so they could return later to an established but
essentially captive population to collect pelts. Elsewhere,
bird conservation • FALL 2008
13

Introduced sheep have severely impacted vegetation on Socorro Island. such as this endemic tree, Bumelia socorrensis. The
tree was a favorite of the nearly extinct Socorro Dove, which now exists only in captivity. Photo: Island Conservation.
A lone biologist on Rat Island. Once full of breeding seabirds, today Rat Island is able to support bird nesting at only
the most minimal level due to the invasive Norway rat. Photo: FWS.
traveling merchants left populations of pigs or goats to provide
meat on future voyages. Mongooses were introduced
to Jamaica and Hawaii to control the introduced rats, only
to become bird predators themselves. Some introduced
animals have now been on islands for a very long time. For
instance in Hawaii, the pigs that Europeans first brought
over have formed feral herds, and hunts for them are now
considered “traditional” because the grandparents and great
grandparents of today’s residents hunted those same herds.
Plant introductions are just as common, but have attracted
less attention. Seeds or insects in produce or cargo brought
to islands can sometimes establish populations, but plants
are more likely to be intentionally brought to islands as ornamentals
in gardens, or to serve as ground cover or erosion
control. However they get there, plants that are new to an
island compete with the native plants. Some invasives can
take over an island entirely, once established.
In general, the probability that an introduced species will
establish a wild population are slim—imagine a flock of parrots
trying to survive in Antarctica—but the sheer numbers
of introduction events over history have meant that there are
many more islands with introduced species than without.
Effects on Seabirds
Introduced species of plants and animals are one of the
foremost threats to seabirds as a group. Seabirds tend to
nest in dense colonies and lay large, tempting eggs, which
produce large, tempting chicks that take months to mature.
Introduced predators, capable of living on eggs or young,
can thrive and increase their populations rapidly. On
Gough Island, which lies almost in the center of the southern
Atlantic, the endangered Tristan Albatross loses 60% of
its young every year to mice (which have evolved to twice
their original size on the island!). Even a few individual
predators can wreak havoc on island bird populations.
Perhaps the most famous case is that of the Stephens Island
Wren, which was driven to extinction by cats on this tiny
island off the coast of New Zealand.
The critically endangered Townsend’s Shearwater is endemic
to the Revillagigedo Archipelago off western Mexico. On
one of its breeding islands, Clarion, the entire shearwater
colony was destroyed because introduced pigs dug up and
ate eggs, nestlings, and adults. At the only remaining colony
on Socorro Island, feral cats are rapidly eating away at the
remaining population of Townsend’s Shearwaters, and
introduced sheep are destroying its nesting habitat.
An auklet egg destroyed by rats on Kiska Island in Alaska. Invasive Norway
rats have pushed many species to the brink of extinction. Photo: FWS.
Townsend’s Shearwater chick on Socorro:
Juan Martinez/Island Endemics.
14
bird conservation • FALL 2008

Laysan Albatross chick, almost lost amidst Verbesina plants that have sprung up since the chick hatched.
Christy Finlaysan.
A biologist trekking through Adak Island in the Aleutians. Photo: Island Conservation
On Midway Atoll, golden crown-beard (Verbesina) is growing
rampantly and choking out the native vegetation. This
relative of the daisy grows so rapidly that adult Laysan
Albatrosses are sometimes unable to reach their chicks
that have become isolated behind a wall of vegetation. The
chicks die of starvation or dehydration.
Solutions
There are literally hundreds of examples of islands with
such problems. However, there are also opportunities for
conservationists to reverse the situation. For example,
Grupo de Ecología y Conservación de Islas A.C. and Island
Conservation are currently planning to remove first the
introduced sheep then the feral cats from Socorro. The 13
species of seabirds that may once have nested on Rat Island,
at the tip of the Aleutian Islands, will soon have the opportunity
to nest again thanks to a rat eradication project
by The Nature Conservancy, the Alaska Maritime National
Wildlife Refuge, and Island Conservation. But the work is
easier said than done.
Xantus’s Murrelets have benefited from the removal of black rats from Anacapa Island, with
breeding success increasing by 155% as of July 2007. Photo: National Park Service.
There have been efforts to remove invasive alien animals
from islands for over 200 years, but large scale eradications
and island restorations are relatively new to conservationists.
