26 REVISION OF AMEBICAN MOLES— TRUE. vol.xix. 



certain ruuways which were pointed out to nie as those of the mole 

 I proved afterwards to be made by meadow mice. 



The records rehiting to Canada are rather couflicting, but there is 

 probably little doubt of the occurrence of the genus in the .southern 

 parts. Thus, Audubon and Bachman, speaking- in general terms, 

 include Canada in the range.' 



Couper states that Scalops is abundant at Montreal, and occurs also 

 at Quebec, but is not common there.^ Chamberlain asserts that it is 

 common in New Brunswick, ' and Dr. J. A. Allen mentions its supposed 

 occurrence in the Tobique Eiver region in this Province, but as speci- 

 mens were not taken, the matter is open to question. If the mole does 

 occur in i^ew Brunswick, it is, of course, extremely probable that it 

 occurs also in Maine. Gapper included the genus half a century ago in 

 the fauna of the region between York and Lake Simcoe in Upper Canada, 

 but no siiecimens were seen.^ Mr. J. B. Tyrrell, in the Proceedings of 

 the Canadian Institute, asserts that it is common throughout eastern 

 Canada,'' and another writer, in the Naturaliste Canadien, records it as 

 existing in Canada, though it is rare.*^ 



Eichardson has a theory to account for the absence <>f the mole in 

 high latitudes, which runs as follows: 



I do not think it [the shrew mole] can exist; at least, on the east side of the Rocky 

 Mountains, beyond the fiftieth degree of latitude, because the earthworm on which 

 the Scalops, like the common mole [Talpa europa'a} principally feeds, is unknown in 

 the Hudson Bay countries. (Fauna Bor. Amer., p. 11.) 



Passing to the westward, the next region in which the existence of 

 Scalops is questionable is southern Michigan. Miles, in 1861, includes 

 it in the fauna of the State, but his list of mammals is probably a nom- 

 inal one." Hayden, in giving the range of S. onachrinKs, places the 

 eastern limit at Detroit. ^ I have seen no specimens from the State. 



In southern and central Wisconsin and Minnesota the species is 

 known to occur. Dr. E. A. Mearns, U. S. A., collected one at Camp 

 Douglas, in Juneau County, Wisconsin, and Strong remarks its occur- 

 rence in the southern and central sections.'' I know of no record of its 

 existence in northern Wisconsin. 



As regards Minnesota, Prof. Otto Lugger wrote me in January, 1896, 

 that he had obtained three specimens — one from Ottertail County, 

 another from Anoka (Anoka County), and a third from Mankato (Blue 

 Earth County). Ottertail County is the most northwesterly locality 



1 Quadrupeds of North America, I, p. 91. 



^Forest and Stream, newspaper, VIII, p. 300. 



3 Bull. Nat. Hist. Soc. New Brunswick, X, 1892, p. 32. ' 



••Zool. Jour., V, 1830, p. 202. 



^Proc. Canad. Inst., 3 8er.,VI, 1888, p. 88. (See Thompson's remarks on the inaccu- 

 racy of this list, aTid the replj , in the same journal, VII, 1889, No. 1, p. 178.) 

 6Nat.Canad,,II, p.44. 

 "Cat. of the Animals of Michigan, 1861. 

 sTrans. Amer. Bhil. Soc, new ser., XII, 1863, p. 140. 

 ** See Moses Strong in Geology of Wisconsin, 1, 1883, p. 438. 



