^°''io''^'l Whitlock, On the East Murchison. 203 



sight of the bush containing the nest and its immediate surroundings, and 

 waited till I was weary. I resolved to go away and return in an hour's time, 

 and as the ground was sandy I would try and steal silently up to the bush, 

 and, if possible, surprise the sitting bird, and procure it before it could slip 

 away. I carried out this plan, and, very cautiously approaching the bush, 

 I peeped into the nest. There was a veritable Aniytornis gis^antura sitting 

 on the eggs ! It flushed with a cry of alarm, but I secured it. It was a 

 male. I waited in vain for the female, as I was most an.xious to secure a 

 specimen — there being only two in existence. Both are in the Perth 

 Museum — one the type, described by Mr. A. W. Milligan, and secured by 

 Mr. J. T. Tunney, near Mt. Magnet, Murchison goldfield, and another 

 collected by myself at Lake Austin. I subsequently photographed the nest 

 and eggs in situ^ and also the surrounding haunts. (See illustration.) This 

 was the only nest of this rare bird I found. The nest and eggs are new to 

 science, and have been recently described in TJie Eniii (p. 136). 



I may note that some time afterwards I visited the same spot again, and 

 heard notes resembling those q{ Atiiytoniis striatiis^ which I have described 

 in another place as resembling the syllables " Tu-tu-tu." Probably they were 

 uttered by a male of the present species. 



Much uncertainty seems to prevail about the identity of this and two 

 other closely allied species. There seems a tendency on the part of 

 certain ornithologists to refer both Aniytortiis iextilis and A. gigantura 

 to one species. In a very interesting letter to Mr. H. L. White, Mr. G. A. 

 Keartland, who accompanied the Calvert Expedition, refers to two species 

 of Auiytornis observed in the country at and around Lake Way. One he 

 identifies as A. slria/us^ and in that I think he is perfectly correct. But his 

 reference to a second species, haunting and observed running about amongst 

 the samphires at Lake Way, has caused me some perplexity. This latter 

 species he refers to A. textilis, despite the fact that Gould described A. 

 macriiriis as a larger and more robust form of the latter, and, moreover, 

 its Western representative. I can hardly credit the statement that such a 

 secretive bird as A. ^tgcifiiura can have been observed amongst the 

 samphires at Lake Way. In my experience it does not frequent such 

 vegetation, but I saw Calamanthiis campestris, which has a carriage very 

 much like an Aniytornis^ in the samphires every time I walked through 

 them. This latter bird has, however, a much shorter tail. As my fore- 

 going notes will illustrate, the difficulty I had in finding the bird alone 

 should be apparent. Mr. Milligan, in describing the types, gives com- 

 parative measurements of five species of this genus {Vict. Nat., xviii.. No. 

 2, June, 1 901), and it will be seen that the dimensions of A. gigantura 

 altogether exceed those of A. textilis, and even Gould's measurements of 

 A. niacriirus. Mr. C. G. Gibson, in his article on the " Birds Observed 

 between Kalgoorlie and Eucla " {Emu, vol. ix., p. T^ groups A. viacrurus 

 with A . gigantura. There is no reason for this, but until a large series 

 of both supposed species have been collected from various localities in 

 this State, and carefully compared, the question must remain an open 

 one, and it may be just as well to let the two species (?) stand as at 

 present. In any case, the Western birds should not, with our present 

 knowledge, be referred to the smaller and less robust A. textilis. I only 

 hope my obsen'ations on the habits of the Lake Way birds, with my 

 photographs of the nest in situ and breeding haunts, will aid in the final 

 settlement of this question.* 



* Since writing my remarks on Atnyiornis gigantura I have seen The Victorian 

 Naturalist for February, 1910. In this journal is an account of the finding by Mr. 

 C. G. Gibson of the nest and eggs of Aniytornis macrurus. The account is accom- 

 panied by a description of the nest and eggs by Mr. A. J. North, and is illustrated 

 by Mr. Gibson's photograph of the nest in sttn. Nothing could have been more 

 opportune. A distinct superstructure in the form of a dome over the nest is observ- 

 able in the photogra]3h of the nest of A. 7nacrnrns. As my notes emphasize, the 

 latter feature is quite absent from the Lake Way nest of ^. gigantttra. 



