a ee See

enn a
este Set 2
——

ANS I)

s i “J

ial

en a one rae!
2 thn a che A eneas

THE MAMMALIAN FAUNA

OF THE

EDINBURGH DISTRICT

Y

Only 200 copies printed.

THE

MAMMALIAN FAUNA

OF THE

EDINBURGH DISTRICT,

WITH

RECORDS OF OCCURRENCES OF THE RARER SPECIES THROUGHOUT
THE SOUTH-EAST OF SCOTLAND GENERALLY

BY

WILLIAM EVANS, F, B.S. E.

SECRETARY TO THE ROYAL PHYSICAL SOCIETY

ae -
ton Inst

EDINBURGH: M‘FARLANE & ERSKINE
1892

ALLHSON Tap
SIMTHSON A

}
y,

FESIC®

PREFACE

THE present volume is substantially a reprint of a paper
forming part of the “Proceedings” of the Royal Physical
Society for the Session 1890-91 (vol. xi., pp. 85-171). The
paper was read at the meeting of the Society on 15th April
1891; and printed in December, a few additional records and
observations being first added to bring it down to date.

The reproduction of the memoir in its present form is
largely due to the representations of a number of friends,
who have been good enough to say that it supplies a long
felt want, and to suggest that, if issued as a separate volume,
its usefulness would be materially increased. Having per-
sonally experienced the want of a treatise on the Mammalia
of the country surrounding the Scottish metropolis, I have
the less hesitation in giving effect to their suggestion.

For the permission to reprint the paper, I take this
opportunity of expressing my sincere thanks to the Council
of the Royal Physical Society. My best thanks are also due
to many friends and correspondents—Mr Eagle Clarke in
particular—for valuable assistance rendered in a variety of
ways. The information I owe to each has been acknow-

ledged, as far as possible, in the text.
Walk:

EDINBURGH, April 1892.

eer SUE ey
: ; «<

Hah JANOVI AN)

‘Dy, 14
Pie ee

-
2

THE MAMMALIAN FAUNA

OF THE

EDINBURGH DISTRICT

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

THE late Mr E. R. Alston, in the closing sentences of his
Catalogue of the Mammalia of Scotland,! pointed out to
Scottish naturalists that the distribution of the mammalian-
life of the country was much in need of revision, and cited
the Shrews, Mice, and Voles as especially deserving of
attention. Impressed with the truth of his remarks, I have
been endeavouring during the last few years to work out
in some degree of detail the distribution in our own neigh-
bourhood of the above-mentioned groups, and also of the
Bats, which had been equally neglected. My original
intention was to communicate to the Royal Physical Society
the results of my observations on these groups alone. Being,
however, also in possession of a mass of data bearing on
the past and present distribution of the other recent animals
of the class Mammalia occurring in the district, I ultimately
decided to combine the two sets of notes, and lay them
before the Society in the present form.

The “Edinburgh District,’ as here understood, embraces
the valley of the Forth, and such parts of the adjoining areas

? Published in 1880 by the Glasgow Natural History Society as part of its

‘Fauna of Scotland, with special reference to Clydesdale and the western
district,”

8 INTRODUCTORY

—Tay and Tweed—as lie within a moderate distance, say
twenty to thirty miles, of the city, the whole being capable -
of investigation in the course of a series of easy excursions,
seldom requiring more than a day for their accomplishment.
It is, in fact, practically the same area as that adopted by
Balfour and Sadler in their “Flora of Edinburgh,” and
shown in the map which accompanies both editions of that
work,—a section of country presenting a combination of
physical features peculiarly rich and varied. The counties
embraced are—on the south, East Lothian, Midlothian,
West Lothian, and Peebles, with parts of the adjoining
counties of Berwick, Roxburgh, Selkirk, Lanark, and
Stirling; and on the north, Fife, Kinross, Clackmannan, and
a portion of Perth. Through the centre—from west to east
—winds the Forth with its estuary and broad firth, into
which innumerable tributary streams from secondary valleys
empty their waters. Fresh-water lochs and ponds also
abound. The upper part of the main valley, penetrating
as it does the south-western section of the Perthshire
Grampians, is thoroughly wild and alpine in character.
From the rugged mountains of this north-west corner, a
series of sub-alpine ranges—the Campsie Fells, the Pent-
lands, the Moorfoots, and the Lammermoors—with their
connecting moorlands, constitute the watershed on the
south ; while the almost alpine Ochils, the Cleish Hills and
the Lomonds, mark it on the north. Between this rampart
of hills and the shores of the Forth, every variety of lowland
country is to be found—fertile lands and barren commons,
green meadows and furze-clad hills, breezy heights and
secluded dells, with woods and plantations of deciduous
trees and pines on every side. The part of the Tweed area
of which we take cognisance lies largely in the pastoral
county of Peebles, and consists for the most part of grassy

INTRODUCTORY i)

and heather-clad hills, intersected by a multitude of glens
dear to the angler. The section of the Tay area falling
within our limits is mainly lowland towards the east, and
highland in the west. It will thus be seen that the district,
whether we contemplate it as in the natural garb of former
times, or as now changed in outward aspect by the hand of
man, is well fitted to be the home of a mammalian fauna
rich both in species and in individuals. In the case of the
rarer and more interesting species, occurrences throughout
the south-east of Scotland generally will be alluded to.

From the earliest times man has ever exercised a modify-
ing influence on mammalian-faunas, adversely affecting some
species either by direct persecution or by rendering the
country unsuitable to their habits, and directly or indirectly
fostering the increase of others. He has, moreover, long
been in the habit of importing certain species from one
country or district to another, so that it is not always easy
to separate the indigenous from the introduced. The more
populous a district becomes, and the more its agricultural
industries are developed, the greater will be the changes on its
fauna. Add to these factors the existence for many centuries
of a large and influential class of landowners holding strong
_ views regarding the preservation of game, and it will readily
be understood that the district around Edinburgh was prob-
ably the first in Scotland to witness a radical change in
the character of its mammalian-life within historic times.
The larger predaceous animals, such as the Wolf and the
Bear, which carried destruction among the flocks, and even
threatened the life of the herdsman himself, would be among
the first to succumb. Many species would be hunted for their
skins or their flesh; others mainly for sport. The smaller
Carnivora would receive further attention on account of

their visits to the poultry-yard, and Hares and Rabbits
b

10 INTRODUCTORY

because of injury to the crops. Then came the game
laws—another interference with the balance of nature—
accelerating the destruction of the predatory animals, and
facilitating the increase of the rodents. The inordinate
increase of the Rabbit led in its turn to a universal system of
trapping to keep it in check, and from that day the fate of
most of the remaining terrestrial Carnivora was sealed.
Boece and Sibbald have put us in possession of much valu-
able information regarding the fauna of Scotland in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, but as a rule their
statements are too general to be of direct interest in the
present inquiry. But from the “Old Statistical Account” of
the parishes we get some excellent glimpses into the state of
our fauna a century ago, Even then the predatory animals
had been in great measure banished to the outlying parishes,
where, however, they were still not uncommon, as the
following extracts clearly testify :—

CAMPSIE (STIRLINGSHIRE).—After mentioning the Badger
and the Fox and their varieties, the writer of the article con-
tinues: “There are likewise (on the Campsie Fells) weasels,
otters, polecats, hedgehogs, wild cats; and, of late, several
martins have been seen among the rocks. . . . It may be
observed, that beasts of prey are every day becoming scarcer.
Till within these two years, we had a regular bred huntsman
who hunted this district ; his salary was paid by the tenants,
at so much per plough, which huntsman and dogs were kept
and fed by each tenant in his turn” (vol. xv., p. 323).

CALLANDER (PERTH).—“ Red deer come here for food and
shelter in severe winters. oes breed in our woods. Hares,
rabbits, foxes, wild cats, badgers, otters, moles, polecats,
weasels, and black martins, are also to be found here”
(vol. x1:, p. 598).

