R.E-Johnson 1968 Journal May 27 Anchitka Island, Alaska (cont.) in new nests yet be on a par with “other buildings” in old nests. Even if my judgement on what makes for “good” nest sites is not correct, the pattern outlined above, i.e. relatively more new nests to old nests in “other bldg” to quonset huts, would still be true & need explanation. One explanation could be that nests may last longer in quonset huts, thus increasing the “old nest” figure. Another would suggest that,^ since they only seem to nest on top of an old nest site, the condition of the old nest may figure in their choice. This might mean that they only select nests in good condition to rebuild & that quonset nests fair poorly (the reverse of the 1st explanation). A third reason could be that recently the quonset huts have deteriorated rapidly & have suddenly fallen into disfavor whereas previously they were used more often. Finally it could be that The last 2 suggestions are more reasonable than the first since the quonset huts are in a bad state of repair, many lack the roof piece that runs their length down the center, and many have collapsed or are about to (those collapsed were tabulated but they lack nests). Finally there is the possibility that my judgment on good nest sites is incorrect & that quonset & “other bldgs” are equal in # of new nests per [illegible]