Tape #2 
Comments, suggestions and corrections by Gene Kridler to Roger Clapp’s original draft 
on the Necker Island Account. 
Species Account: Brown Booby - The change - first paragraph - Status - evidently a 
rare breeder - change to evidently an uncommon breeder. Change recent estimates from 
25 to recent estimate 40. Third paragraph - Annual cycle - change other Hawaiian 
Leeward Islands to other northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Next page - on the bottom 
I\ve added the 1969 data where we counted 20 nests all of which contained eggs. 
And, Roger, this is the reason why I’ve changed the maximum recent estimate from 25 to 
Move on to Red-footed Booby - Now, Red-footed Booby, common breeder - maximum 
recent estimate 1,000; change that number to 1,400. Roger, here again the 1969 data 
is responsible for the chang .e of the comments I had also: did Wetmore include 
chicks in his estimate? If he did, we are real close in 1969 with his estimates. You 
see he was there in the summer and by that time many chicks would have been probably 
fledged or pretty close to fledging. Now we had a minimum count of 700 nests and 
we even may have missed a few. Were we to multiply this by 2 because of our breeding 
pair here in March would give us ikOO adults, then add the probable 700 chicks, even 
600 chicks, considering that perhaps 100 die, which isn’t likely, were we to add these 
100 chicks, that would then give us 2100 birds probably in June, both adults and 
immatures in June. This then would come pretty close to Wetmore’s estimate. 
The next page under breeding habitat - you say in March 1965 Kridler indicated 
that most neststwere found on the north slopes. This still holds true. From general 
observations of other Marchs and also in September and then again here in 1969 . I 
don’t recall ever seeing the rfest of the Red-footed Booby on Northwest Cape. These 
birds certainly seem to favor very strongly the Chenopodium as well as an occasional 
Sustania plant. 
In the last page on the table for the Red-footed Booby I’ve entered the 1969 
data and also the information or the sample of the time I counted, checked, 118 nests, 
70/0 had 1 egg, while 30 $ contained no eggs at all and which were very new; and her^ 
again in your 1967 March information throughout all your tables for all species, you 
