Page:Rothschild Extinct Birds.djvu/111




 * Sceloglaux rufifacies Buller, Ibis 1904, p. 639; id. Suppl. B. New Zealand II, p. 65, pl. VII (1906).

RIGINAL description: "Adult female: Similar to Sceloglaux albifacies, but appreciably smaller; face dull rufous brown, instead of being white; crown and nape blackish brown; entire upper surface strongly suffused with rufous; quills marked with regular transverse bars and a terminal edging of rufous brown; tail-feathers uniform yellowish brown, obscurely barred with pale brown; bill lemon-yellow; feet dull yellow."

"Wairarapa district, near Wellington, North Island, in the summer 1868-9."

This supposed "species" is a very doubtful one. A close examination in the Tring Museum of the type (which was offered me for such a high price that I did not feel justified in buying it, fond as I am of possessing extinct forms, types and varieties) by Messrs. Hartert, Hellmayr and myself proved beyond doubt to all three of us that the specimen was not fully adult, but showed signs of immaturity. If I said to Sir Walter Buller that it was an extremely young, hardly fledged Sceloglaux this was certainly incorrect, and was perhaps just an exclamation after a hasty preliminary examination, for the bird is of course fully fledged and has passed, at least partially, through one moult of the feathers. On the other hand, both Professor Newton's and Dr. Sharpe's reputed statements that the owl in question is fully adult are not correct. It certainly shows unmistakable signs of immaturity, as noticed at once by Dr. Gadow (cf. Newton's letter on p. 66, l.c.), by Hartert, Hellmayr and myself. Moreover Professor Newton—though Buller says he "pronounced it to be an adult bird"—also admits that the bird "had moulted, though not necessarily to be in adult plumage," and he continues that he thinks the character of the markings continues to be juvenile.

Having thus discussed the age of this owl, the question must be considered if it is different from S. albifacies from the South Island. This is less easily done. Buller described it as a "new species," and mentions among the distinctive characters (see above) the colour of the tail. The tail, however, is "skillfully" (as Buller calls it, though I should use a less complimentary adverb) stuck in, and does not belong to a Sceloglaux, but to an Australian Ninox, and also some feathers on the neck are foreign. The wings being abraded, its slightly smaller length is not very significant. Certainly, however, the colouration in general is slightly more rufous than