September, 1943 Monr: 
the 1939-40 season as compared with those 
of the previous season. 
If these correlations, or differences, be- 
tween monthly report index figures and 
corresponding figures derived from data 
accumulated in the course of the oral sur- 
vey were constant previous to the 1938-39 
season, then we may assume that an aver- 
Fig. 8—Female coon in slab box on the 
Chautauqua National Wildlife Refuge, Mason 
County. The box, originally erected for wood 
ducks, had been appropriated by the coon 
which, shortly before the picture was taken, 
had given birth to four young. 
age of approximately 8,800 fur-takers 
caught coons annually; the calculated 
number was about 12,000 during the 1929- 
30 season and about 11,210 during the 
1939-40 season, 10 years later. As will be 
noted below, these figures are very con- 
servative. The total annual catch of these 
coon trappers and hunters is estimated to 
have averaged at least 32,000. Income is 
estimated to have averaged about $102,- 
000 annually. Averages are for the sea- 
sons of this study ending with 1939-40. 
The above figures are equivalent to 
about 1 coon hunter or trapper per 6.4 
square miles, or 86 per county; | coon to 
1.8 square miles, or 314 per county; about 
$1.80 per square mile, or $1,000 per 
county. 
It is possible that the number of coon 
takers in 1929-30 may have been as high 
as 50,000. It will be noted that, in the 
F URBEARER DISTRIBUTION AND INCOME 
517 
1937-38 season, there was a large and 
suddenly increased percentage index of 
coon catchers from 27 to 32, an increase 
of 5 points, table 4. This 1937-38 figure 
was greater than that derived for any 
previous year, even 1929-30, and was due 
apparently to a change in the law, bring- 
ing a suddenly increased number of fur 
hunters to record, fig. 2. Fur hunters 
average a greater number of coons per 
individual than do trappers. Indications 
are that the 1936-37 data and those for 
all previous seasons should be raised 5 
points to allow for inclusion of hunters 
not then recorded. Then the percentage 
of those fur-takers who caught coons in 
1929-30 would be up around 36 instead 
of 31. This situation should be considered 
when examining the above calculations, 
which are based on the lower percentages. 
Probably the total catch of coons declined 
more than our conservative figures show. 
SKUNK 
Distribution.—The average catch of 
skunks per fur-taker, converted into dots 
in such a way as to show the relative size 
of the catch in each county, indicates that 
the greatest skunk populations lie near our 
largest rivers, fig. 9. The counties along 
the Illinois River and the southern IIli- 
nois counties along the Mississippi stand 
Table 5.—Weighted per cent of Illinois fur- 
takers catching skunks, and weighted average 
catch of skunks per effective fur-taker; data 
derived from fur-takers’ monthly reports, and 
weighting done on the basis of the relative 
size of the counties represented. 
WEIGHTED WEIGHTED 
Per Cent AVERAGE 
SnicoN OF CaTcH OF 
Fur-TAKERS SKUNKS PER 
CATCHING EFFECTIVE 
SKUNKS Fur-TAKER 
1929-30.... 55 5.0 
1930-31. .. 59 5.9 
1934-35... 56 529 
1935-36. ... 45 4.7 
1936-37.... 64 Dea 
1937-38.... 49 Sti 
1938-39... 48 See 
1939-40. ... 48 3 
1940-41... ci! sey) 
1941-42.... 44 ol 
