250 SUGGESTED IDENTITY OF THE BISON AND GAYAL. 



Bengal. Under similar conditions there is no doubt the bison would live, 

 and probably breed with domestic cattle, upon his own forest ground in 

 Southern India. 



I believe the distinction between the bison and the gayal was made by 

 Cuvier, or Blyth ; and Dr Jerdon has quoted them. The difference is, how- 

 ever, exceedingly slight, and from the sportsman or general observer's point 

 of view the two animals are to all intents and purposes identical. Were it 

 not that I should be setting my opinion against that of the above-named 

 eminent naturalists, I should say the animals are the same, and that the 

 distinction has been founded on a comparison of the wild individuals in 

 the one locality, and the domesticated and impure race in the other. The 

 name gayal is merely the local native name in Bengal. 



Wlien in the hill-tracts of Chittagong I saw numbers of domesticated 

 gayal, and examined them closely. Jerdon says of this animal : " The 

 gayal or mithun {Gavceus frontalis) is found in the hilly tracts to the east 

 of the Burrampooter, and at the head of the valley of Assam, the Mishnee 

 hills and their vicinity, probably extending north and east into the borders 

 of China. It is domesticated extensively and easily, and has bred with the 

 common Indian cattle. It is a heavy, clumsy-looking animal compared 

 with the bison, the wild animal similarly coloured and with white legs. It 

 browses more than the bison, and, unlike that, it has a smaU but distinct 

 dewlap. The domesticated race extends south as far as Tipperah and the 

 Chittagong hills, and northwards has been seen grazing in company with 

 the yak, close to the snows. It is better adapted for rocky and precipitous 

 ground than the bison." 



The points which Jerdon here notes seem slight divergencies on which 

 to found a distinction between two animals, when it is seen that the follow- 

 ing essential points exist in both : the dorsal ridge ending abruptly in the 

 middle of the back ; the peculiar light-blue fuU pupil of the eye ; the 

 unmixed brown colour of the hide, with chestnut inside the thighs and on 

 the abdomen ; the white forehead and legs ; similar horns. 



In the alleged points of difference there seem to be none that may not 

 be the direct result of the bison's (or gayaVs) domestication. Heaviness and 

 clumsiness of appearance might follow partial curtailment of the wanderings 

 of the wild animal, whilst its browsing more than the bison of Southern 

 India might be caused by local differences in pasture. I cannot imagine 

 any animal better adapted for rocky and precipitous country than the bison ; 

 but if the domestic gayal is so, that, too, may be a peculiarity arising from 

 the nature of the country. The chief point of difference seems to be 

 in the gayal's having, it is said, a small dewlap which is wanting in the 