DouneE (Soura-West Perrn).—<The wild animals here

INTRODUCTORY ime

are the same as in the neighbouring parishes, hares, rabbits,
foxes, badgers, otters, foumarts, or polecats. The braes on
the north-east side of Cambuswallace House have been long
a receptacle for badgers and foxes; but these mischievous
animals are now much banished” (vol. xx., p. 49).

ALLOA (CLACKMANNAN).—“ The wild animals are the same
as are common to all the Low Country: hares, rabbits, foxes,
badgers, otters, fowmarts, or polecats, and stoats, or ermines.
These last are very rare. There are no wild cats” (vol. viil.,
p. 645).

TILLICOULTRY (CLACKMANNAN).—“ The wild quadrupeds
are hares, rabbits, foxes, hedge-hogs, weasels, polecats, badgers,
and otters” (vol. xv., p. 200).

FossAWAY AND TULLIEBOLE (PERTH AND KrNROSS).—“ Of
quadrupeds, there are foxes, badgers, otters, polecats, hares,
and rabbits” (vol. xviii., p. 466).

CASTLETOWN (RoxpurGH),.—“The wild quadrupeds are
foxes, hares, wild cats, polecats, weasels, the white weasel, often
seen in winter, hedgehogs, and Norway rats” (xvi., p. 76).

Many of the terrestrial species mentioned in the following
pages have doubtless been inhabitants of the district from a
remote antiquity. The naturalist, therefore (and I feel sure
the sportsman too, if he would but allow himself to look at
the matter in all its aspects), cannot contemplate without
feelings of regret the extermination of such animals as the
Wild Cat, the Marten, the Polecat, and the Badger, whose
ancestors were the contemporaries of the Bear, the Wolf, the
Wild Boar, and the Beaver, and in all probability inhabited
the district while extinct Deer and Oxen, and maybe even
the gigantic Mammoth, still lingered on its soil.

1 Evidence of the former existence of the Bear, the Wolf, and the Wild
Boar, even within historic times, is not wanting; and remains of the Wolf
have been found on the Pentland Hills above Dreghorn ; of the Beaver at

12 INTRODUCTORY

As the sole object of this memoir is to furnish information
concerning the mammals now or recently to be found in
the district, I have deemed it expedient to include in the
catalogue only those species which are known to have
occurred within the present century. Disregarding such as
had disappeared before Sibbald’s day, and also the Narwhal
(Monodon monoceros), of which an example, obtained near
the Isle of May in June 1648, is mentioned by Tulpius
(“ Obs. Med.,” p. 376), I thus exclude but one species having
anything like a substantial claim to a place in the list, namely,
the Sperm Whale or Cachelot (Physeter macrocephalus),
of which three are recorded as having been stranded in the
Forth, namely, one at Limekilns in 1689, and two near
Cramond, in 1701 and 1769 respectively. The fact that
when the Athole herd of the so-called Wild White Cattle was
broken up in 1854, about a dozen of them were secured by
the then Duke of Buccleuch, and kept for a few years in the
park at Dalkeith, does not entitle the animal to a place
in this list, even when taken in connection with Bishop
Leslie’s statement that it existed at Stirling (in the royal
park ?) in 1578. Those who desire information regarding the
extinct forms may be referred to Owen’s “ British Fossil
Mammals and Birds,” Dr J. A. Smith’s papers in the
“Proceedings” of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland
(vols. viii., ix., etc.), Woodward & Sherborn’s “ Catalogue of
Kimmerghame (Berwickshire), Linton Moss (Roxburghshire), and Loch Marlee
(Perthshire); of the Elk at Whitrig Bog (Berwickshire), near Hawick, and
near Selkirk ; apparently also at Duddingston and near Cramond (Mid-
lothian), near North Berwick (East Lothian), Kirkurd (Peeblesshire), Marlee
(Perthshire), etc.; of the Reindeer near Craigton (Linlithgowshire), and on
the Pentland Hills above Dreghorn; of the Great Long-horned Ox or Urus at
Whitrig Bog and Swinton Mill (Berwickshire), near Jedburgh, Lilliesleaf,
and Linton Moss (Roxburghshire), Whitmuirhall near Selkirk, Newburgh
(Fife), ete.; and of the Mammoth at Clifton Hall on the confines of the

counties of Edinburgh and Linlithgow (Mem. Wern. Soc., iv., 58), and
at Kimmerghame (Berwickshire).

INTRODUCTORY 13

British Fossil Vertebrata,’ and Harting’s “ British Animals
Extinct within Historic Times.”

The number of recent species (exclusive of the White
Cattle) hitherto recorded on satisfactory evidence for the
whole of Scotland is fifty-seven, which includes six additions
to Alston’s 1880 catalogue, namely, two Bats (Vespertilio
natterert and V. mystacinus) and four Cetaceans (balenop-
tera borealis, Grampus griseus, Lagenorhynchus albirostris,
and Delphinus delphis). Of these, forty-eight have valid
claims to a place in the present catalogue, and no fewer than
forty-six of them have occurred within the Forth area. This
is exclusive of Natterer’s Bat, the record of which requires
confirmation. The Greenland or Harp Seal (Phoca gren-
landica), and the Dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius)—
both perhaps less likely to occur—have also been recorded,
but on insufficient evidence, and are consequently likewise
excluded. The details of the comparison are given in the
following table, which also contains the figures for the British
Isles as a whole :—

Order. Britain. Scotland. Edinburgh.
Chiroptera, . . | 12 species.} 5 species, 3 species,
Insectivora, . : By en Diy a3 Be 53
Carnivora, , : 11 eee Ile a
Rodentia, . ; ‘ Te Sees, DAE aes
Ungulata, : By 55 ome Bl bs
Cetacea, . : : 1 ORES HQ)? tans 14 ges sf

In all, : . | 66 species. 57 species. 48 species.

The number by which the Edinburgh list falls short of the
British is largely made up of Bats, while the deficiency, as
compared with the Scottish list, consists almost entirely of

1V. murinus, V. discolor, and V. dasycneme, being in all likelihood
mere importations, are excluded.

14 INTRODUCTORY

Cetaceans and Seals. The British Bats are mainly confined to
England, several of them being of rare occurrence even there,
so that we can scarcely hope to increase our list by discoveries
in this group to the extent of more than two or three. The
occurrence of any further marine Carnivora on our coasts is
not at all likely; but the identification of one or two
additional Cetaceans is probably only a question of time. It
is therefore to the Bats and Cetaceans that we must look for
any augmentation of the list. The latter group may safely be
left in the hands of Sir William Turner, LL.D., F.R.S., whose
investigations have already thrown so much light on this section
of our fauna. Should any of my readers have opportunities of
obtaining Bats from any part of Scotland, they will confer a
favour by forwarding specimens either to myself or to Mr
Eagle Clarke of the Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh,
for examination.

On account of their timidity and more or less nocturnal
habits, comparatively few of our native quadrupeds come
under the notice of the casual observer; and the same causes,
by rendering the observation and study of them matters of
considerable difficulty, are no doubt in great measure respon-
sible for the scanty attention paid to the class by the majority
of field naturalists. With the exception of the very meagre
lists in Rhind’s “Excursions,” illustrative of the natural
history of the environs of Edinburgh, and in Stark’s “ Picture
of Edinburgh,” and of a short article by Mr Eagle Clarke in
Pollock’s “ Dictionary of the Forth,” published in May 1891,
no account of the Mammalia of the district has hitherto, so
far as Lam aware, been written. Records and short notices
bearing on the subject are, however, by no means scarce,
though scattered over a wide field of zoological and other
literature. A list of the publications from which information
has been derived will be found at the end of the volume.

