982 ADDENDUM — SECTION D. 



omitted from the far north-west coast of Australia in Dr. 

 Ramsay's "List," having probably been overlooked by 

 collectors in that district. Immediately to the north of 

 Australia it is found in jN^ew Guinea and the Am Islands, 

 but it appears doubtful if it extends further north than the 

 Great Papuan Island, as it is not recorded from the Philippine 

 Group, although Mr. Howard Saunders in the second 

 edition of Yarrell's "British Birds" records it from China 

 and Japan. The common species, however, of that region is 

 H. osculaus, Swinhoe, and I find no mention of our bird in 

 the published catalogues of Chinese and Japanese shore birds. 

 It is possible, therefore, that the identifications on which Mr. 

 Saunders based his distribution in that part of the world of 

 H. lonyirostris may have been erroneous. 



The Polynesian range of this latter species seems to be 

 restricted to the afore-mentioned localities, New Zealand, and 

 the Chatham Islands, for it is not recorded from New Caledonia, 

 Fiji, or any of the surrounding or intervening groups. This 

 fact may ]>artly be accounted for by the fact that the species, 

 like its congeners, is non-migratory, although it is singular 

 that it should not originally have been located in Norfolk 

 Island, New Caledonia, and other contiguous spots as well as 

 in New Zealand. 



45. H^MATOPUS UNICOLOR. 



(Sooty Oyster Catcher). 



Hmnatopus tmicohr, Wagler, Isi8, 1832, p. 1320 ; Ramsay, List 



Austr. Bird8, p. 19, (1888) . 

 UcematopasJ'uUginosus, Gould, Handb. B. of Austr. p. 217. (1865). 



This large Oyster Catcher, the " Red Bill " of shore sports- 

 men, is a resident species on all the coasts of the colonies, includ- 

 ing the Bass Straits Islands and New Zealand. It is recorded 

 by Dr. Ramsay from Port Darwin and all other explored 

 localities eastward along the north coast, and likewise down 

 the east coast to Victoria, and thence westward to Western 

 Australia. It does not appear to have been noticed yet on 

 the south coast of New Guinea, but probably it exists there, 

 being so well distributed along the adjoining coast of Aus- 

 tralia. Its omission in Ramsay's List from N. West Australia 

 is doubtless due to its having been overlooked in that region. 

 In New Zealand it is more abundant, as stated by Buller, in the 

 southei'u parts than the foregoing species, and is not un- 

 common in the North Island. I have found it more evenly 

 distributed along our own Tasmanian coasts than the White- 

 breasted species. 



