Eudyptes chrysocome 

Scope: Global
Language: English

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Aves Sphenisciformes Spheniscidae

Scientific Name: Eudyptes chrysocome
Species Authority: (Forster, 1781)
Common Name(s):
English Southern Rockhopper Penguin, Rockhopper Penguin
Spanish Pingüino de penacho amarillo
Taxonomic Source(s): del Hoyo, J., Collar, N.J., Christie, D.A., Elliott, A. and Fishpool, L.D.C. 2014. HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World. Lynx Edicions BirdLife International, Barcelona, Spain and Cambridge, UK.
Identification information: Identification. 55 cm. Average weight of 3.35 kg. A robust body with white underparts and slate-grey upperparts. Distinctive red eyes and a short reddish brown bill. A straight yellow eyebrow ending in sideways projecting plumes extends above the eye. Similar species. The Southern Rockhopper Penguins differ from their Northern counterparts in having a narrower supercilium and shorter plumes, which reach just over the black throat. Immature birds have only a narrow supercilium and a pale mottled grey chin.

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Vulnerable A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde ver 3.1
Year Published: 2016
Date Assessed: 2016-10-01
Assessor(s): BirdLife International
Reviewer(s): Butchart, S. & Symes, A.
Contributor(s): Bost, C., Crawford, R., Crofts , S., Dehnhard , N., Gales, R., Harris, S., Hilton, G., Huin, N., Kirkwood, R., Makhado, A., Moore, P., Morrison , K., Pütz, K., Quillfeldt , P., Raya-Rey, A., Schiavini, A. & Whitehead , O.
Facilitator/Compiler(s): Allinson, T, Benstead, P., Calvert, R., Ekstrom, J., Mahood, S., McClellan, R., Moreno, R., Pütz, K., Shutes, S., Stattersfield, A., Taylor, J.
This species has been classified as Vulnerable owing to rapid population declines, which, although they have been on-going for perhaps a century, appear to have worsened in recent years.

Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:

Eudyptes chrysocome breeds on islands located in the South Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans, ranging from 46º S in the South Atlantic Ocean and South Indian Oceans to Macquarie Island at 54ºS in the South Pacific Ocean (a total of 319,163 breeding pairs in 2010; Baylis et al. 2013), and a number of offshore islands in southern Argentina and Chile (Isla de los Estados: 135,000 pairs in 2010, Isla Pinguino: 1061 pairs in 2014, Isla Ildefonso: 86,400 pairs in 2006, Diego Ramirez: 132,721 pairs in 2002, Isla Noir: 158,200 pairs in 2005, Isla Barnevelt: 10,800 pairs in 1992, Cape Horn: 600 pairs in 1992, Isla Terhalten: 3,000 pairs in 2008 and Isla Buenaventura: 500 pairs in 1992 [Schiavini et al. 2005, BirdLife International 2010, Raya Rey et al. 2014, Raya Rey et al. unpublished, Gandini et al. in press]). Subspecies E. c. filholi breeds on Prince Edward: 38,000 pairs in 2008/09 (Crawford et al. 2009) and Marion Islands: 65,000 pairs in 2012/13 (Dyer and Crawford 2015) (South Africa), Crozet Islands: 152,800 pairs in 1982, Kerguelen Islands: 85,500 pairs in 1985 (French Southern Territories), Heard Island: 10,000 pairs in 2003 (Heard and McDonald Islands [to Australia]), Macquarie Island: 37,500 pairs in 2007 (Australia) and Campbell: 33,239 pairs in 2012 (Morrison et al. 2012), Auckland (3000 pairs in 1990) and Antipodes Islands (2,700-3,600 pairs in 1990, New Zealand). 

