598 REPORT OF NATIONAL MUSEUM, 1889. 



from Carroll, Montana, to Yellowstone Nat. Park in 1875, by Win. Ludlow, 1875, pp. 

 63-72.) A Puma from Fort Keogh is living in the Smithsonian park at this date. 

 See also Forest and Stream, xxvi, 1886, p. 508: xxx, 1888, pp. 411, 350. Mr. Vernou 

 Bailey found the Puma at Tilyou's Ranch, Dawson County, in 1887. (Rep't Orni- 

 thologist, Dep't Agriculture, 1888, p. 431.) 



Nebraska. — Aughey remarks regarding the Puma in this State: "I have only seen 

 it a few times on the Niobrara and the Loup." (S. Aughey, Geology of Nebraska, 

 1880, p. 119.) 



Nevada. — I have found no distinct record of its occurrence in this State. 



New Hampshire. — No evidence found of its occurrence in this State. 



New Jersey. — Omitted by Beesley from his list of the wild animals of Cape May 

 County (Geology of the County of Cape May, 1857, p. 137) and by Abbott from his 

 list, of the mammals of the State published in the Report of the Geological Survey of 

 New Jersey, 1868, pp. 751-761. 



Neiv Mexico. — Bartlect found the Puma along the water courses of this Territory 

 thirty-five years ago, (Narrative of Explorations in Texas, New Mexico, etc., n, 

 1853, p. 555&.) Woodhouse states that the Puma was observed in the mountains of 

 New Mexico. He also in another place states that its cry was heard on the San Fran- 

 cisco Mountains. (He calls it Felis partialis.) (Woodhouse in Sitgreaves's Exped. 

 down the Zufli and Colorado Rivers, 1853, pp. 37 and 47.) Drs. Coues and Yarrow 

 reported in 1875 that the Puma was tolerably common in the mountains of Colorado, 

 New Mexico, and Arizona. (Rep't Wheeler's survey, v, 1875, pp. 35-129.) Mr. J. 

 Preston True states that his guide killed a Puma at Albuquerque in 1888. (Forest 

 and Stream, xxx, 1888, pp. 350, 411. See also Forest and Stream, xn, 1879, p. 294, 

 and American Field, xx, 1883, p. 201.) 



New York. — The Puma is still found in the Adirondack Mountains. Dr. C. H. Mer- 

 riam gives a list of forty-six killed in that region between 1871 and 1881, and esti- 

 mates that nearly a hundred were killed between 1860 and 1882. (Trans. Liuuean 

 Society of New York, I, 1882, p. 39.) DeKay stated, in 1842, that the species was oc- 

 casionally seen in the Catskill Mountains. (Nat. Hist, of New York, Zoology, 

 1842, pp. 47, 48.) He also remembered the appearance of one in AYestchester County, 

 within 25 miles of New York City, when a boy, and was informed that one had been 

 killed in Warren County. See also Forest and Stream, xxm, 1884, pp. 4 and 264; 

 xxv, 1885, p. 286; vi. 1876, 138 (Lewis County); x, 1878, p. 138 (Fulton Lakes). 



North Carolina and South Carolina. — Andubon, in 1851, stated that it was occasion- 

 ally killed along the water-courses of these States. (Audubon and Bachmau, Quad- 

 rupeds of North America, ii, 1851, p. 312.) I liud no reference to its occurrence 

 here at a later date. Dr. Merriam in 1888 reported that the Panther was unknown 

 in the Great Smoky Mountain region of Tennessee and North Carolina. (Amer. 

 Jour. Science, xxxvi, 1888, p. 459.) 



Ohio. — Kirtland stated, in 1838, that the Puma was formerly found in Ohio, but 

 had disappeared. He mentions specimens in Dorfeuille's Museum in Cincinnati. 

 (Rep't Geol. Survey of Ohio, 1838, p. 176.) Later writers do not include the species. 



Oregon. — Suckley and Gibbs, in 1859, reported the Puma common in Oregon and 

 Washington, and abundant in the mountains of the Klamath River. (Nat. History 

 of Wash. Territory, U. S. Pacific R. R. Survey, 1859.) Mr. Hallock mentions that 

 Pumas were numerous in Josephine County, in 1877. (Sportsman's Gazetteer, 1877, 

 p, 138.) See also Forest and Stream, xxvn, 1887, p. 104 (near Puget Sound). 



Pennsylvania. — Audubon stated that the Puma was abundant at the headwaters of 

 the Juniata River in 1851. (Audubon and Bachmau, Quadrupeds of North America, 

 ii, 1851, p. 311.) McMurtrie states that a woman was killed by a Puma in Pennsyl- 

 vania in January, 1830. (Cuvier's Animal Kingdom, i, 1831, p. 115.) (See also Forest 

 and Stream, in, 1874, p. 67. Berks County). Mr. Hallock states that Pumas were to 

 be found in Cambria County, near Ebensburgh, in 1877; also in Elk County, near 

 Ridgway. (Sportsman's Gazetteer, 1877, p. 140.) Mrs. B. H. Warren writes me that 





