448 
‘To contact many such individuals, numer- 
ous repeat trips were necessary, and much 
of the interviewing was done during even- 
ing hours and over week-ends. Every fur- 
taker, regardless of age, sex, trapping suc- 
cess or observance of laws, was questioned 
as adroitly as possible. Following each 
interview, all the information obtained 
was recorded on a form especially designed 
ILLINnois NATURAL History SURVEY BULLETIN 
V ol. 22,74 rte 
evaluation of the important fur animals, 
a point almost always conditioned by the 
monetary return; his opinion on whether 
these fur animals had increased or de- 
creased in numbers since the preceding 
season ; his estimate of trapping conditions, © 
which, together with price, partly explain 
the seasonal fluctuation in catch; and the 
use made by the fur-taker of dog and gun 
Table 2.—Chronological schedule of fur survey. 
County 
Champaign sc. <r ee er re: 
Lea ere eo ek, Meee ee 
Lice eee ea ee 
IM ASOn Se eget helt eer 
OV av ESS teee coe tiene ee eae rca caer ee ea 
EVaAneOC cy eee eee eee rel tak desl oaneaen ee ea eae 
a ENS ots etre tee pare eae ae eee: 
rank lititeet oe tier 92 A ee 
UiniGni ete eed Soke en te 
Calhouni scene aca ee ates 
SEASON OF 1938-39 
June June 2451939. eee 
June 2/— july 14,1939. eee 
July 1$—Aug. 4511939 2 eee 
Aug. 6=Augs 211939597 ee 
Aug, 23 Sept: ola 1030 eee 
Septel3 Sept 9.1939 eee 
Sept, (0 -Octy 22, 1939 ae 
Oct. 22—Novy. 14, 1939. 
Season oF 1939-40 
May 31—June 11, 1940 
May 15—May 28, 1940 
May 6—May 14, 1940 
April 24—May 5, 1940 
April 12—April 23, 1940 
March 28—April 11, 1940 
March 15—March 26, 1940 
March 3—March 14, 1940 
Feb. 16—March 2, 1940 
Feb. 1—Feb. 15, 1940 
for this purpose, fig. 13. Questionable re- 
ports were corrected so far as possible by 
talking with neighbors, local fur dealers 
and state investigators (game wardens). 
In a very few cases, correction was ac- 
complished by personal appraisal based on 
all information at hand. 
Approximately 500 fur-takers, 50 deal- 
ers and several hundred other individuals 
were interviewed in obtaining data on the 
1938-39 catch. With the exception of a 
few trappers or fur-hunters who moved on 
or off the strips between seasons, and the 
fur-takers in Jo Daviess and Hancock 
Counties, who were interviewed only once, 
the same individuals were contacted a 
second time when data on the season of 
1939-40 were obtained. This duplication 
in sampling permitted an opportunity to 
evaluate the effects of price, weather and 
other seasonal changes on fur yield, refine 
sampling technique, and determine the 
trend in the fur catch over a 2-year period. 
It is probable that some individuals gave 
more nearly accurate answers the second 
year than the first. 
As shown in fig. 13, the form used in 
recording field information included space 
for the fur-taker’s name, address, license 
number, county and location of county. 
It included, also, space for the fur-taker’s 
in taking furs. “The catch by species, 
whether this was the fur-taker’s estimate 
or actual record, was always obtained and 
recorded on the form; the catch by weeks 
was usually estimated and gives only the 
general trend. Under ‘General notes,” 
anything considered pertinent to the study 
or case at hand was written in by the 
questioner. The relationship of sample 
strips to one soil type region is illustrated 
ie Paez: 
In the two instances in which two coun- 
ties represented a region, the data for both 
counties were averaged and considered as 
representative of the region as a whole. 
In these two instances, Union and Cal- 
houn counties represented the River Bluffs 
and Bottoms Region, and Franklin and 
Jasper counties represented the Gray 
Prairie Region. In the first case, the 
average fur income per square mile during 
the 2-year period was $20.43 for Union 
County and $18.08 for Calhoun County ; 
in the second the income during the same 
period was $11.71 for Jasper County and 
$10.48 for Franklin County, table 18. 
This close similarity of fur values for 
counties in the same regions indicates a 
relative uniformity throughout the regions, 
even though such similarity does not ex- 
tend to each of the fur species. Since the 
