/E GI4I,OPiannL,US C A H T lA N t r S
Kentish Plover.
Chafadrius cantianus, Lath. Ind. Orn. Suppl., p. lxvi.
albifrons, Meyer, Taschenb. deutsch. Vög., tom. ii. p. 323.
Uttoralis, Bedist. Naturg. Beutschl., tom. iv. p. 430, tab. 23.
-------------- Alexandrinus, Hasselq. Reise, p. 213.
JEgialitis cantianus, Boie, Isis, 1822, p. 558.
— albifrons, Brehm, Vög. Deutschl.,-p. 551.
—— albiguJaris, Brehm, ibid., p. 553.
“ T h is little Plover,” says Yarrell, in his * British Birds,’ “ was first described and named by Dr. Latham
in the ninth vohtmc of his ‘ General History o f Birds,’ p. 328, from specimens sent him by Dr. Boys, which
had been killed a t Sandwich, in Kent, in the years 1787 and 1791, in which locality the species has several
times been obtained. In May 1830 Mr. George Clayton, o f Rochester, found it in pairs a t Pegwell Bay and
on the Sandwich Flats ; it has also been met with on the shelly bank, towards Sandhurst Castle and Deal,
whence I have seen specimens. The Ringed Plover is common in the same localities; but the Kentish
Plovers may be readily distinguished when on the ground by their smaller size. Though they mix together
when feeding, Mr. Clayton says the two species do not fly in company.” “ The egg,’”Mr. Yarrell states,
“ is correctly figured by Mr. Hewitson, in his well known work the * Eggs o f British Birds.’ I possess
two eggs o f this species, given me by Dr. Pitman, obtained with others on the Sussex co ast; these are one
inch and three lines in length by eleven lines in breadth, o f a yellowish stone-colour, spotted and streaked
with black.”
The above is probably the earliest record of this interesting species; and I have considered it only just
to the late Mr. Yarrell to repeat the information he has given to the trorW.
Mr. Stevenson, in his ‘Birds o f Norfolk,’ after 4 the instances o f its occurrence as
stated by Y arrell, M r. Clarke, o f Saffron Walden, ihv swi* and Mr. J . H, Gorney, proceeds to say:__
“ I have not had the opportunity o f examining specimen* of this bird in the flesh ■ hut Mr. Gould describes
the bill and legs as hard and black, whilst the same parts in the Ringed Plover are pulpy and yellow ; and
in all plumages the former may be recognized by the white o f the breast extending -upwards to the chin
without any interruption, which is not the case with the Ringed Plover.”
I am somewhat surprised that Mr. Stevenson has never had fresh Norfolk examples o f this bird, since from
1828 until within the last few years I have been in the habit o f receiving specimens along with other shore-
birds direct from Yarmouth, where I know they had been killed by the gunners who eke out a living by
shooting birds for the London collectors.
IF we compare the Kentish Plover with the Ringed Plover (o r the Ringed Dottrel, as it is more frequently
called}, we find certain stroeiKf&l differences which, although they may be slight, doubtless have some influence
over their itahriK and ceoe*n»*«S. On this head I may repeat here what I said in my ‘ Handbook to the
Birds o f A>i*-vr puifliiftod m 4865 In accordance with the spirit o f minute subdivision, which now
pervades all bnlnchc* o f ¡latural science. 1 ha**: tor a long time considered that the small Plovers hitherto
comprised in the genus JEgialites, o f «he ./¿V. kiaticula is the type, required a further subdivision; I
therefore propefse the term above i,i' nn i for the cantianus of Europe, and to associate with
it the ¿E. riificapUlus o f Australia. I fees'* «.»any other species o f this form, all or nearly all o f which
have black bilks and long legs, and are kww vttfc black on the under surface than the members o f the
genus AEgialites. They have a different note, arc nimble of foot, and affect situations bordering the open sea.”
The Kentish Plovers have longer legs and shorter toes, which are black and hard, instead o f the
former being pulpy and the latter yellow as in the Hioged Plovers; their eyes also are larger when compared
with the size of the body. The situations tW rwvj birds affect when they come to us to breed are also
very different, the Ringed Plovers dispersing ifeeiMseHea over shingly beds and sides o f rivers, while the
Kentish Plover keeps to the sea-shore, and deposits its eggs above high-water mark and out o f the rcech
of the spray. Those who have seen the two birds alive in their native hannts cannot have failed to
observe the difference o f sites chosen by the two bntU. The note o f the Kentish Plover also is markedly
different from the plaintive pipe o f the Ringed Plovers, being more harsh and chattering. I f the« have n o t
all been ruthlessly destroyed since the month of June, 1846, the reader may go to the little town of Lvdd,
on the coast o f Kent, and thence to the shingles, and observe for himself both the species above mentioned.