Order APTEKYGIFOBMES.] 



[Family APTEBYGIDiE 



APTERYX BULLERI. 



(BULLER'S KIWI.) 



Apteryx bulleri, Sharpe, Trans. N. Z. Inst., vol. xxi., p. 224. 



Theee can be no doubt that there are two forms of Apteryx inhabiting the North Island — one 

 chestnut-brown in colour, the other blackish-brown — as easily distinguishable by their plumage as 

 the Brown Wood-hen and the Black Wood-hen. In February, 1897, I exhibited, at a meeting of 

 the Wellington Philosophical Society, a specimen (a fine male bird) which was wholly brownish- 

 black, being the darkest I had seen. This, with six others of both sexes, came from the Waitara 

 district, where, so far as I can learn, most of the birds are of dark colour. My specimens exhibit 

 varying shades of colour, and in some of them the brown predominates ; but on the whole they 

 present a very different appearance to the ordinary bird, and, in addition to this distinctive 

 feature, the plumage is more wiry in structure, with stiffened points to the feathers. Sir James 

 Hector was the first to call my attention, some years ago, to the existence of this darker race 

 of Apteryx, telegraphing to me from Gisborne to examine a live pair passing through Wellington 

 on a homeward-bound ship ; but I was anxious to see a good series of specimens before giving a 

 name to it. As readily distinguishable from the typical chestnut-brown Kiwi, the species ought 

 to have a name, and I think that we must adhere to the one proposed by Dr. Sharpe. His 

 distinguishng characters for Apteryx bulleri, as compared with Apteryx australis, are " Blackish- 

 brown instead of a tawny tint," and " the curious harsh structure of the plumage, especially of 

 the feathers of the rump and neck." This diagnosis is applicable to this species only, and not to 

 the lighter and better-known form, which will still retain the name of Apteryx mantelli. 



Having already stated (p. 2) my reasons for keeping these forms distinct, it will be seen 

 that I am quite in accord with Dr. Bowdler Sharpe's views on the question of sub-species as 

 stated in the 'Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum ' (vol. ii., p. 45) :— 



I can hardly expect that all ornithologists will acquiesce in my views as to the sub-species or races which 

 I have believed it to be my duty to recognise. These races do exist in nature, and they may be called by 

 whatever name naturalists please, ' varieties,' ' races,' ' sub-species,' ' climatic forms,' &c. ; but it has seemed 

 to me better to keep these forms, many of which are very well characterised, distinct from one another, 

 than to merge them all as one species, and thus to obliterate all records of natural facts, which are plain 

 enough to the practised eye of the ornithologist, though difficult to describe in words. 



The range of Apteryx bulleri is co-extensive with that of A. mantelli, and it is not unlikely 

 that they intermingle in their haunts, as do Apteryx australis, A. oweni and A. occidentalis in the 

 South Island. It might, of course, be sufficient to treat this forrn as a melanoid variety of the 

 common species, in which the prevailing colour is chestnut-brown ; but, after what I have said 

 under the head of Apteryx lawryi, my reason for treating it as a distinct species, under a name 

 that has obtained currency, will be appreciated, and the name of Apteryx bulleri seems to me 

 more convenient than the alternative trinomial one of Apteryx australis bulleri* If a sufficiently 



* I am old-fashioned enough to be wholly opposed to the trinomial system of nomenclature, now so much in 

 vogue. The inconvenience of this practice is well illustrated in Dr. Hartert's recent Birds of the Palcearctic Fauna, in 

 which he proposes to give three names to nearly every species treated of. Commenting on this, the Editors of the 

 ' Ibis ' write : "At times Mr. Hartert's plan results in such monstrosities as ' Pica pica pica,' and ' Oriolus oriolus 

 oriolus,' and becomes almost ridiculous." 



3 



