I^ Alexander, Australian Species of Tubinares. [,.t^"]u\ 



Australian Species of Tubinares (Petrels and 



Albatrosses). 



By W. B. Alexander, M.A., Keeper of Biology, Western 

 Australian Museum, Perth. 



In The Emu, vol. xviii. (1918), p. 82, Mr. G. M. Mathews published 

 an article entitled " What are Australian Petrels ? " In this 

 article he pointed out that a number of species had been included 

 on the Australian list of which no specimen from Australia was 

 in existence, and he therefore proposed that these should be 

 excluded from future lists until actual specimens were forth- 

 coming. This suggestion was entirely in line with my personal 

 views, and I had already, in The Emu, queried the inclusion of 

 a number of species on the Western Australian list on the ground 

 that no definite record of their occurrence in that State was 

 available. 



The chief point on which I disagree with Mr. Mathews is as to 

 what constitutes a valid record. I do not deny that the most 

 satisfactory record is an actual specimen procured on the coast 

 of Australia or in Australian seas. But even in such cases we 

 are dependent on the reliability of the history given on the label 

 of the specimen. Several of the specimens recorded by Salvin 

 in the British Museum Catalogue as from Australia were almost 

 certainly not obtained at the localities to which they were 

 attributed ; for instance, the specimens of the White-bellied Storm- 

 Petrel {Fregetta leucogaster) [grallaria], presented by Sir George 

 Grey, labelled as from South Australia. Grey was at the time 

 Governor of that colony, but it is practically certain that the 

 specimens must have been obtained on one of his voyages to or 

 -from England. Each such case must be judged on its merits, 

 and there may well be differences of opinion on such matters. It 

 will rest with the Check-list Committee to decide the question on 

 the balance of evidence. 



Mr. Mathews would not admit any species to the list which have 

 been observed within our limits but not secured. Personally, I 

 think that such cases also should be decided on their merits. 

 Skilled observers could not possibly mistake such species as the 

 Giant Petrel {Macronectes giganteus) or the Cape Petrel {Petrella 

 capensis) ; and even if skins of these species from Australia were 

 not forthcoming I would be prepared to admit them if Gould, 

 Giglioli, or other reliable ornithologists recorded having seen them 

 within our limits. A case in point is the Light-mantled Sooty 

 j\lbatross {Phcehetria palpebrata). Dr. E. M. Eerguson, Dr. W. 

 Macgillivray, and I have all recorded in The Emu that we observed 

 this species in tlie Biglit. It is a species which is very easily 

 recognized, and tliercforr I think it should W included. Mr. 

 Mathews, tliough he constantly uses the word " species," is 

 apparently really treating of sub-species. I quite admit that we 

 shall not know whether the sub-species, Phwbetria palpebrata 