Rats have now been successfully eliminated from more
than 200 islands, and feral cats from at least 48. The results
can be quick and dramatic. Xantus’s Murrelets on Anacapa
Island off the coast of California made an astounding 80%
leap in nesting success within one year of removing rats.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) operates an
ambitious campaign to restore the biological integrity of
the Aleutian Islands off Alaska. One of the most striking
examples of their success was that of the Aleutian Cackling
Goose, which was on the brink of extinction until the mid
1990s, when FWS stepped up control of the foxes that had
been introduced to its nesting grounds more than 70 years
before. The goose population rebounded quickly from a
low of 300 birds to 30,000, and in 2001, it was removed
from the endangered species list.
Even with sophisticated techniques available to biologists
today, the effort required to clear an island is considerable.
For example, in rat eradications, thousands of pounds of
poison must be aerially distributed to cover an entire island
in a manner that will not put the birds themselves at risk.
The process requires painstaking attention to detail before,
during, and after the operation, and the price of failure is
high. A single island eradication can cost upwards of $2
million to complete, yet leaving even a few rats alive will
render the entire exercise useless in no time at all. And rats
are no easy opponent! Just ask James Russell.
As a graduate student, Russell radio collared a single rat, to
try to learn more about its behavior and movements. Upon
release, the rat promptly took off and the race was on. After
a few nights of tracking the rat’s movements, Russell was
ready to capture it and end the study, but the rat had other
ideas, and led researchers on a fantastic chase. The rat eluded
capture for two months of dawn-to-dusk radio tracking,
until it finally disappeared from the island, never having
been sighted. Russell declared it missing presumed dead
until visitors from a nearby island reported a radio-tagged
rat there. The passage was hard to imagine, almost comical.
For mysterious reasons of its own, the rat had struck out
from the island swimming across over 400 yards of open
ocean. Again, Russell was on its tail, this time with traps
and rat-sniffing dogs to carry on the hunt. Still, it was three
bird conservation • FALL 2008 15

months before the rat was caught. This underscores the difficulties
faced by conservationists who must eliminate every
last island invader to claim success.
The slow, technically difficult, and rigorous process of
island eradication is an exciting frontier in avian conservation.
Yet to restore these complex biological systems, even
successful eradication isn’t the end of the story.
Island Recovery: Birds as
Architects of Island Habitats
Now that some of the techniques for ridding the island
of invasives are in place, scientists are beginning to take a
more careful look at what happens after eradication. Some
of these islands were changed over a hundred years ago as
a result of introduced species, and what was once a seabird
paradise might now be altered beyond recognition. This is
in part because the birds themselves have such a profound
effect on the landscape.
Biologist Christa Mulder was face down, wriggling across a
nesting colony on Stephens Island, New Zealand, when she
had a small revelation. She had avoided walking so that she
wouldn’t crush the delicate sand burrows beneath the surface
of the soil, where Fairy Prions were nesting. Looking
around the colony, it struck her how radically the seabirds
had altered that part of the island. In these areas with high
densities of nesting burrows, the landscape was completely
different from elsewhere. The soil was loose and easily
blown by the wind, which made the local trees prone to
losing their grip and falling. The birds also actively grabbed
vegetation, pulling it down into their burrows, leaving
very little on the surface. Such changes to the plants have
Christa Mulder conducting research on Fairy Prions
on Middle Island: M. Durrett.
a profound effect on the rest of the environment, from the
invertebrates that eat the vegetation to the land birds and
lizards that feed on those invertebrates, and so on throughout
the island ecosystem.
In other colonies, seabirds have different effects on the ecology.
On many islands, seabirds play an important role in
natural soil fertilization, because their waste provides most
of the nutrient s in the system. Christa began to wonder if
all of these complicated interactions might have effects on
island eradication projects. What if simply removing the
introduced species didn’t solve the problem because of other
changes to the soil, vegetation, and other animal populations
on the island Christa and her colleague formed
Seabird Islands and Introduced Predators (SEAPRE), a
network of seabird island ecologists and eradication and
restoration scientists and managers, to look at these issues.
Their upcoming book summarizes what scientists know
about impacts of seabirds and their predators on other
animals and plants, and the group ultimately intends to
provide guidelines for managers and conservationists on
what to do after eradications.
Biologists track radio-tagged birds on Adak Island in preparation for the
Rat Island restoration project. Photo: Steve Ebbert/FWS.
16
bird conservation • FALL 2008

Compensatory Mitigation
Fairy Prion: Mike Danzenbaker
Horned Puffin: FWS
Future Eradications
Though eradications are complicated and can be initially
expensive, many practitioners feel that their time has come.
