Natural History 375 



of setting the feet we can distinguish the predacious and 

 the marsh-frequenting quadrupeds. 



The next track Hkely to be seen is that of the dog 

 (Illustration 2). In this the harder, less pliant foot and 

 the non-retractile claws are clearly seen. But the trail 

 shows the dog is not a correct walker. His tracks are 

 "out of register" as a printer would say. And he has 

 a glaring defect — the result no doubt of domestication, 

 of long generations on pavements and in houses — he drags 

 his toes. All these things contribute to make the dog 

 a noisy walker in the woods. 



WOLF 



It is well at this time to compare the track of the dog 

 with that of the wolf. I have made dozens of drawings, 

 casts, prints, photographs, and studies of wolf and dog 

 tracks; and have not found a single reliable feature that 

 will distinguish them. One hunter says the wolf has the 

 relatively small outer toes. Yes, sometimes; but not 

 when compared with a colHe. Another says that the 

 wolf's foot is longer; but not when compared with that 

 of a greyhound, staghound, or lurcher. Another, the 

 wolf's foot is larger; yet it will not rank in size with that 

 of a St. Bernard or a great Dane. The wolf hfts his feet 

 neatly without dragging his toes; but so do many dogs, 

 especially country dogs. Thus all these diagnostics fail. 

 On the whole a wolf is a better walker than a dog. His 

 tracks do usually register, but not always, and in some 

 wolves rarely. 



If a wolf-track in the snow be followed for a mile or two, 

 it will be found to go cautiously up to an unusual or 

 promising object. (Illustration 3.) It is obviously the 

 trail of a suspicious, shy creature while the dog-trail 



