CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME 81 



harbor infection without showing any evidence of it themselves are 

 called "carriers." 



Now that deer are proved to be "carriers" of anaplasmosis, how 

 can they be a menace to cattle ? The fact that anaplasmosis is a blood 

 infection means that blood from a "carrier" animal must be intro- 

 duced into a susceptible one in order to produce disease. By what 

 means can the blood of deer be transmitted to the blood of cattle? 

 A ready answer is: "insects." Previous discoveries of other investi- 

 gators indicate that certain ticks and blood-sucking flies may transmit 

 the disease through their bite. It is possible that these flies may attack 

 deer ; some of the ticks, at least, which were found on the two deer under 

 investigation are among those proved to be transmitters of the disease. 

 Since these ticks may first bite "carrier" deer, drop off, and crawl 

 onto cattle grazing in the vicinity, biting them in turn, and thereby 

 injecting the causative agent into the cattle, there is always a chance 

 of spreading anaplasmosis in this manner— a possibility that should 

 receive further attention.— TF. H. Boijnton, Division of Veterinary 

 Science, University of California, Berkeley, Novemler 15, 1933. 



ANOTHER "NEW" DEER FOR CALIFORNIA 



I. McT. Cowan's work on Pacific coast deer was outlined in the 

 October issue of California Fish and Game (Vol. 19, p. 274), wdiere 

 his description of a new subspecies of mule deer from the Inyo region 

 was mentioned. 



The November, 1933, issue of the Journal of Mammalogy (Volume 

 14, pp. 326-327) contains the description of another "new" subspecies 

 of mule deer from California. To this deer, Cowan has bestowed the 

 name Odocoileus hemionus fuliginatus. The type specimen was secured 

 on the Barona Ranch, 30 miles east of San Diego, October 8, 1928, 

 and was taken by Webb Toms, Avho was a State Game Warden at that 

 time. 



Cowan provides the following range for the new subspecies : ' ' From 

 San Jacinto and Santa Rosa Mountains, Riverside County, and San 

 Mateo Valley, San Diego County, California, southward at least to 

 La Corona, Sierra San Pedro Martir, Lower California, Mexico. ' ' Thus 

 the new subspecies inhabits San Diego and southern Riverside counties 

 in California, and the northern portion of Baja California. 



Cowan's paper provides no vernacular name for the new deer, so 

 its seems advisable to call it the San Diego mule deer because its range 

 is in the so-called San Diegan faunal district. 



This new mule deer is evidently most closely related to the Cali- 

 fornia mule deer {Odocoileus hemionus calif ornicus) and is of the same 

 size. The San Diego mule deer differs from the typical California 

 mule chiefly in its much darker coloration, being, in fact, the darkest 

 of all mule deer. This darkness is not a slight one, but is extremely 

 noticeable, and it is remarkable that the fact was not observed long ago. 



Cowan had 16 specimens of the San Diego mule deer available for 

 his study, one of which, from the Santa Ana Mountains, Orange 

 County, showed a close approach to the California mule deer, hence 

 it is probable that the subspecies intergrade in that vicinity.— /awes 

 Moffitt, Division of Fish and Game, Sa7i Francisco, December 20, 1933. 



6—9030 



