Kermadec Petrel
Pterodroma neglecta (Schlegel, 1863)
Photo © By ZooPro at English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15371391
STATUS
Pacific Ocean. Polytypic.
OVERVIEW
In a review of all seabirds by W. R. P. Bourne (Ibis 109: 141-167) the BOU (1971) under 'Introduction' p. xiv, adopted his recommendations and this record was not admitted.
NOT PROVEN
0). 1908 Cheshire & Wirral Tarporley, picked up dead, 1st April, now at Grosvenor Museum, Chester.
(Anon., Proceedings of the Zoological Society 1908: 433; W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 21: 101; R. Newstead & T. A. Coward, British Birds 2: 14; T. Iredale, Ibis 1914: 423-436; W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club 33: 124-125; W. R. P. Bourne, Birding World 5 (10): 384; G. Watola, Birding World 17 (6): 240-241; BOURC (2006), Ibis 149: 195; M. Woodcock, British Birds 101: 211-212; C. Smout, British Birds 101: 212-213; P. Combridge, British Birds 101: 322-324).
[W. R. P. Bourne, Ibis 109: 154; BOURC (1971), Ibis 113: 145; T. Melling, British Birds 101: 31-38, plates 17-19].
History Anon. (1908) in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society, p. 433, at a meeting held on 12th May 1908, says 'Mr. T. A. Coward, F.Z.S., exhibited a specimen of a Petrel, Oestrelata neglecta Schleg., the property of Mr. Arthur Newstead, of Cheshire, which had been picked up dead, yet in a quite fresh condition, at Tarporley in Cheshire, on April 1st, 1908. This bird is a native of the Southern Pacific, and has almost certainly never been recorded from the northern hemisphere, and certainly never from Europe before.'
W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, Editor (1908) in the Bulletin of the British Ornithologists' Club, Vol. XXI. p. 101, at the 142nd Meeting of the Club held on 20th May 1908 at the Restaurant Frascati, London, says: 'Mr. C. Oldham exhibited an example of Schlegel's Petrel (Oestrelata neglecta) which had been picked up dead near Tarporley, Cheshire, on April 1st, 1908. It was seen in the flesh by Mr. Robert Newstead, and immediately afterwards by Mr. T. A. Coward, who recognized it as O. neglecta, an identification which was subsequently confirmed at the British Museum by Mr. F. D. Godman and Dr. Bowdler Sharpe. The true home of this species was the Southern Pacific, especially the Kermadec Islands, about 1500 miles to the east of Australia. This was the first instance of the occurrence of this species in Europe or in any part of the Northern Hemisphere. The specimen had already been exhibited at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London held on May the 12th [cf. Abstr. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. no. 58, p. 23 (1908)].'
Robert Newstead & T. A. Coward (1908) in British Birds, Vol. II. pp. 14-17, say: 'On April 1st, 1908, an example of one of the "Dovelike Fulmars" was found dead under a tree near Tarporley, Cheshire, by a man who attends the weekly market at Chester. On the fourth day after its discovery the bird was offered to Mr. Arthur Newstead, who subsequently purchased it; it is now in his possession. The bird, a male, was examined by one of us while it was still in the flesh, an outline drawing was made of it, and the colour of the soft parts, the weight, and other details, carefully noted. The bird was in an excellent state of preservation, and, as might be expected with a Petrel, there was no indication that it had been in captivity.
The distinguishing characters of the bird are as follows: - Uniformly brown, paler beneath; forehead and cheeks faintly mottled; "exposed portion of the outer primary beneath - white towards the base of the inner web (Salvin, Cat. Birds in coll, Brit. Museum, XXV. p. 397)." Tarsi, proximal third of the toes, and webs, bluish-grey; the rest of the feet black. Tail very slightly rounded. Bill black. Irides dark hazel. The details are: - Upper-surface dark brown, head and neck decidedly greyer; all the feathers edged with paler brown, with the exception of some of the scapulars, which are also decidedly darker (blackish-brown) than the feathers of the back; forehead and cheeks mottled with brown. Under-surface greyish-brown, in a strong light presenting a marked grey reflection; traces of narrow, interrupted, obscure dark bands on the breast, which are evident only when closely examined in a good light. Under tail-coverts dark-brown; bases white. Under wing-coverts and axillaries brown with paler margins; primaries blackish-brown, bases of inner webs and shafts white. Concealed bases of all the feathers white, a character most strongly marked on the neck and breast, where the grey-brown tips barely cover the underlying portions, so that on the slightest displacement of the feathers the white proximal portions show distinctly through. Total length, 15 inches; wing 11.1; tail, central and lateral rectrices, 4; bill, 1.7; tarsus, 1.5; middle and outer toe, 2.1; inner toe, 1.7. Weight, 16 oz. This example agrees best with the dark-breasted form of (O. neglecta (Schlegel), but this species, according to Salvin, (op. cit., p. 412) has the tarsi and basal portions of the toes yellow. However this may be, we find on comparing our specimen with an example of the dark-breasted form of (O. neglecta, in the collection of the Liverpool Museum, and with the specimens in the Natural History Museum, South Kensington, that they are, we think, specifically identical. The plumage agrees in almost every detail.