INTRODUCTORY 15

The arrangement and nomenclature followed are those
adopted by Flower and Lydekker in their recently-published
“Introduction to the Study of Mammals,” with this excep-
tion, namely, that I begin with the Chiroptera and end with
the Cetacea, instead of the reverse, the result being that the
orders are presented in the same sequence as in the second
edition of Bell’s “ History of British Quadrupeds,” which is
still the standard work on these animals. The following
quotations from Flower and Lydekker’s book are well
worth bearing in mind in this connection. The authors
remark, p. 84, that “In systematic descriptions in books,
in lists, and catalogues, and in arranging collections, the
objects dealt with must be placed in a single linear series.
But by no means can such a series be made to coincide
with natural affinities. The artificial character of such
an arrangement, the constant violation of all true relation-
ships, are the more painfully evident the greater the
knowledge of the real structure and affinities. But the
necessity is obvious, and all that can be done is to make such
an arrangement as little as possible discordant with facts.”
Again (p. 85), speaking of the sub-class Lutherta (Mono-
delphia), with which alone we have here to do, they make the
following observations :—“ Their affinities with one another
are so complex that it is impossible to arrange them serially
with any regard to natural affinities. Indeed, each order is
now so isolated that it is almost impossible to say what its
affinities are ; and none of the hitherto proposed associations
of the orders into large groups stand the test of critical
investigation. All serial arrangements of the orders are
therefore perfectly arbitrary ; and although it would be of
very great convenience for reference in books and museums
if some general sequence, such as that here proposed, were
generally adopted, such a result can scarcely be expected,

16 INTRODUCTORY

since equally good reasons might be given for almost any
other combination of the various elements of which the
series is composed.”

As regards the means adopted for the capture of Mice,
Voles, and Shrews, I may mention that I use a small trap
known as the “ Cyclone mouse-trap ’—an American patent—
and find it most effective. It consists of a metal plate about
two inches square, to which are attached two strong spring
“jaws” of single wires, which, when the trap is unset, rest on
the edges of the foot-plate, so that the whole instrument
occupies very little space, thus permitting of a number being
carried in the pocket without inconvenience. When exposed
to damp they are apt to become rusty, which impedes the
action of the springs, but this is easily obviated by the
application of a little oil or vaseline. For bait I have
generally used cheese, cake of any sort, or a piece of apple,
but on the suggestion of Mr W. D. Roebuck of Leeds, I
have lately tried powdered aniseed, and find it remarkably
attractive to most of the micro-mammals.

LONG-EARED BAT ny

OrpeR CHIROPRTERA.

LONG-EARED BAT.

PLECOTUS AURITUS (Z.).

THouGH much less abundant than the next species, this
Bat is widely distributed in the district, and is by no means
rare. I have myself obtained it at Tynefield and Gosford in
East Lothian, at Colinton in Midlothian,’ and at Lamancha in
Peeblesshire ; and have seen examples (including one obtained
by Mr Harvie-Brown at Dunipace in Stirlingshire), or had it
reported to me, from a number of other localities on both sides
of the Forth. All my captures have been made while the
animals were at rest in their hiding-places, which I have
invariably found to be about buildings. The Colinton colony
inhabit the ruins of an ancient castle, concealing themselves
in narrow holes in the masonry of the roofs of the vaults and
passages. The species was recorded for Alloa as far back as
1793 (“Old Stat. Acc.,” viii., p. 646).

Mr George Pow has sent me a specimen which was
taken in the day-time, near Dunbar, on 10th June last. It
flew against the face of its captor apparently in a dazed state,
and fell helpless to the ground. At Yetholm, in June 1886,
I observed one fluttering in broad daylight near an old mill
in the same semi-conscious state, and might easily have
captured it but for an intervening stream. Its behaviour was
in marked contrast to the activity displayed by the Pipistrelle,

1 A specimen obtained at Yester in East Lothian, on 17th October 1891,
has been handed to me by Mr Bruce Campbell; and I have to thank
Mr D. F. Mackenzie for another taken at Mortonhall, near Edinburgh,

on 10th November,
A

18 CHIROPTERA

as I have seen it under similar circumstances. As a rule this
is a late flier, and hence is seldom noticed on wing.

Since writing the above, I have received from Mr Chouler,
gamekeeper, Dalkeith Park,a Long-eared Bat which entered his
house on the evening of 1st October (1891), and was observed
to take two flies from the ceiling of a room in which a bright
light was burning. It is alive still (12th October), and is
allowed out of its box for a couple of hours every evening for a
flight by gaslight. When first exposed to the light, it seems
rather bewildered, but very soon becomes quite lively, flitting
about with the utmost confidence, examining every corner of the
room, and ever and anon resting suspended head downwards
from the cornice or curtains. It delights in scrambling about
the pictures, the window-blinds, and even the chairs; and
often settles on the floor, where it moves with considerable
rapidity (indeed, it may almost be said to run), keeping the
body practically clear of the ground. A more knowing little
creature I have seldom seen; and, having discovered that
there is sufficient space below the room-door for it to creep
through, its endeavours to overcome obstacles placed in the
way of its escape are most persistent and amusing. Once it
flew up the chimney, but in five minutes returned very much
begrimed, of course, with soot. At the light it never flies,
as moths invariably do. During flight the tail is not, as a
rule, stretched full out behind (as represented in most illus-
trations of bats on wing), but, at about half its length, is
curved downwards and forwards. From a flat surface—the
table or the floor, for instance—it springs into flight without
the slightest difficulty. Flies and small pieces of butcher-
meat it takes readily from the hand. The inside of the
mouth is quite pallid as compared with that of a Daubenton’s
Bat I had alive a month ago.?

1 Captured at Cromdale, Strathspey, vide Scottish Naturalist, 1891, p. 190.

PIPISTRELLE 19

COMMON BAT or PIPISTRELLE.

VESPERUGO PIPISTRELLUS (Schreb.).

Bats are familiar objects in almost every part of the district,
as they flit to and fro in the twilight of summer evenings ;
and, of the three kinds positively known to occur, the
Pipistrelle is undoubtedly by far the most abundant and
generally distributed. I have examined examples from many
localities ; and, by its size and its style of flight, have identified
it on the wing hundreds of times. Some years ago I captured
about a dozen in a few minutes with a landing-net at
Macbiehill in Peeblesshire, and in May 1890 I secured nearly
as many with an insect-net at Gosford in East Lothian. I
have also recently netted it at Duddingston Loch. For the
opportunity of examining fresh specimens from the following
localities, my best thanks are due to the persons whose names
are given after each, namely :—Dunbar and East Linton, in
Haddingtonshire (G. Pow); Yester, Haddingtonshire (Bruce
Campbell); Grant’s House, Berwickshire (Bruce Campbell) ;
Stobo, Peeblesshire (J. Thomson); The Inch, Midlothian
(T. Speedy) ; Dalmeny Park, Linlithgowshire (Bruce Camp-
bell) ; Dunipace, Stirlingshire (J. A. Harvie-Brown) ; Broom-
hall, Fifeshire (W. Lumley).

With us the Pipistrelle’s usual period of activity is from
April till late in October! but it may be seen on wing in
mild weather in every month of the year. On New Year's
Day 1883, I noticed one flying briskly about Cramond church,
and two were seen in Dalmeny Park on 28th January 1891.
Occasionally, too, it may be observed abroad at midday. In

1 One was seen at Dalmeny on 7th November 1891, and I saw one flying

briskly near Morningside at noon on 23rd December (a sunny and very
frosty day), and again in the evening on 28th February and 19th March 1892,

20 CHIROPTERA

June last I watched one for fully a quarter of an hour flying
in the bright sunshine at Broomhall, near Dunfermline, and
was much struck with its activity, and the facility with which
it evaded stones and other missiles thrown at it. It would
appear that it also occasionally travels a considerable dis-
tance in search of food, for on 18th September 1884, while
waiting for wild-fowl by the sandhills at the mouth of Aber-
lady Bay, one flew round me several times. Some of the
many examples that have passed through my hands have
been decidedly paler than the ordinary form, while one or
two have been almost black. Their flight, as observed in my
room, is more rapid and erratic than that of the last species,
and instead of alighting on the cornice or curtains in an
inverted position, they settle with the head uppermost,
and as a rule only invert themselves when about to

take flight again.