Countries occurrence:
Argentina; Australia; Chile; Falkland Islands (Malvinas); French Southern Territories; Heard Island and McDonald Islands; New Zealand; South Africa
Additional data:
Estimated area of occupancy (AOO) - km2:3640Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):NoEstimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:13100000
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):UnknownExtreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):No
Continuing decline in number of locations:Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:No
Upper elevation limit (metres):60
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:Several populations have experienced major long-term population crashes. Approximately 1.5 million pairs are estimated to have been lost from Campbell Island (94% of the original total) between 1942 and 1986 (Cunningham and Moors 1994), with further 21.8% decrease between 1986 and 2012 (Morrison et al. 2015). In the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), the population fell by around 1.2 million pairs between 1932 and 2000 (20% of the original total) (Pütz et al. 2003a). At Staten Island, the numbers of Rockhopper Penguins decreased by 24 % between the censuses of 1998 and 2010 (Raya Rey et al. 2014). Between 1987/88 and 2012/13, numbers at Marion Island decreased by about 52%, from 138,000 pairs to 65,000 pairs, equivalent to 72% in three generations (Dyer and Crawford 2015). The long-term trends remain unknown for the Kerguelen and Crozet populations (CEBC-CNRS database, C.A. Bost, pers. comm.). Several other sites appear to have suffered severe declines (of more than 40%) between the 1970s and the 1990s: Auckland Islands and Antipodes Islands(Cooper 1992, Hiscock and Chilvers 2013). 
Population modelling, based on those breeding sites that have been accurately surveyed, indicates that between 1971 and 2007 (three generations) the number of Southern Rockhopper Penguins declined by 34% (BirdLife International 2010). In early 2016 there was a mortality of unknown extent of Rockhopper penguins in the Southwest Atlantic before and during the moulting period, with dead penguins (mainly caused by starvation) found along the coasts of Tierra del Fuego (around 300), the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands (300-400 on Saunders Islands) and near Puerto Deseado (around 200) (Andrea Raya Rey and Sarah Crofts, However, while the extent of this recent mortality is currently not assessable, it appears that it may have affected the population at a larger regional scale (Crofts and Stanworth 2016, A. Raya Rey, pers. comm.). 

Trend Justification:  A decline of 34% over the last three generations (30 years), as calculated from survey data, has been driven largely by the declines in the Falklands (where data are most complete), and to a lesser extent, Marion Island (BirdLife International 2010). The Falklands declines may be even steeper: using the less uncertain 2000 estimate (instead of 1995) requires greater extrapolation, but this would yield an overall decline of 55.2%.

Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Number of mature individuals:2500000Continuing decline of mature individuals:Yes
Extreme fluctuations:NoPopulation severely fragmented:No
No. of subpopulations:2-100Continuing decline in subpopulations:Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:NoAll individuals in one subpopulation:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:

This species returns to its breeding colonies in October, which range from sea-level sites to cliff-tops, and sometimes inland. Two eggs are laid and incubated during November and December for 32-34 days. In February, the chicks fledge and depart the colony (BirdLife International 2010). At most breeding sites, only one chick is fledged, but there is some evidence that it is not unusual for those in the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) to raise two chicks (Clausen and Pütz 2002, Poisbleau et al. 2008). On Crozet, the occurrence of two successfully fledged chicks has also been observed (C. Bost com.pers.). Rockhopper penguins prey on a variety of fish, crustaceans and cephalopods (Williams 1995), but there is individual dietary specialization during part of their annual cycle (Dehnhard et al. 2016).  At the Falklands hybridization occurs with Macaroni (White and Clausen 2002) and Northern Rockhopper Penguins (Crofts and Robson 2016). 

Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:Unknown
Generation Length (years):11.5
Movement patterns:Full Migrant
Congregatory:Congregatory (and dispersive)

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s):

