Evaluation of artificial nest sites for long-term conservation of a burrow-nesting seabird

Published source details Sutherland D.R., Dann P. & Jessop R.E. (2014) Evaluation of artificial nest sites for long-term conservation of a burrow-nesting seabird. Journal of Wildlife Management, 78, 1415-1424.
Share Tweet Email

Summary

Provide artificial nesting sites for ground and tree-nesting seabirds

A replicated, site comparison study in 1986–2011 on Phillip Island, Victoria, Australia (Sutherland et al. 2014) found that little penguins Eudyptula minor in artificial nests had more stable hatching success, fledging success, total chick mass/clutch, adult survival and population growth rates across years than penguins in natural nests. The effect of nest type on these outcomes depended on the year (based on statistical models), with no clear difference in around 70–86% of monitored years but higher values in artificial than natural nests in 9–29% of monitored years (see original paper for data). Nest type (artificial or natural) had no significant effect on clutch number (initiations/nest/year) or brood size (eggs hatched/clutch/year). Within one year of installation, 65% of artificial nest boxes were occupied and 81% of these were used for breeding. Within about seven years, these values levelled off at 97% occupancy and 93% used for breeding. In 1986–1990, wooden nest boxes (30 x 45 x 45 cm) were installed on Summerland Peninsula. Native vegetation was also planted to provide shade. Artificial nests (average 239/year, across four sites) and natural nests (average 104/year, across three sites) were monitored at least once/month each breeding season between 1986 and 2011. Adults were marked. Hatching and fledging success were measured as the percentage of nests in which ≥1 egg hatched and ≥1 chick fledged, respectively.