DAUBENTON’S, or tue WATER BAT.

VESPERTILIO DAUBENTONI JLevsl.

Our knowledge of the distribution of this species in the
district is still imperfect, but enough is known to show that
it is, at least locally, not uncommon. Under the name of
V. marginatus, it was recorded from Fife so long ago as 1828
by Fleming (“British Animals,’ p. 6). During the summer
of 1869 I observed a number of Bats flitting over a still reach
of the Esk above Penicuik, and one which I succeeded in
striking down with a walking-stick proved to be of this species.
In the Edinburgh Museum there are three specimens (two
adults and a newly-born young one), identified by Mr Eagle
Clarke (“Scottish Naturalist,” 1891, p. 92), which were taken
at The Inch, near Liberton, in July 1880 by Mr T. Speedy,

DAUBENTON’S BAT 21

who tells me they were found with many others in the hollow
of an old ash. He assures me there were many dozens
clustered together in this dormitory, which, however, they
forsook immediately after its discovery. I have little doubt
the feeding-ground of the colony was Duddingston Loch,
over whose surface, on calm summer evenings, numbers of
V. daubentont may generally be seen.t On two occasions in
June of the present year (1891) I was on the south side of
the loch at dusk, and identified several pairs, their larger size,
and habit of gliding in easy circles close to the surface of the
water, serving at once to distinguish them from the Pipi-
strelles. In other suitable localities I have from time to time
seen bats that doubtless were of this species. In the “ Pro-
ceedings” of the Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club (vol.ix., p.441),
Dr Hardy states—on the authority, he tells me, of the late
Mr Robert Gray—that Daubenton’s Bat is well known about
Dunbar, a district from which, through the attention of Mr
G. Pow, I have received three examples in the flesh. Two of
these—male and female—were shot as they flew over a sheet
of water at Broxmouth on 20th June of the present year
(1891), and the third by the Tyne at East Linton four days
later. The expanse of the wings in the first of these was about
9? inches, while in the last it was barely 9. The species has
likewise been recorded more than once from Roxburghshire
(Proc. Berw. Nat. Club,” ix., p. 441; and “Scottish Leader ”
of 22nd June 1888). Its Scottish stronghold, however,
would appear to be in the neighbourhood of Dumfries, where
Mr Service tells me it is commoner than the Pipistrelle.
As in the case of other Bats, July seems to be the usual
time for the production of the young.

1 Vogt, in his Natural History of Animals (London, 1887, vol. i., p. 106),

says of this Bat, ‘‘Its winter quarters are in hollow trees, often pretty far
from its hunting-ground.”

2 CHIROPTERA

[NATTERER’S BAT.
VESPERTILIO NATTERERI ‘whl.

This Bat is recorded as having occurred near Dalkeith, but
unfortunately the circumstances are not altogether satisfac-
tory. They are as follows :-—On 28th September 1880 the
late Mr R. Gray wrote to Mr Harvie-Brown in these terms—
“T find a new bat to our Scottish lists in some plenty near Dal-
keith, viz., R. [sic] natterert.” . . . “ Nattereri was in dozens
in the hole of a tree,” statements which were published by
Mr Harvie-Brown in the “Proceedings” of the Glasgow
Natural History Society (vol. iv., p. 503). Itseems strange that
Mr Gray, who was always so solicitous for the full and proper
recording of rarities, should have let the subject drop here if
he was convinced of the correctness of his identification. I
have endeavoured to follow the matter up, but with little
success. No specimen of Bat from Dalkeith, or of V. natterera
from any locality, can be found in Mr Gray’s collections.
From Mr Hope, taxidermist, Edinburgh, I learn, however,
that in 1880 he had in his shop, besides those brought
by Mr Speedy from The Inch, and since referred by Mr Eagle
Clarke to V. daubentoni, some Bats from Dalkeith Park
which Mr Gray remarked were of an uncommon kind, and
one of which was given to him at his request. On inquiry
at Mr Malcolm Dunn, Dalkeith Gardens, he informs me that
“in the spring of 1886 a large colony of bats (roughly
estimated at about fifty) were discovered one sunny afternoon
thickly clustered beneath the ‘roan’ and eave, and behind a
rain-pipe” in a corner of his house. He mentioned the
circumstance to Mr Gray, who expressed the opinion that
they would belong to the species known as Natterer’s Bat.
For two or three years they frequented the same corner, but

NATTERER’S BAT 23

have now entirely deserted it; and though Mr Dunn has
made diligent search himself in every likely place, and has
kindly afforded me an opportunity for a personal examination
this summer, we have not succeeded in finding their present
quarters. It is possible these Bats were a colony of V.
daubentoni ; but it must be remembered that Mr Gray was
well acquainted with that species, having reported its occur-
rence on several occasions, and that, after all, the existence of
V. natterert in the district is by no means so very unlikely,
looking to its range on the Continent, and seeing it has
apparently already occurred in Scotland, a specimen (an adult
female) in the British Museum being labelled “Inveraray,
August 1858,” and identified by no less an authority than
Dr G. E. Dobson (“Catalogue of the Chiroptera,” p. 308).
I ought to say, however, that the Duke of Argyll, from
whom the specimen is said to have been received, has no
recollection of the matter (letter to Mr Harvie-Brown, 24th
March 1891). This record appears to have escaped the
notice of Mr Alston when he drew up his paper on the
Scottish Mammals, and might have been overlooked by me
also, but for Mr Harting’s article on the species, published in
the “ Zoologist ” for 1889, p. 247.

To the same writer’s article on the Whiskered Bat (Ves-
pertilio mystacinus Leisl.) in the “Zoologist” for 1888 (p. 165),
I am indebted for a clue which has enabled me to trace an
undoubted Scotch example (the only one on record) of this
species also. The specimen, which is in the Manchester
Museum (Owens College), was captured by Mr J. Ray Hardy
of that institution, who writes me as follows:—“I took the
Bat you mention about four miles from Rannoch on the road
to Pitlochry, early in June 1874, while sugaring for Noctue,
I struck at him with my entomological net, and the cane rim
caught him and knocked him down. He died in my hand.”

24 CHIROPTERA

Its identity with V. mystacinus of Leisler was first recog-
nised by the Rev. J. E. Kelsall, who mentioned it to
Mr Harting, and this identification has been confirmed by
Mr Oldfield Thomas of the British Museum, to whom the
specimen has been kindly submitted by my friend Mr W. E.
Hoyle, curator of the Owens College Museum. My best
thanks are due to Mr Hardy for the privilege of being
allowed to record these particulars for the first time. This,
then, is another Bat which we may reasonably hope to

discover in the district. ]

HEDGEHOG

bo
Ou

OrpvpER INSECTIVORA.

HEDGEHOG.

ERINACEUS EUROPAUS L.

In spite of the persistent persecution to which it is
- subjected by gamekeepers in consequence of the occasional
plunder of a pheasant’s or a partridge’s nest, this interesting
animal is still common in all but the most unsuitable
localities. Many of them come annually under my own
notice between April and October—especially in those years
when I happen to be much about the woods and hedgerows
at night after moths. Some idea of their numbers may be
gathered from the fact that a keeper on a small property a
few miles south of Edinburgh kills between twenty and
thirty annually. I have frequently kept Hedgehogs in
confinement, but cannot say that they have always proved
“interesting pets.” The facility and speed with which they
follow up the track of a beetle shows that they possess a
very keen scent. Pale or albino examples occur at rare
intervals—two (adult and young) belonging to the Earl of
Haddington were exhibited at a meeting of the Royal
Physical Society on 17th February 1885.