Biologists are enthusiastic about restoration efforts with the
potential for such incredible results. Plans are in place for
dozens of island eradications, including Rat Island in the
Aleutians that is home to nesting Fork-tailed Storm Petrels,
Whiskered Auklets, and Tufted and Horned Puffins. One
of the key elements in eradicating introduced species is
funding. That is why ABC is so committed to the passage
of the bipartisan Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance,
and Immediate Response Act, or REPAIR Act (H.R. 767),
which was recently passed in the House of Representatives
and now awaits action by the Senate. If signed into law, the
Act will direct federal resources to states to help eradicate
invasive species that are devastating many National Wildlife
Refuges, including several seabird nesting islands. One of
the most important components of the legislation is that it
offers the capability for quick response, which is essential
if new problems are to be tackled before they become fullblown
disasters. Island restoration has come a long way,
and much of the development
phase is over. Now that
we recognize the gravity
of the problem and have
appropriate technology, it’s
time to get busy and clean
up our islands. With the commitment
of conservation organizations
and the public, the results could be
inspirational.
Arecent proposal by Dr. Chris Wilcox of Australia’s National
Science Agency has touched off a flurry of controversy
among seabird conservationists. In an article in the August
edition of Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, Wilcox and
his coauthor Josh Donlan proposed a scheme of “compensatory
mitigation” for seabirds that interact with fisheries. They examined
the Flesh-footed Shearwaters accidentally killed in Australia’s
eastern tuna and billfish fishery. According to their calculations,
charging fishermen for the birds they kill and using that money
to remove predators from nesting islands is more effective than
shutting down a fishery, both in terms of cost to the industry, and
in terms of the population growth for the birds. Some have eagerly
embraced the idea, especially where bycatch mitigation is difficult.
Eradications, though expensive, offer a more straightforward approach
to bird conservation.
The article has inspired heated debate. Critics worry that because
seabirds are long-lived and slow to reproduce, adult mortality will
always be the most important threat. After all, few of the chicks
that would be saved by island eradications would actually survive
to breed anyway. Others maintain that Wilcox and Donlan’s
analysis is overly simplistic because it suggests closing fisheries
(which rarely happens outside of the United States) rather than the
much cheaper option of mandating bycatch avoidance measures.
They fear the scheme would effectively give fishermen a license
to kill, that it would impede progress on other solutions which
benefit more than one species, and that we don’t have the data
to correctly calculate the appropriate tradeoffs. Several prominent
seabird conservationists responded to Wilcox’s proposal, emphasizing
these drawbacks, and disputing the calculations, which they
had been unable to reproduce. Wilcox and Donlan subsequently
clarified their position, saying that compensatory mitigation was
not the solution to fisheries bycatch, but that it should be one tool
among many.
Compensatory mitigation schemes for seabird bycatch raise a
host of questions. When are such schemes appropriate Many
fishing nations with effective laws and regulations have reduced
their seabird bycatch by a considerable margin (see article on
page 7). Would compensatory mitigation then assess fees on top
of the current regulations On the other hand, in countries without
enforced regulations and where seabird avoidance gear is not
widely used, neither the bycatch information nor the regulation is
reliable enough to employ such schemes. In any case, the issue is
probably moot in the United States. Since most
seabird bycatch is illegal, some federal
managers think there is no
institutional mechanism by
which to “allow” any level
of bycatch under the
current laws.
Flesh-footed Shearwater: Mike Double
Crested Auklet: FWS.
bird conservation • FALL 2008
17

Your Donations at Work
Waved Albatrosses: Eleanor Briccetti
Saving the Waved Albatross
Odd Albatross Out
Most albatrosses are easily divided into those of the northern
Pacific and those of the southern oceans. They tend to
be found at high latitudes because cold ocean waters are
more productive and provide more suitable habitat. The
Waved Albatross in an exception. It is the only albatross
species found in Equatorial regions, breeding in the Galapagos
Archipelago and spending most of its life – in albatross
terms – close by. The furthest extent of its range is only
1,500 miles or so, which is a short flap and glide compared
to the really far-ranging species such as the Wandering
Albatross, which can travel over 6,000 miles in a single trip.
With the exception of a few vagrants on other islands in the
chain, and one tiny population on Isla de la Plata near the
Ecuadorian mainland, Waved Albatrosses breed exclusively
on Española Island.
