1934

Following a request from a correspondent to "The West Australian" the Curator of the Perth Museum (Mr. L. Glauert) yesterday supplied the following seasons why the Rottnest "monster," which was found on the beach at Rottnest Island recently, was considered definitely to be portion of a whale:—

1. There were no bones present.

2. There was no framework of cartilaginous material such as takes the place of bones in sharks, rays and other sea denizens of a similar kind.

3. There were no indications of the presence of eyes, mouth, gills, spiracles or organs of any kind.

4. The so-called "tail" was found to be without any concentric structure when cut through about half way along its length. It was therefore but a piece of flesh.

5. The material examined was dense and uniform in structure and had the appearance of flesh. In view of the long exposure it was remarkably well preserved.

6. There was no trace of skin or any other external covering, the so-called "hairs" being strands or fibres more resistant than the surrounding material.

7. In certain places roots and stalks of the marine plant cymodocea had become entangled in these strands.

8. A whale or a large dolphin was the only marine creature of our seas which could supply a mass of such size.

WHEN THE SECRETARY of the Rottnest Board of Control (Mr. S. J. Hay ward) saw this strange object in a city street, he thought at first sight It was the Rottnest monster, or a pup thereof. However, at a second glance, he discovered it was a length of copper wire, bent and twisted into all sorts ef queer shapes while it lay under the wheels of traffic.