Pennant, in Lightfoot’s “ Flora Scotica,” published in 1792
(vol. 1., p. 13), says of the Hedgehog—‘ not found beyond the
Tay, perhaps not beyond the Forth;” but the accuracy of
this statement may well be questioned. Sibbald includes the
“ Krinaceus” in his “ Historia Animalium in Scotia” (1684),

but the few remarks he makes concerning it have reference
B

26 INSECTIVORA

entirely to its habits and uses. We may fairly assume,
however, that had it then been unknown, or even very rare
in Fife—a county whose animals were probably better known
to him than those of any other part of Scotland—he would
have made some allusion to the fact. Only six years after
the publication of Lightfoot’s work, the “Urchin” was included
without comment in an enumeration of animals found in the
parish of Dowally, near Dunkeld (“ Old Statistical Account
of Scotland,” vol. xx., p. 472). It is also mentioned in the
Account of the parish of Tillicoultry, written in 1795
(op. cit., vol. xv., p. 200). Don, in his “List of Forfarshire
Animals,” published in 1813 (Headrick’s “Agriculture” of the
County, Appendix, p. 38), says: “This animal was formerly
rare in Angusshire, but of late years it has appeared in
tolerable plenty.” From personal inquiries made in different
parts of the counties of Fife, and Perth as far north as the
entrance to the Highlands, I learn that it is common through-
out these districts, and none of my correspondents can
remember when it was otherwise. Mr Keay, gamekeeper,
Murthly, can speak from his own knowledge to its abundance
in that neighbourhood for over forty years. Sixty-three years
ago, the limit set by Fleming to its northern distribution in
Britain was the Moray Firth (“British Animals,” p. 8).

COMMON SHREW.

SOREX VULGARIS JZ.

Very abundant and apparently universally distributed in
the district, expresses no more than the bare truth with
regard to this species. Though so common, comparatively
few people would be aware of its presence but for the feeble
cheep and rustle in the grass, and the occasional dead body

COMMON SHREW 27

_

on the pathway, so seldom does the tiny creature expose his
velvet coat to view. These indications of the animal’s
presence, however, scarcely give an adequate idea of its
abundance, and it is only after we have had recourse to
trapping for a time that this is fully realised. Wherever my
traps have been set, from the vicinity of the seashore to
the midst of the hills—whether by a stream, a hedge-bottom,
or under a whin-bush; in a plantation, a garden, or an upland
pasture—the Common Shrew has invariably been one of the
first and most frequent captures. On the furze-clad slopes of
the Braid Hills they are a perfect pest, continually occupying
the traps to the exclusion of better things. In the heart of
the Pentlands, too, near Loganlee, they have more than once
frustrated my endeavours to obtain other kinds; and Mr
Bruce, gardener, Colinton House, to whom I am indebted for
examples of most of our smaller mammals, takes large
numbers in and about the garden there. Correspondents in
East Lothian, Peeblesshire, Linlithgowshire, and Fife, have
had no difficulty in procuring me specimens. No better
time for trapping them can be selected than during winter,
especially when there is frost and a sprinkling of snow on
the ground; and I have captured them in the daytime as
readily as at night. Though probably most active towards
evening and after nightfall, the Shrews cannot properly be
regarded as nocturnal animals, nor do they appear to hibernate
even partially.

LESSER SHREW.

SorEX MINUTUS Z.=SOREX PYGMAUS Pall.
The authors of the last edition of Bell’s “ British Quadru-

peds” (1872) were disposed to regard the Lesser Shrew as
senerallv distributed in Scotland; bunt. while the correctness

28 INSECTIVORA

of their assumption need not be questioned, it should be
remembered that it was based on very scanty data; and it is
to be regretted that during the nineteen years which have
since elapsed our knowledge of the animal’s actual distribu-
tion in the country has received scarcely any substantial
-increase. By the uninitiated the Lesser Shrew is hardly
likely to be distinguished from the common species; but our
present ignorance of its precise range north of the Tweed is
not creditable to Scottish field-naturalists.

During the winter of 1888-89, I gave the ferryman at
Cramond a few traps, which he set in and about his garden,
on the Linlithgow side of the Almond. Among other things,
he captured three examples of this tiny quadruped, one of
which—the first recorded from this district—was exhibited
by me at a meeting of the Royal Physical Society on 20th
March 1889. In the course of last winter (1890-91) three
or four others, captured by the Messrs Campbell a little
farther west in Dalmeny Park, have passed through my
hands; and from what Mr M‘Leish, mole-catcher, Millburn,
near Corstorphine, tells me, there can be no doubt he has
observed it in his neighbourhood. On 22nd November 1890
Mr Eagle Clarke captured one in the daytime on the northern
slopes of the Pentlands, at Colzium, as recorded in the
“Scottish Naturalist” for January 1891, page 36; and on 25th
February Mr T. G. Laidlaw brought me another which his
brother had trapped the previous day at Hallmyre, near
West Linton, Peeblesshire. According to Alston (“Fauna
West of Scotland,” p. v), it is not uncommon in the Upper
Ward of Lanarkshire.

As these pages are passing through the press, I learn from
Mr Eagle Clarke that a specimen has been sent to him by Mr
Wm. Berry of Tayfield, Newport, who captured it on 2nd
November (1891) on Tentsmuir, Fife.

WATER SHREW 29

WATER SHREW.

CROSSOPUS FODIENS (Pallas).

With us the Water Shrew is widely, though somewhat
locally, distributed, but is nowhere abundant. I have records
of its occurrence during the last four or five years in several
parts of East Lothian and Midlothian; also in Linlithgow-
shire, Stirlingshire, Peeblesshire, and Fifeshire, and it has
been observed by Dr Hardy to enter his own house at Old-
cambus, Berwickshire (“ Proc. Berw. Nat. Club,” viii., p. 527).
Through the attention of the Messrs Campbell, I have
recently had opportunities of examining several in the flesh,
captured both in summer and winter in Dalmeny Park, and
have found them all to be more or less of the typical form
with the light underparts, which is the common form in the
more inland localities also. Mr Bruce has taken it in
the grounds of Colinton House, at a considerable distance
from water. One found dead by my children on the path
close to the Braid burn at Greenbank farm, on 10th July
1890, was of the variety with the dark underparts—the Sorex
remifer of MacGillivray’s “ British Quadrupeds.” I have
obtained several by means of the “Cyclone” traps baited
with cheese. i

Alston (Scottish Mammalia, p. 10) gives the credit of
adding the Water Shrew to the Scottish list to Dr Scoular of
Glasgow. As long ago, however, as 1808 it was known to
Patrick Neill as an inhabitant of the Esk at Habbie’s Howe,
near Carlops (vide his list of animals and plants, contributed to
the 1808 edition of Allan Ramsay’s “Gentle Shepherd,” vol. 1.,
p. 269); and in 1812 Fleming, in his “ Contributions to the
British Fauna,” published in the Wernerian Society’s

30 INSECTIVORA

“Memoirs” (vol. ii., p. 238), stated that it was then “ by
no means rare in the county of Fife.” Its presence near
Abbotsford was recorded in the “Magazine of Natural
History” (iii, p. 236) prior to the appearance of Scoular’s
note. What Scoular (op. cit., 1834, vi., p. 512) really did
was to recognise the variety remifer for the first time as
Scottish.

Since this memoir was read, I have had an unusually
good opportunity of studying the habits of this interesting
animal in the Braid burn below Comiston farm. About 8 P.M.,
on 22nd May, while strolling quietly by the side of the stream,
a series of ripples spreading over the water from the bank
almost beneath my feet attracted my attention. In a few
seconds the wavelets had vanished, and the surface of the
pool was as still as before; but while I gazed into it a little
creature, clothed as it were in silver, darted from the bank to
the bottom of the stream, and after hastily snatching some
water insects or crustaceans from a piece of wood lying on
the mud, returned precipitately to its den. In this way it
continued to feed for some minutes, when the sudden appear-
ance of three others swimming out from the opposite bank
was evidently the signal for play, for in an instant the four
joined company and scampered up the stream after each
other with astonishing rapidity, swimming on the surface or
beneath it, or running on the margin with equal facility.
Having gone a distance of twenty-five or thirty yards, they
disappeared into a drain, but soon reappeared, and pro-
ceeded down stream, in the same manner as they had gone
up, till about twenty yards below where I stood, when they
disappeared a second time. In a few minutes they were
out again, and so the chase went on for fully half an hour.
They frequently made a squeaking noise, which seemed to
me identical with that uttered by the Common Shrew. With

LN enn EE ee

WATER SHREW oll

one exception they were quite pale on the under parts. One
of them now forms part of the collection of native mammals
in the Museum of Science and Art; and the gambols of the
survivors have been a source of pleasure to me on several

subsequent occasions.

