NORTH AMERICA AND THE WEST INDIES 189 



gan. In earlier times there were a few in Wisconsin, and Hoy 

 mentions one killed in La Crosse County in 1870. Rather 

 surprising, however, is the evidence adduced by Hahn (1909) 

 of a wolverene having been killed in 1840 in Noble County, 

 Ind., and a second in 1852 in Knox County of the same State. 

 The records probably mark nearly the southern limit of range 

 in the east in historic times. In Minnesota, Herrick, writing in 

 1892, says he has no recent knowledge of it, so that it doubtless 

 was rare there at that time, but Kingsford, quoted by Cory 

 (1912), says that "about 1895 to 1897 they were quite plentiful 

 in northern Minnesota. " More recent records indicate that a 

 few individuals were found in Minnesota up to a much later 

 time, for Dr. H. H. T. Jackson (1922) has recorded a skull in 

 the collection of the U. S. Biological Survey from an animal 

 killed in Itasca County, January 11, 1899; and C. E. Johnson 

 (1923), who made special efforts to learn of the wolverene's 

 former status, records that a fur trader of long experience in 

 northern Minnesota told him in 1922 that in 30 years of buying 

 furs in the region he would not average more than one wolver- 

 ene pelt a year and had bought none during the previous three 

 years along the Canadian border. He specifically mentions a 

 pelt bought by this trader that was taken in 1918 in the 

 northern part of St. Louis County, Minn. It seems to be the 

 last definite record for that State. 



In the early years of the last century these animals were 

 found at least in the northeastern part of North Dakota and 

 were taken in small numbers with the fur catch of those days 

 (see V. Bailey, 1926). It seems to have been present in the 

 State till about 1850, but there are no later records. According 

 to Baird (1857) it occurred in "the Black Hills of the Missouri" 

 at about the same time. 



While in the eastern United States and southeastern Canada 

 the wolverene is doubtless now to be regarded as extinct, it 

 still is found in some numbers in the wilder and more moun- 

 tainous parts of the western United States and more frequently 

 in the Canadian Northwest, although on account of its solitary 

 habits it can not be accounted a "common" species at any 

 time. Writing of the mammals of the Athabaska-Mackenzie 

 district Preble (1908) states that it is found throughout that 

 region "but is nowhere common, though a few skins are 

 collected at all the posts we visited. During our trip in 1901 