Genetically, the Waved Albatross is much closer to its
northern Pacific brethren than those to the south. It shares
a genus (Phoebastria) with the albatrosses most familiar to
North Americans, our own Black-footed and Laysan Albatrosses,
but it has no range overlap with other albatrosses of
the northern Pacific.
Waved Albatrosses can live for 40 years or more, have low
productivity, and don’t breed until they are five or six. This
means they are especially sensitive to adult mortality, which
has climbed steadily in recent years. As a result, their population,
which was stable in the 1960s, has since declined
sharply, with a precipitous drop between 1994 and 2002 at
study sites. The species is considered Critically Endangered
under IUCN-World Conservation Union Criteria, though
its overall population status remains largely unknown.
Breeding Issues
Waved Albatrosses once shared Española Island with
thousands of Galapagos tortoises, but these gentle giants
were extirpated during the 18th and 19th centuries by
sailors, who took them aboard their ships to eat during the
course of their long journeys. Tortoises have a profound
effect on the environment: they serve as living bulldozers,
trampling vegetation and keeping the undergrowth open.
This is good for the albatrosses, which, despite their
grace on the wing, are clumsy and awkward on land –
particularly when young and learning to fly – and can
become entrapped in overgrown vegetation. When the
tortoises were nearly all gone, goats were introduced to the
island by the sailors as a replacement source of meat. The
goats probably hastened the demise of the last remaining
tortoises from Española, competing with them for food,
but they did at least continue to keep the vegetation at bay.
However, goats were removed from the island in the mid
1970s, and since then, the vegetation has grown unchecked.
18
bird conservation • FALL 2008

Researchers have reported finding several bird carcasses
entangled in the dense undergrowth.
The Galapagos National Park has collaborated with the
Charles Darwin Research Station, and together they have
made heroic efforts to protect the tortoises throughout the
archipelago, and re-establish them in places from which
they have been extirpated. Thanks to their work, the Española
population has now started to recover. Some 2,000
young tortoises have been released, and likely half of these
have survived and begun reproducing. Some biologists
think that the tortoise population is growing too slowly,
and it is taking too long for the vegetation to revert back to
the conditions under which the albatross evolved. Others
question whether the vegetation overgrowth ever had any
substantial effect on the overall albatross population at all.
The birds may simply have compensated by increasing their
nesting density on the beaches, which are free of vegetation;
and it is possible that birds killed by dense plant growth
may have been weak and would have perished anyway. The
debate as to whether further vegetation management is
required has been heated, but there is little evidence to support
either position, mainly because, for decades, seabird
biologists have not ventured into the central colony that is
most affected by the vegetation.
This summer, ABC began working with the Galapagos
National Park and the Charles Darwin Foundation to
find out more about the birds of the central colony, and
to determine whether vegetation control would benefit
them. Among the biologists working on this project is
James Gibbs. He and his research associate, Hara Woltz,
made their way to the central colony in May to mark out
transects for future clearing and study.
Española is a small island, only a few kilometers in any
direction, so even though the vegetation was dense, Gibbs
assumed a trip to the central colony would be straightforward.
He soon found the contrary. Since the choking
vegetation has made the old trails impassable, reaching the
central colony was a major challenge, made greater by extreme
heat. “It is remarkable that it can be that difficult to
go just a few miles from the easily accessible beaches to the
center of the island,” said Gibbs. “If it wasn’t so critically
important, and the birds weren’t so spectacular to watch, we
would have given up several times.”
distances by foot to reach areas with sufficient clearing to
get airborne. These “airstrips” were scarce, and few birds
were found nesting farther than 100 yards from them. That
led the researchers to surmise that access to open areas may
indeed be a critical factor in nesting. In addition, they saw
albatrosses (albeit from afar) in areas that had not been
previously documented. Staff of the Galapagos National
Park are currently discussing a plan to return to the central
colony after the birds have left the island for the season, to
begin removing vegetation from test plots, with a third trip
next year to see how this affects breeding densities in the
colony.
Poor Man’s Galapagos
Also in Ecuador, ABC, in-country partner Equilibrio Azul,
and Island Conservation are planning to collaborate on
an upcoming project on Isla de la Plata, an island close to
the Ecuadorian mainland. La Plata is sometimes called the
poor man’s Galapagos because it houses similarly unafraid
animals that are easy to observe, but is accessible by a short
boat trip from the mainland.