MOLE.

TALPA EUROP@A JL.

Innumerable colonies of Moles inhabit all our cultivated
lands and pastures, from the shores of the Forth to the
summits of the hills; I have myself seen their “hillocks” at
fully 1700 feet on the Pentlands, and still higher on the Ochils.
In the lowlands, where agriculture is at its height, the farmers
wage an incessant war against it through the medium of the
professional mole-catcher, but in the upland pastures it is less
molested, and consequently its habits and economy can be
there more readily studied. In such outlying districts, on
the lower slopes of the Pentland and Moorfoot hills, I have
frequently dug into the large mounds, or fortresses as they
have been called, containing the snug beds of soft grass in
which the animals repose during the short intervals from
labour in their subterranean hunting-grounds, but cannot say
that I have found the number or position of the tunnels with
which these mounds are pierced, disposed with the mathe-
matical exactitude invariably ascribed to them on the strength
of Le Court’s observations. Occasionally a close agreement
with the well-known illustration is observed, but as a rule
the departure from it is very considerable. The following
figure accurately represents the plan of a “fortress,” about
three feet in diameter, which I dissected in April 1891 on

oe INSECTIVORA

a moor behind the Dalmahoy hills. I ought to say that my
attention was first directed to this want of uniformity by
Mr M‘Leish, mole-catcher, Corstorphine.

ye ee

/ * os r NE x
ieee

Under gallery communicating dir- Upper gallery opening downwards
ectly with the central chamber (at the arrows) into the under one,
and the outside runs. Three which is shown in dotted lines.

escape-holes lower in the cham-
ber are shown in dotted lines.

The voracity of the Mole is well known. A year or two
ago I placed one at dusk into a deep box in which a quantity
of earth had stood for a considerable time. An hour after-
wards, on looking into the box by the light of a lantern,
innumerable worms were observed all round the sides endea-
vouring to make their escape. The Mole, however, was out
of sight, but his presence was indicated by slight upheavals
of the soil. By next morning he had not left a worm, and so
keen was his appetite that it was found impossible to meet
its demands, and he died after four days of confinement.
Instances of Moles taking earth-worms from the hand
immediately after being captured have been related to me,
and incidents of a like import are recorded in “Some Obser-
vations on the Natural History and Habits of the Mole,”
by the Rev. James Grierson, M.D., minister of Cockpen
(Mem. Wern. Soc.” iv., p. 218), published in 1822.

In August last, while searching for land-shells in a birch
plantation, a strange throbbing sound—a kind of thurr thurr,

MOLE 33

thurr thurr—somewhat like the purring of a cat or the distant
jarring of a goatsucker, arrested my attention. Creeping
cautiously in the direction whence the sound came, I per-
ceived that it proceeded from the ground, and the moment
I touched the spot it ceased. On digging into the ground a
Mole’s run was found a few inches below the surface, and
I have not the slightest doubt the author of the sound was
no other than the Mole itself.

I have obtained the young (probably ten days to a fortnight
old) from the nest during the third week of May. They
were then of a bluish-grey colour, very silky in appearance,
and without fur.

Buff and cream-coloured varieties are not very uncommon,
and from time to time afford material for a correspondence
in the newspapers.

Q

34 CARNIVORA

OrpvpeER CARNIVORA.

WILD CAT:

FELIS caTus JZ.

THOUGH doubtless once a denizen of all our glens and deans,
wherever the banks were sufficiently rocky and clothed with
woods and thickets to afford the necessary shelter, this fine
animal is now quite extinct throughout the whole of the
district, and for many miles beyond it. Its extermination
throughout Fife and the Lothians, with the exception of the
eastern corner of Haddingtonshire, must have taken place a
long time ago, but how long it is impossible to say, as no
facts bearing on the point appear to have been placed on
record. In some of the many suitable localities that readily
suggest themselves—for instance, on the banks of the Esk, to
go no farther afield—it is just possible that a few may have
lingered till the opening years of the present century, but
this is a mere conjecture on my part. In the cleuchs and
deans of the Lammermoors, the adjoining coast of Berwick-
shire, and in the Border counties generally, it seems to have
maintained its footing longer, and certainly existed in a few
spots well into this century. The same may be said of the
hills of Stirlingshire; and among the wilds of south-western
Perthshire it did not finally disappear till some twenty-five
or thirty years ago. In 1849 and 1874, Dr James Hardy, of
Oldcambus, published, in the “ Proceedings ” of the Berwick-
shire Naturalists’ Club (vol. il, p. 357, and vii, p. 246), some
valuable observations on the former occurrence of the Wild

WILD CAT 35

Cat in Berwickshire (and adjoining parts of East Lothian)
and the other Border counties—a timely step, otherwise even
the memory of it would, in all probability, have died out
without notice there as elsewhere in the south-east of Scot-
land. What Dr Hardy did for the Border counties, Mr
Harvie-Brown has done for the rest of Scotland in his excel-
lent article on the species contained in the “ Zoologist” for
1881, p. 8. Dr Hardy’s main facts will be best given in his
own words. In 1849 he wrote as follows :—* The Wild Cat
is probably by this time considered as an extinct animal in
Berwickshire. According to my information, it has not been
noticed in this part of the county for at least forty years. I
have, however, recently ascertained that one at least yet
survives, having hitherto been secured amidst the fastnesses
of our rocky coast from the unremitting persecution waged in
modern times against our indigenous wild Carnivora. On the
17th of March 1849, while on a visit to the coast immediately
to the east of St Helen’s Chapel, I had the pleasure of seeing
an individual still frequenting the ancient haunts of its race.

I first remarked it on the top of one of these precipices
named the Swallow Craig. . . . This was likewise the
spot where, more than forty years ago, my father used to see
them when they were still numerous. . . . The dark
caverns, or ‘ coves, of which there are several in the range
of cliffs from this to Fast Castle, had the repute in former
times of being tenanted by these animals. . . . By their
occasional depredations in the hen-roost they were known as
far westward as Dunglass, perhaps finding a retreat in the
deep and wooded glen. Fifty years ago, they were exceed-
ingly numerous in the woods above the Pease Bridge.” The
precipitous sea-banks between Gunsgreen and Fairneyside
are mentioned as another haunt, and it is further stated that
below a place named Blaikie, “there are several holes in the

36 CARNIVORA

banks still called the cat-holes, which were the headquarters
of the wild cats that prevailed there. . . . It is only
within a recent period that the last of them was killed.” In
his 1874 article Dr Hardy adduces further evidence of the
animal being formerly familiar to the country people in the
Border districts. Alexander Somerville’s encounter with it
in the Ogle Burn, a deep dark wooded ravine running into
the Lammermoors in the parish of Innerwick, as related in
his “ Autobiography of a Working Man,” is quoted at length.
Other localities particularised are “The Sting,’ on Upper
Monynut, also in the Lammermoors, where the last “ clecking”
is said to have been destroyed about sixty years since; Belton
Wood, where one is supposed to have been seen somewhat
later; and the Press Woods, on the edge of Coldingham
Moor. Place-names such as Cat-craig, now quarried away
for lime, on the coast east from Dunbar; Wulcat Yett, a few
miles from Jedburgh; Cat-lee Burn, in Southdean, are put
forward as additional evidence; and in this connection I may
also mention Wul-cat-brae on the Eye (op. cit.,1x., p. 15), and
Cat-slack in Yarrow. In the “Old Statistical Account”
(xvi. p. 76) the Wild Cat is included among the quadrupeds
then inhabiting the parish of Castletown in Roxburghshire, a
record which is not referred to either by Dr Hardy or Mr
Harvie-Brown. In the tenth volume of the “ Proceedings”
of the Berwickshire Club (p. 47) it is recorded that at the
Jedburgh meeting in September 1883, “a Wild Cat (/. catus)
shot a few years ago at Wolflee,” was exhibited by Mr J. T.
8. Elhot; but I would ask,—Is there no likelihood of this
having been a domestic cat run wild ?