Furthermore, Salvin (op. cit., p. 412), states that "great variation exists as to the colour of the under-surface, some birds being nearly uniform greyish-brown". O. arminjoniana, Gigl. and Salvad., comes very near it, but this species is said to have the "under tail-coverts white (Salvin, op. cit., p. 413)", and there are other marked differences. Both the species hitherto recorded for the British Isles [O. hesitata, Kuhl., and O. brevipes (Peale)], belong to that section of the genus Oestrelata in which the exposed portion of the outer primary beneath is dark not white, so that, apart from other differences, the Cheshire specimen cannot be either of these. Regardless, therefore, of the difference in the colour of the feet and legs, we have come to the conclusion that our specimen is referable to Oestrelata neglecta, and that this species should be added to our fauna as a wanderer to the British Isles.
Drs. Bowdler Sharpe and Du Cane Godman, to whom we showed the specimen, are of opinion that our conclusion is warranted. O. neglecta is known only as a South Pacific species; it has been obtained in the neighbourhood of the Kermadec Islands, but little is known about its range. Apparently it has never before been recorded as occurring in Europe.
On March 25th the wind in Cheshire veered from the south-east to the west, and later to the N.N.W. On the 27th it backed to the S.S.W., rising in force, and remained westerly until the 31st, when, as registered at Manchester, it was blowing with an average velocity of 21 miles an hour. Tarporley is about 11 miles S.S.E. of the Mersey Estuary, 16 miles; S.E. of the Dee Estuary, some 60 miles E. of Cardigan Bay, and over 100 miles N. of the Bristol Channel. From the condition of the bird when found we conclude that it dropped towards the end of the month, probably on or about March 31st, when the westerly winds were at their strongest. The bird was exhibited at the meeting of the Zoological Society held on May 12th, and at the meeting of the British Ornithologists' Club held on May 20th last.'
W. R. P. Bourne (1967) in The Ibis, Vol. CIX. p. 154, says: 'The first record was attacked by Iredale as early as 1914; no named person saw the bird until it was bought in Chester Market on the fourth day after discovery and at the time it had never occurred away from the south Pacific. According to Coward's diary in the Edward Grey Institute, Oxford, for 14 April, the eyes had already begun to shrink when it was picked up, and it was only seen in the flesh by Arthur Newstead who bought it, not by Coward himself, though he saw the skin before it was dry. Many witnesses agree that the bird, which is still in the Chester Museum, is correctly identified, but the correspondence attached to the skin (Bourne 1963) is more concerned with the cost of stuffing it than with attempts to verify its origin. Tarporley is well inland in Cheshire, away from the Mersey Ports and Manchester, which are visited by vessels from all parts of the world.'
Admitted nationally (Witherby, Jourdain, Ticehurst & Tucker 1938-52).
In a further review by T. Melling (2008) in British Birds, Vol. CI. pp. 31-38, it was still considered unacceptable. The species was regarded as sedentary in 1971 when the BOU rejected it, but further knowledge that it is dispersive and wide-ranging prompted a further review. Martin Woodcock of Wiveton (2008) in British Birds, Vol. CI. pp. 211-212, in a Letter, states that Tim Melling's reappraisal of this record is based largely on fraud, but he thinks this is extremely unconvincing. Chris Smout of Anstruther (2008) in British Birds, Vol. CI. pp. 212-213, in a Letter, also states that Tim Melling's account doesn't really prove the record is unacceptable and that it should be reconsidered again, to which Tim Melling adds "the record lacks full provenance for a first for the Western Palearctic."
Comment Osbert Salvin was regarded as the authority of the Procelliidarae at the time.