A basic tenant of conservation is that multiple colonies
or populations are an extremely important buffer against
extinction. Efforts to create new populations or increase
the viability of existing additional colonies are always high
priorities for highly threatened species. Given that Isla de la
Plata already supports a few breeding birds and the island is
located closer to the main foraging grounds than the Galapagos,
efforts to improve conditions there are important.
Island Conservation plans to remove all introduced predators
from la Plata that are known to kill young and adult
birds, helping restore the native environment, and giving
the albatrosses a better chance at successfully reproducing.
Their short journey required GPS navigation, and they
had to make grueling trips, each lasting several hours, to
and from caches of water, just to make sure they had
adequate supplies for their work. But the payoff
was worthwhile. They saw 274 breeding
adults, and discovered that the vegetation
did seem to have a negative effect on the
birds. The adults were commuting long
Waved Albatross: Hara Woltz
bird conservation • FALL 2008
19

All at Sea
Despite the logistical challenges, work on the breeding sites
is straightforward compared with confronting threats at sea,
which are undoubtedly the most significant factors affecting
these birds. Interactions with fishermen, both accidental
and intentional, are a major source of adult mortality,
which has a profound effect on the population’s health. In
Peru, 107 Waved Albatross leg bands have been recovered
from fishermen. Startlingly, most of them probably came
from birds that were taken for food. Observers from conservation
organizations and the government who monitor the
fishing fleets have not recorded much accidental bycatch,
but they are rarely present on any of the vast number of
small boats operating out of southern Ecuador and northern
Peru. In order to pinpoint the factors that result in
dead birds, conservationists have been asking the fishermen
themselves for help. In interviews and surveys, the fishermen
reported regular interaction with Waved Albatrosses.
The first survey of fishermen in Peru was over a decade ago,
and has guided a series of recent conservation activities by
ABC and its partners.
Joanna Alfaro, executive director of the Peruvian conservation
group ProDelphinus, began to hear about the Waved
Albatross as she worked with fishermen in the conservation
of turtles, dolphins, and sharks. As more and more fishermen
began providing her with leg bands that had been
collected from Waved Albatrosses, she quickly realized that
she needed to include birds as well. ProDelphinus has long
understood the influence fishermen can have over their
peers, and has identified interested captains to champion
the cause in talks and workshops. With ABC, they also
adapted the successful idea of comic books, used to good
effect in turtle conservation in Central America, to the local
situation, and produced a funny and informative outreach
tool for the fishermen. By including a lunar calendar on the
back, they ensured that the fishermen would want to carry
it with them on the boats.
In Ecuador, ABC collaborated earlier this year with Equilibrio
Azul to gather the first interview data from fishermen
in the southern part of the country. Approximately one third
of the fishermen interviewed said that they had accidentally
caught an albatross while fishing. This was a surprise,
because most of the birds were thought to bypass southern
Ecuador on their way to richer feeding grounds to the south.
With this new information, ABC is now able to identify the
fisheries that have the most interactions, and when they occur,
and to develop mitigation measures that will help lessen
the bycatch. As always, education is a critical component.
Once fishermen are made aware of the problem and have
agreed to help remedy it, their boats are so small that it is
often quite simple for them to avoid killing the birds just by
scaring them away by hand from on deck.
Waved Albatross on nest:
Hara Woltz
Luckily, the Waved Albatross’s situation has attracted a great
deal of attention in recent years. Since the first startling
reports of population declines, Galapagos National Park,
the governments of Peru and Ecuador, scientists operating
on the islands, and international conservation organizations
have been working together to determine priority actions
for the birds. In particular, the Agreement on the Conservation
of Albatrosses and Petrels (ACAP) has established the
conservation of the Waved Albatross as a high priority.
This international agreement (see Bird’s Eye View by Carl
Safina on page 2) is an excellent vehicle for coordinated
planning, and has brought all the stakeholders together for
workshops in both Peru and Ecuador. The fishermen, park
staff, and other conservationists have written a conservation
plan that will guide policy and priorities for the species for
years to come. ABC has provided a vital link in the process,
responding quickly to the conservation needs expressed by
the governments and others, and making sure that the planning
process quickly results in concrete actions.
Work on ACAP, local education initiatives, and island
restoration efforts demonstrate what can be achieved in
the conservation of this unique species. Thanks to generous
support from the Disney Worldwide Conservation
Fund, Lynn White, Martin Foundation, Mars Foundation,
Cheeseman Ecology Safaris, Anne Symchych, and others,
and with ABC’s continued involvement, the prospects of
the Waved Albatross may now be looking brighter.