The “ Old Statistical Account” contains abundant evidence
of the Wild Cat in Stirlingshire in the end of last century. In
the “New Statistical Account” of the county it is spoken of
as extinct in 1842 in Campsie and Fintry, but as still existing

WILD CAT an

in Strathblane, which, however, Mr Harvie-Brown is inclined
to doubt (“Zoologist,” 1881, p. 15). Cat-craig and Cats-
cleuch, near Denny, are mentioned as probable place-names
in Stirlingshire. Passing to south-west Perthshire, there is no
lack of evidence of its presence in many localities there during
the first half of the present century; but I must refer my
readers to Mr Harvie-Brown’s admirable paper for the
details. Suffice it to say, that two were killed near
Aberfoyle about 1855; that the last obtained in the Callander
district was trapped in or about 1857 in the glen of
Leny, and is still preserved at Leny House; that another was
killed at Cromlix, Braes of Doune, in 1857 or 1858; that
about 1850 one was killed at Gleneagles; that the keeper on
Balquhidder killed Wild Cats about 1855; and that in the
district south of Glendochart the last was killed upon Ben
More, near Suie, in 1863 or 1864.

A few of the places mentioned above are rather beyond
the limits of this paper, but their bearing on the subject
is sufficiently obvious, it is hoped, to justify the reference
to them.

FOX:
CANIS VULPES L.

Notwithstanding its predatory habits, the Fox is still fairly
numerous, being allowed in most parts of the district a large
amount of immunity from indiscriminate persecution in order
that it may be hunted with hound and horn in orthodox
fashion ; otherwise, we may well suppose, it would have
shared the fate of the other larger Carnivora, and long ere this
have been practically banished from the lowlands. In the
words of the writer of the article on the Fox in the Badminton

38 CARNIVORA

Library (“ Hunting,” p. 63), “hunted he must be; if he is to
exist at all, it is his raison d’étre.” At the present time there
are ten packs of fox-hounds in Scotland, all located south of
the Firths of Tay and Clyde. Six of them hunt the eastern
division, namely—the Fife hounds, 50 couples (kennels at
Harleswynd, Ceres); the Linlithgow and Stirlingshire, 3
couples (Golf Hall, Corstorphine); the Berwickshire, 35
couples (Belchester, Coldstream) ; the Duke of Buccleuch’s, 57
couples (St Boswell’s, Roxburghshire) ; Mr Scott-Plummer’s,
20 couples (Sunderland Hall, Selkirk) ; and the Jedforest
(Lintalee, Jedburgh). During the season 1890-91 the Lin-
lithgow and Stirlingshire pack killed 24 brace of foxes, as I
am informed by Mr E. Cotesworth, the huntsman, who
adds that the yearly average is about 25 brace. Mr W.
Shore, the huntsman of the Duke of Buccleuch’s pack, tells
me that they usually kill about 30 brace in a season. From
these statements I estimate that the six packs kill over
250 foxes per annum. Of course, a good many more are
quietly got rid of in less demonstrative ways, even in the
heart of the hunting areas; and in the hilly districts the
keepers and shepherds openly capture or destroy all they
can. Live cubs are readily disposed of at from 10s. to 15s.
a-piece, to be turned out in hunting districts, chiefly in
England. In the spring of 1889 a litter of five was dug out
‘of an earth on the Pentlands above Dreghorn. <A vixen and
her six cubs, taken on the Peeblesshire hills in the end of
April last, were sold at 10s. a-piece, while another vixen
and five cubs, captured on the Pentlands above Boghall on
11th May, were disposed of at £3, 10s., being £1 for the
mother and 10s. for each of her young ones.

Though, as has just been shown, this animal is by no means
rare with us, it is comparatively seldom that a person not
having special facilities has the opportunity of writing “ Fox

FOX 39

seen” in his diary. Still, in the course of the last fifteen
years, I have observed them on many occasions (and smelt
them on many more!) during my natural history rambles in
Midlothian and the adjoining counties. Quite recently I had
an excellent view of one on the Pentlands as it left the rocks
above Swanston and trotted leisurely over the summit of
Cairketton hill, When my father tenanted the farm of
Tynefield in East Lothian, a litter was reared there every
year; and I well remember the delight with which we used
to watch the youngsters as they played at the mouth of the
earth.

In the volumes of the “ Old Statistical Account,” the Fox
is perhaps more frequently mentioned than any other wild
animal. The writer of the article on the parish of Bowden
(Roxburghshire) tells us (vol. xvi., p. 239) that “much [injury]
was formerly sustained from foxes, to which the furze and
brushwood on the lower skirts of Eildon, both in this and
Melrose parish, afford cover. Of late, however, their number
has been diminished by the noblemen and gentlemen of the
Caledonian Hunt and others who keep hounds.” In the
Account of Duddingston (vol. xviii, p. 374), it is recorded
that “Foxes from the neighbouring hill or plantations some-
times invade the farm-yards.” Stark, in his “ Picture of
Edinburgh ” (6th ed., 1834, p. 322), states that it is “ occasion-
ally seen on the southern declivities of Arthur Seat hills,” a
locality in which I have good reason to believe it has been
observed up to a much more recent date. Mr Harold
Raeburn tells me that his brothers have seen one well within
the city boundary, near the Dean, within the last three or
four years.

Such place-names as Todholes near Balerno, Todhills near
Dalkeith, etc., perpetuate the old Scotch name for the Fox.

AO CARNIVORA

OTTER.

LUTRA VULGARIS Lral.

The Otter occurs permanently or at intervals on all our
rivers and larger streams, but only in very limited numbers.
Without attempting to give an exhaustive list of localities
and occurrences, I may mention that I have on several
occasions seen their footprints or “seals ” on the banks of the
Biel burn in East Lothian, and only the other day by the
Esk within the deer-park at Dalkeith Palace; and that,
besides specimens killed in these places, I have, during the
last few years, either examined examples or had their occur-
rence reported to me from the Tyne; the South Esk, on which
one (of two) was captured near Dalhousie Castle in 1889; the
North Esk, on which one was killed near Eskbank in 1890,
and another seen at Newhall five or six years since; Glen-
corse reservoir and Logan burn, in the Pentlands, where one
was captured in 1886, and the marks of another seen the
winter before last; the Tweed, between Peebles and Inner-
leithen, and at various other points in its course; the
Almond, both near its mouth and higher up; and the Carron,
in Stirlingshire. I have also quite recently seen one from
near Callander, and J. Gilmour, Esq. of Montrave, informs
me it is still not uncommon in Fife.

