BRUCHIGAVIA. 
* 
Gray, in his memorable Handlist, probably influenced by that greatest 
of “ lumpers ” Schlegel, included all the forms in Larus, but carefully indicated 
aU differences by subgeneric headings of which no fewer than eighteen were 
recognised. Saunders, who did not recognise subgenera, simply lumped 
the whole lot as Larus, and though such treatment is quite against all scientific 
methods of the present time, as noted above, Saunders’s action appears to 
have been unhesitatingly followed by recent workers. The only excuse I can 
imagine is non-interest, as the differences to be observed are much greater 
than those taken hold of when dealing with other groups. 
Bonaparte’s diagnosis of his genus Bruchigavia is : — 
Rostrum breve robustulum, compactum, valde angulatum ; nares oblongae, pedes 
breves, validiculi : alae modicae ; cauda brevis ! 
Caput Omni tempore album, immaculatum. 
I am utilising this, as study of the juveniles must be undertaken before 
the correct appreciation of the affinities of the various species can be ascertained, 
and it seems useless to accept Larus any longer in the broad manner adopted 
by Saunders. 
From Terns and Noddies, Gulls are easily separated by the shape of the 
bill and tail. 
The bill is short and stout, between two and three times as long as it 
is deep, with the maxilla longer, and the tip bent over the mandible ; the tail 
is short and generally square. The nostrils are placed in a suture at some 
distance from the base of the bill, and are oblong in shape. The tarsus is 
fairly moderate and the feet are large and fully webbed; the hind toe fully 
developed, though small. First primary longest. The tail is shorter than the 
wing, and square. 
The above diagnosis is applicable to Larus, after the method of Saunders. 
Bruchigavia is characterised by having the tail less than half the length 
of the wing, and the bill is short and robust, though of a genteel shape ; the 
nostrils are proportionately very long and linear. 
VOL. II. 
445 