Jessica Hardesty
Seabird Program Director
American Bird Conservancy
20
bird conservation • FALL 2008

Black-footed Albatross: George Wallace
Marine Contaminants
In its mission to conserve native wild birds and their habitats, ABC confronts a variety of threats to birds on
land and sea. Many of the projects benefitting seabirds are those that work to reduce their mortality caused
by fishery bycatch (see article page 11) and to increase their nesting success on islands (see article page 13).
However, seabirds face many other threats, each of which adds to the cumulative toll and contributes towards
declining populations. Marine contaminants are a less visible threat, yet nevertheless they form a significant
factor in the overall equation, requiring a different conservation tool box. For many of the marine contaminant
threats, seabirds are only one of many affected groups, and they often foreshadow impacts to humans.
Plastics
In the center of the Pacific Ocean,
about as far away from human
civilization as you can get, there is a
swirling mass of plastic roughly the
size of Texas. The North Pacific Gyre,
as it is officially called, sounds like
something out of a science fiction
film. It is a slow moving current circling
a remote, island-free area. The
prevailing ocean currents flow into
the gyre, bringing in floating material
that then becomes trapped there.
There are gyres in other oceans, but
this is by far the largest. The plastics
that wash down storm drains, get
tossed overboard on ships, or left on
beaches have accumulated, creating a
massive loose agglomeration of floating plastic that is sometimes
referred to as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, or the
Pacific Trash Vortex. Today, it has been estimated that there
Body of albatross killed by eating plastic: Mary Hughes.
stock.xchng
Plastic debris in
the ocean can be
remarkably hardy.
A single plastic bag
may take 500 years
to degrade, and solid
plastics are virtually
indestructible.
is about 100 million tons of floating
plastic in the gyre—six times as much
as there is plankton.
Plastic debris in the ocean can be
remarkably hardy. A single plastic bag
may take 500 years to degrade, and
solid plastics are virtually indestructible.
Even plastic bags do not truly
biodegrade, instead breaking down
over time into microscopic pieces.
Once on the open ocean, the bits of
plastic that don’t get concentrated into
gyres can travel tens of thousands of
miles. In one famous case, a flotilla
of about 30,000 rubber ducks spilled
from a cargo ship in the Pacific in
1992, and struck out on an epic ocean voyage. Many made
a slow, three-year circle of the Pacific Basin before escaping
to the Arctic seas. Their hardiness testifies to the persistence
of garbage in the world’s oceans. There is now a $100
reward being offered by the duck manufacturer, The First
Years Inc., for returned ducks from the northern Atlantic,
which have been floating around for the last fifteen years.
On your next trip to the beach, watch out for faded yellow
ducks that say “First Years”!
Floating plastic presents a particular hazard to seabirds.
Birds comb the wide expanse of ocean for visual cues which
may indicate food. A piece of floating plastic, seen from far
away, can trigger them to dive, and swallow the item before
its composition can be recognized. The birds also return to
bird conservation • FALL 2008
21

Marine Pollutants
In addition to the highly visible plastic debris and oil in
the oceans, there are a variety of invisible dangers. These
include organochlorine pesticides such as DDT, and their
associated products, PCBs, as well as heavy metals such as
lead and mercury. Many of the offending compounds are
controlled or banned in the United States, but the oceans
do not abide by political borders. Their currents draw pollutants
from all over the world that affect fish and other
marine life. Animals that are high on the food chain, especially
if they are also long-lived, are particularly vulnerable.
Each time they consume prey containing these compounds,
the chemicals are stored in their fat in a process called
bioaccumulation. Humans can be exposed to high levels of
the toxins depending on what they eat, too, causing many
doctors to recommend that pregnant women avoid or limit
their consumption of predatory fish (e.g., tuna and swordfish)
because of their high contaminant loads.
King Eider killed by an oil spill: FWS.
the nest and regurgitate the plastic to feed to their young.
Adult and baby birds are commonly found with lighters,
milk caps, toothbrushes, and an impressive array of other
plastic debris in their guts.