It is not yet clear what is driving current population declines, although climate changes appear to be a significant factor. Land-based human threats at breeding sites, such as tourism, research and land management are considered low, and although they may vary on a site by site basis, are not currently deemed significant at an overall population level at the Falklands (Crofts 2014). Egg collection was common at some colonies until the 1950s, such as in the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), but is now prohibited. Historically, penguins were taken as bait for use in crab pots at a number of sites, including some Chilean islands (Ryan and Cooper 1991, P. G. Ryan in litt. 1999). The disappearance of the colony on Isla Recalada in Chile indicates that human depredation, in this case the collection of zoological specimens and as bait for crab pots (Oehler et al. 2007), is still a serious threat to colonies where sites are accessible and not well protected. The number of birds taken in recent years from other Chilean colonies is less than 500 individuals per year (BirdLife International 2010). At some sites, introduced grazing animals have caused significant vegetation loss. At Macquarie Island, overgrazing by rabbits led to serious landslips; however vegetation is now recovering following the successful Macquarie Island Pest Eradication Project. The effect of grazing by goats and deer at Isla de los Estados is not known and should be investigated. There are very few records of disease outbreaks, although few colonies are visited regularly. Avian cholera has caused deaths of a small number of adults and chicks at Campbell Island in 1985/86 (de Lisle et al. 1990). Avian Pox has been reported within the Falkland population but in low numbers and at few sites only (e.g. New Island in 2014-14; P. Quillfeldt unpubl.), and an unknown disease caused <100 adult mortalities at Steeple Jason (Crofts 2014).  The massive mortality event on the Falklands in 2002/2003 was due to a Harmful Algal Bloom (Uhart et al. 2007). At the Falklands and in southern Patagonia, adult mortalities of an unknown extent were reported during the moulting period following the breeding season 2015/16 (Crofts & Stanworth 2016, A. Raya Rey, number of Southern Rockhopper Penguins affected by oil pollution is currently not thought to be as great as in the past, when 40,000 Magellanic Penguins Spheniscus magellanicus were estimated to be contaminated annually in Argentina (Gandini et al. 1994). In Patagonian coastal waters, hydrocarbon exploitation is a threat (Ellis et al. 1998), as is the potential development of hydrocarbons at the Falkland Islands (between 2008-14 <100 oiled individuals were reported in the Falklands with highest occurrence in Sep-Oct; Crofts 2014). Other important factors include interactions with fisheries (see Crawford et al., in prep; A global review of penguin bycatch in fisheries), indirect changes to the food web through modification of ecosystems by fisheries,  and the effects of climate change (Hilton et al. 2006), including increased frequency of storm events at breeding sites (Wolfaardt et al. 2012). Survival of adult rockhopper penguins appears to be sensitive to ocean temperatures, with highest survival probabilities under moderately-cold to long-term average temperature, and reduced survival probabilities under increasingly cold or warm ocean temperatures (Raya Rey et al. 2007, Dehnhard et al. 2013a).  Rockhopper penguins in the Falklands furthermore delayed breeding under warmer environmental conditions and layed lighter eggs with potential effects on breeding success (Dehnhard et al. 2015a & 2015b). Finally, wind-patterns, which are also subject to change under global warming scenarios, have been shown to affect the foraging success of rockhopper penguins: currently dominating southerly and westerly winds increased foraging success while foraging success was lower under northerly and easterly wind directions which may become more frequent in the future (Dehnhard et al. 2013b). Besides these apparent bottom-up effects, climate change may also lead to  top-down changes in food web structure leading to increased inter-specific competition and secondary predation. For example, possible ‘top-down’ effects on the eudyptid penguins are competition with and predation by rapidly increasing pinniped (fur seal and sea lions) populations (Barlow et al. 2002, Raya Rey et al. 2012, Morrison et al. 2016). Finally, rockhoppers on Staten had elevated mercury levels, despite foraging at a lower trophic level when compared to conspecifics from other breeding sites (Brasso et al. 2015). Overwintering conditions are thought to influence the proportions of birds skipping breeding at Marion Island (Crawford et al. 2006) and potentially elsewhere. The number of Southern Rockhopper penguins returning to Marion Island to breed decreased by about 20% between 1994/95 and 2007/08 and was significantly correlated with breeding success (Crawford et al. 2008).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions:

Conservation Actions Underway

Regular monitoring is undertaken on Staten, Falklands, Marion and Campbell Islands (BirdLife International 2010, Raya Rey et al. 2014). Several ecological and demographic studies have been undertaken (Ellis et al. 1998, Guinard et al. 1998, Dehnhard et al. 2013a, 2014). Research has attempted to determine the cause of historic declines using stable isotope analysis of museum skins (Hilton et al. 2006). An International Species Action Plan and a series of Regional Action Plans have been developed (BirdLife International 2010). Following this, research has been conducted at many breeding sites following the recommendations made in the report. A Falkland Island Species Action Plan was completed in 2014 (Crofts 2014). 

Conservation Actions Proposed

Continue or start to monitor all populations, especially in the Indian Ocean, in order to assess trends (Guinard et al. 1998, BirdLife International 2010, Raya Rey et al. 2014, Baylis et al. 2013) and improve methodologies for monitoring. Conduct long-term demographic studies to understand the causes of the current decline (BirdLife International 2010, Dehnhard et al. 2013). Conduct genetic studies to determine the taxonomic status of the species (chrysocome vs. filholi). Conduct research into spatial and temporal links between population trends, sea-surface temperature and primary productivity (BirdLife International 2010). Investigate the possible impact of oil exploitation (Guinard et al. 1998). Conduct studies to assess interactions with commercial fisheries (Ellis et al. 1998). Assess the threat from introduced predators. Reduce disturbance from ecotourism through the use of codes of conduct. Assess the threats of disease and increase biosecurity measures (Crofts 2014).

Citation: BirdLife International. 2016. Eudyptes chrysocome. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T22735250A95106180. . Downloaded on 18 January 2017.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided