GENERAL NOTES 
173 
that the comparative dates of horn shedding are more or less directly connected 
with the growth and condition of vegetation during the summer preceding the 
shedding season. Take, the above dates for 1917-1918, which were late. The 
spring of 1918 was extremely early but the shedding dates were very late, and 
the reason is evident from the record of conditions during the summer of 1917. 
The winter of 1916-1917 was a hard one and the spring was very late; the forage 
started late and the short season did not permit it to cure properly. The horned 
animals did not get the usual abundance of food; the horn growth was not as 
strong as usual, and did not mature so early. As the horns seem to be carried 
about the same length of time each year, the late maturity caused a late shedding. 
On the other hand the season of 1919 was early, hot, and dry, with very little 
forage. The horns grew at the usual rate for there was enough food during the 
growing period of the first half of the year. But the animals were not as strong 
and fat at the beginning of the winter. Then the winter was very snowy and 
cold and the weakened condition of the animals led to the early shedding of 
1919-1920, although the succeeding spring proved one of the latest ever recorded. 
The early shedding by weak and sick animals was very noticeable during the 
winter of 1919-1920. An old, one-eyed mule deer in evident poor health shed 
the first horn on December 22 and the remaining one on the 25th of the same 
month, and shortly afterwards died. An elk was seen on January 18 who had 
just shed both horns, and this animal did not live through the winter either. 
Since the shedding by both these animals was so evidently due to poor health, 
the dates are omitted from the above tabulation. — M. P. Skinner, Yellowstone 
Park, Wyoming. 
A “silk buffalo” robe 
I have in my possession a buffalo robe, an heirloom in my family, which, with 
a similar robe, was given to my grandfather, Martin Bates of Boston, sometime 
between 1840 and 1850, by Pierre Chouteau, the fur trader of St. Louis, with 
whom my grandfather had business dealings. As the elder Pierre Chouteau 
died in 1849 at the age of one hundred, it is to be presumed that his son, Pierre 
Chouteau, Junior, was the donor of the robes. The other robe was sold, and 
was inferior to the one I have. This one has been in the possession of the family 
ever since, though no use has been made of it. My uncle, the late Charles S. 
Bates, son of Martin Bates, gave the robe to his niece, and told her that it was 
called a silk buffalo, that it was very rare and highly valued. 
The hide was tanned by the Indians, and was sewed by them on the right side 
with sinew threads. As this made heavy ridges which might wear away the hair 
my cousin had the seams ripped and sewed on the other side. The skin is 70 
inches long, 65 inches wide just behind the forelegs, and 71 inches wide in front 
of hindlegs. The dorsal area is light brown in color, with a slight drab tone in 
some lights. The sides are dark, almost black on the front legs. Most of this 
long time the robe has been kept in the dark, so that it seems probable that it 
has faded little or none. The hair on the back is fine, short, and curly, appar- 
ently from one to 1| inches long, and in texture it is very soft; I suppose it might 
be called “silky.” I have no other bison skin at hand for comparison, so cannot 
say if it is really any softer than the average robe. I have made a few inquiries 