Oil Spills
For seabirds, perhaps the most notorious of dangers on the
open ocean is oil. The image of thousands of oiled birds
from spills such as the Exxon Valdez is difficult to forget,
but in addition to these large, well-publicized catastrophes,
thousands of small spills go unreported around the world
every day. One of the most obvious consequences for
seabirds is that oiled feathers cannot do their job; birds
become waterlogged, and unable to regulate their body
temperature or fly. Preening their feathers only leads to the
birds ingesting the oil, causing longer-term toxic effects. In
the marine environment, the effects of oils spills can persist
for months or even years.
These pollutants damage birds’ immune, endocrine, and
reproductive systems. One of the most famous effects of
DDT was the thinning of eggshells, which was the primary
factor in the decline of the Bald Eagle, Peregrine Falcon,
Brown Pelican, and other bird species. Even after DDT was
banned in America in 1972, it continued to be produced
here for sale abroad, and continued to affect U.S. breeding
birds that travel overseas. Research by ABC’s Dr. Michael
Fry on the effects of chemical pollutants on birds revealed
that organochlorine pesticides and heavy metals are still
causing embryos to die prior to hatching, chicks to die before
fledging, and a variety of deformities and impairments.
Recently, Dr. Myra Finkelstein and her colleagues at the
University of California, Santa Cruz, measured the presence
of marine pollutants in two species of albatross, the Laysan
Though they are often some of the most visible victims,
bird populations have proved quite resilient to oil spills,
perhaps because of their broad regional distributions and,
for those not immediately caught in the slick, their ability
to move into oil-free waters. Disastrous as oil spills are, the
vast majority of the seabird work in the northern Pacific
has been supported because of their threat or by fines levied
against the liable companies.
22
bird conservation • FALL 2008
Laysan and Black-footed Albatrosses often carry high pesticide loads, which may damage their immune, endocrine,
and reproductive systems, negatively impacting survival and breeding success. Photo: Tonya M. Haff.

Julie Ellis and SEANET volunteers conducting a beach survey. Photo: SEANET.
Beached Bird Surveys
This albatross chick with droopwing will not survive to adulthood. Photo: Myra Finkelstein.
and Black-footed. Both species live for a long time and are
high on the food chain, and so bioaccumulate chemicals in
their bodies. Levels of DDT and PCBs were twice as high
in Laysan Albatrosses as they were ten years ago, and DDT
levels were four times higher in Black-footeds. “The high
contaminant load in Black-footed Albatrosses foraging in
the California Current probably reflects in part the long
history of industrial and agricultural discharges along the
West Coast,” Finkelstein said. But she added that the distribution
and transport of contaminants in the North Pacific
involves processes that are still not fully understood.
Midway Lead Paint
Thanks to the leadership support of Lynn White and a
handful of other key supporters, ABC has been drawing
attention to the problem of lead poisoning on Midway
Atoll National Wildlife Refuge, where hundreds of thousands
of albatrosses breed each year (including, in 2007,
four federally endangered Short-tailed Albatrosses, which
usually breed only on one island in Japan). Lead-based
paint is peeling from more than 90 aging buildings on the
island, and is being eaten by curious albatross chicks. The
chicks soon develop a condition known as droopwing,
whereby they are unable to lift their wings off the ground.
As a result, as many as 10,000 chicks die each year.
In March, 2006, First Lady Laura Bush visited Midway and
expressed her concern and support for the lead paint cleanup.
Though there was no immediate action, the President’s
2008 budget sent funds to Midway to “encapsulate” 15 of
the buildings (a short-term solution of painting over them
to contain the flakes). ABC is hopeful that the creation of
the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in
the Northwest Hawaiian Islands, which encompasses Midway,
will cause this problem to be confronted, and enable
the Monument to become a true environmental showpiece.
Julie Ellis works with the Seabird Ecological Assessment
Network (SEANET), which operates out of the School of
Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University in Massachusetts.
She coordinates an extensive network of volunteers all along the
Atlantic Seaboard who conduct regular censuses of dead birds.
Volunteers choose a section of beach and monitor it for bird carcasses
once or twice a month. On the appointed day, they walk
their section and take detailed notes on any dead birds they find.
SEANET trains volunteers, and has published a guide to identifying
dead birds, which, for its oddity, has actually proved popular
with birders as well! Such citizen science has proved invaluable to
bird conservationists, and in this case, has raised awareness of a
wide variety of threats.
One of the most important aspects to SEANET’s efforts is the
breadth of data they are gathering on a variety of contaminants.
National Marine Fisheries Service marine observers, who are
stationed on commercial fishing vessels, also submit carcasses
of seabirds that are entangled and drowned in fishing nets. These
samples provide useful information about the birds’ diets. Over
85% of the shearwaters submitted by the National Marine Fisheries
Service Marine Observer Program have plastic in their digestive
tracts. Although they currently lack funding for the expensive
lab work to quantify contaminant loads, SEANET veterinarian
Sarah Courchesne is collecting and preserving samples from
animals in order to perhaps conduct the research at a future date.
Their work underscores one of the most important factors in addressing
the challenges posed by marine contaminants. The work
often relies on costly laboratory fees, and poisoning and sublethal
effects can sometimes seem less compelling than other, more
immediate threats. Nevertheless, without a complete understanding
of these effects, the conservation of the world’s threatened
seabirds will be missing an important piece of the puzzle.
Dead Shearwater: Jeff Pollin/Marine Photobank
bird conservation • FALL 2008
23

SPECIES PROFILE: PERUVIAN TERN
The globally endangered Peruvian
Tern is South America’s version of
the Least Tern; an elegant slip of a
bird, pale gray above, white underneath,
with a black cap that trails down the
back of its head like a baseball cap on
backwards. A small patch of white peaks
out just above the base of its long, stout
bill. It is most easily distinguished from
other terns that share its range by its
diminutive size. The Peruvian Tern is
restricted to coastal Peru and northern Chile (although
it has been found as far north as central Ecuador), where
the Humboldt Current brings its diet of anchovies and
other small fish in to shore. Its global population may now
number as few as 1,000-2,500 birds. It nests on upland
beaches along the coasts, occasionally near wetlands. It
often chooses a hot, flat, open plain of beach, where surface
temperatures regularly reach 90 degrees on calm days. It
does not build a nest, instead laying one or two perfectly
camouflaged eggs on the bare, sandy ground. In historical
times, these exposed eggs were protected by broad surrounding
stretches of sand, where few predators or other
enemies would venture. But times have changed.
Peruvian Tern and chick: Patricia Saravia
The first big hit to the species’ survival came in 1972, when
anchovy stocks collapsed, never to recover. Today, the main
threat comes from the exploding human populations along
the coast, as new and better roads make it more feasible for
marine products to get to market from far-flung coastal villages.
The resulting development has reduced the breeding
habitat of these birds to a tiny fraction of its former size.
There are currently only three breeding sites in Peru and
eight in Chile. Former nesting grounds are now irrigated
for crops, used as dumps, or covered by beach-front condos
and hotels. Most recently, construction of a port complex
at Mejillones, Chile, impacted habitat for as many as 200
terns. Off-road vehicles driven on the
beaches, and the pets that inevitably
accompany human populations, have
wrought further havoc on the terns.
Adults, chicks, and eggs all fall victim
to uncontrolled cats and dogs, and the
wheels of rampaging four-by-fours.
It is no accident that the largest remaining
colony of Peruvian Terns is in a
protected area, Paracas National Reserve,
located on the coast of Peru, 170 miles south of the
capital, Lima. It is here that American Bird Conservancy is
focusing its efforts to save the species. The Reserve is Peru’s
only protected coastal-marine system, comprising mostly
subtropical coastal desert, but also encompassing a chain of
small islands. Unfortunately, the Reserve has few resources
and many species in need, but luckily the threat to the
tern nesting grounds is tractable. Tourists and fishermen
drive over the hard, flat plain without realizing there are
nests beneath their wheels. Simply marking a corridor for
vehicles and placing informational signs about the terns will
prevent dozens of accidental nest losses each year. For a species
as rare as this, the difference will be critical. ABC has
responded to the Reserve’s request for help, and is working
with the Seabird Program of the Asociación Peruana para
la Conservación de la Naturaleza (APECO), Peru’s oldest
environmental group, on a project to protect the nesting
grounds. Representatives of APECO and the Reserve have
already met with the local fishing cooperative, which is willing
to modify its routes to avoid the nesting area.
The determination of the Peruvian Tern, as it braves the
harsh, barren landscape to raise its young, is inspiring. With
the support of members and friends, and the equally inspiring
determination of APECO, ABC is helping make the
tern’s most important breeding site a safe harbor once again.
BirdConservation
The magazine about bird conservation
throughout the Americas
American Bird Conservancy
P.O. Box 249
The Plains, VA 20198
Address Service Requested
NON-PROFIT ORG
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
PERMIT NO. 2392
MERRIFIELD, VA