From Sir Robert Sibbald we learn that in the end of the
seventeenth century, when he wrote his “History of Fife
and Kinross,” “the sea-otter, which differeth from the land-
otter, for it is bigger, and the pile of its furr is rougher,”
inhabited the Firths of Forth and Tay (1803 ed., p. 114);
but I am not aware that the Otter now occurs in the
waters of these arms of the sea. In the volumes of the

OTTER 41

“Old Statistical Account” the Otter is frequently mentioned.
For instance, in vol. xx., p. 49, we are told they abounded at
Loch Mahaich, near Doune. In vol. xviii., p. 374, it is stated
that they “used to frequent Duddingston Loch,” which they
have often visited since—see ‘“‘ Proceedings” of the Royal
Physical Society, vol. i, p. 269, and vol. ii, p. 244, where
mention is made of specimens obtained or seen near Peffer
Mill in December 1856, Duddingston Loch about the
same time, and near Coltbridge in December 1860. Mr
Speedy assures me that not more than twenty years ago
they regularly frequented the policies of Duddingston
House. Patrick Neill, in his list of Habbie’s Howe animals
(1808), enters the Otter with the remark, “seldom met
with” against it; and we find the fact of one being killed
during severe weather in December 1812 at the farm-offices
of Ingliston, a mile and a half from the Almond, considered
worth recording in the “Scots Magazine” for that year
(p. 892). A male killed near Stow in the end of 1831,
and a female in November 1832, are recorded in the
“New Statistical Account” of the parish (p. 404). Both
were sent to the museum of the University of Edinburgh.
The animal is also mentioned in Stark’s “ Picture of Edin-
burgh” (1834) as inhabiting the Water of Leith, “ but is
rare.” On the whole, I am inclined to think that its status
in the district now is not much worse than it was three-
quarters of a century ago.

MacGillivray, in his “ British Quadrupeds,” 1838, p. 180,
states that a pack of otter-hounds was then kept by Lord John
Scott, who “exercised” them on the streams of Roxbureh-
shire. Since the death, about nine years ago, of Mr W. Hill,
who resided for some time at Kilduff, in East Lothian, where
he kept a pack, I am not aware that otter-hunting has been
practised in the district, except when the Dumfriesshire

42 CARNIVORA

hounds pay the Tweed or the Esk a visit, which they have
done quite recently. Mr Chouler, keeper, Dalkeith Park, has
the head of the last otter killed by Mr Hill; it was taken in
the Esk on 10th October 1881.

BADGER.
MELES TAXUS (Schreb.).

That the Badger, or Brock, as it was called, was a common
animal throughout the district in olden- times goes without
saying. At the time the “Old Statistical Account” was
drawn up—the closing years of last century—it was still well
known as an inhabitant of many localities, though even then
its numbers were greatly reduced ; and the adverse conditions
continuing to grow, its extermination in most of its former
haunts was apparently accomplished by about the middle of
the present century. Here and there a miserable remnant
lingered a few years longer, but it is very doubtful if more
than eight or nine pairs of the original stock now exist
anywhere in the valley of the Forth, and these mainly in its
remotest parts among the Perthshire hills, concerning which
the Rev. P. Graham wrote in his “Sketches of Perthshire”
(2nd ed., 1812, p. 216), “ We have hares, badgers, weasels,
etc., everywhere.” In the valley of the Tweed it maintained
its footing better, and a few favourite habitats are known to
be still occupied.

In the “Old Statistical Account” of Duddingston (vol.
xviii, p. 374) we read that “a solitary badger at times may
provoke a stubborn chace and contest,” and it is interesting
to know that at the present moment a few are to be found
within a very short distance of that locality, though I fear
we cannot claim them as the descendants of the sturdy beasts

BADGER 43

just mentioned. I refer to the policies at Edmonstone
House, where Badgers have taken up their abode for some
years past, and are known to have bred on several occasions.
Unfortunately, the gamekeeper seems to think they are
already too numerous, and has taken to killing them. In
May of this year (1891) I saw two of them in the taxider-
mist’s hands. It is supposed that this colony originated with
a female which escaped from the stables at The Inch, where
Mr T. Speedy has kept several in confinement. The Badger
seen in a field near Greenend in June 1883, and mentioned
in the “Scotsman” at the time, was doubtless the same
animal,

Former haunts on both branches of the Esk have been
placed on record. In 1808 Neill included it in his list of
animals inhabiting the grounds of Newhall, on the North Esk;
and the writer of the “ New Statistical Account ” of the parish
of Borthwick, on the southern branch, informs us that while
he was preparing that account (in 1839) there was a litter of
young Badgers in the Chirmat, a piece of wooded hill opposite
the windows of the manse. About Temple and Rosebery,
in the same neighbourhood, it existed until quite recently,
and the last may not even yet have been destroyed there.
One which was taken alive near Temple was advertised for
sale in the “Scotsman” of 25th April 1880; and a little
farther east, on the confines of Midlothian and Haddington-
shire, another was trapped some sixteen or seventeen years
ago at Blackshiels by Mr W. Wood, gamekeeper, who has
often related the circumstance to me.

Almost every estate in East Lothian appears to have
contained Badgers at one time. Mr Saunders, camekeeper,
Gosford, informs me that it is now some forty-five years since
the last was killed there, and that about the same time they
were on the adjoining properties of Gilmerton and Luffness, on

44 CARNIVORA

the latter of which the last succumbed about thirty-seven years
ago. From Mr R. Inglis, keeper, Tyninghame, I learn that
about forty years ago he knew of two litters on that estate
in each of two or three successive seasons, “but they were
never allowed to live long.” The last was killed there
twenty-one years ago, and he is not aware of any having
been seen since. There are places, however, in Binning
Wood, where they may well have lingered some years longer.
In May 1881 a hole once frequented by them in the grounds
at Belton was pointed out to the members of the Berwick-
shire Naturalists’ Club, and Dr Hardy was told that they
were then preserved in Pressmennan woods, and retained
a privileged home at Newbyth (Club’s “Proc.,” ix., 427). The
latter part of this statement is not corroborated, however, by
the Newbyth keeper, of whom I have made inquiries. He
has been seventeen years on the estate, and has not known
of a Badger on it during that time. Pressmennan woods,
on the other hand, not only were, but I have good reason to
believe still are tenanted. In 1862 I saw one alive in East
Linton, which had just been brought in from the Biel estate,
of which Pressmennan is a part; and Mr G. Muirhead
tells me he has a specimen which was captured at Salton in
the spring of 1868. On the confines of East Lothian and
Berwickshire, as well as throughout the latter county,
they had many haunts, and in few districts have more
places been named after it. We have, for instance, the
Brock or Spott water, near Dunbar ; the Brock-holes, a bank
below Thurston Mains; Brockhole farm, on the Eye; ete.
(vide “ Proceedings” of the Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club,
ix., pp. 17, 215, 222). Proceeding up the valley of the
Tweed, we find it in Lauderdale even at the present time.
It was stated to be still common at Legerwood in 1880
(op. cit., ix., p. 242). During the last five or six years I have

BADGER 45

examined in the flesh about a dozen from within the water-
shed of the Tweed, most of them having been captured in the
neighbourhood of Lauder, and two in Selkirkshire. On
one occasion, some two-and-twenty years ago, Mr Small,
taxidermist, Edinburgh, received six from Coldstream. In the
parish of Heriot they were present in the days of the “Old
Statistical Account” (xvi., p. 51); and in the north-west of
Peeblesshire one was killed at Halmyre dean about ten years
ago, as I am informed by Mr T. G. Laidlaw; while on the
Dolphinton estate a full-grown female—the third got there
during the last two or three years—was captured on 18th
April 1890, as recorded by Mr Charles Cook in the “Scottish
Naturalist” for January 1891, page 36.

The rough braes of many a Linlithgowshire stream, covered
as they then would be with natural wood and bracken, were
doubtless in former times also the chosen abode of the Brock;
indeed this is rendered certain as regards one section of the
county at any rate, by the fact that the parish of Uphall was
formerly called “Strathbrok” (“Old Stat. Ace.,” vi., 543) ;
hence also Broxburn, the principal village in the parish.
The Rev. Professor Duns informs me that when he went
to reside at Torphichen in 1844, there were still a few in
that neighbourhood, and that he has a skin yet which he then
obtained. Lochcote was a habitat at that time, or even later,
as I learn from the son of a former keeper there. Mr 8S.
Martin, for many years keeper at Hopetoun, writes me
(October 1891) that to the best of his recollection Badgers
were killed there about twelve or fifteen years ago; and
Mr Small, taxidermist, Edinburgh, tells me that prior to
1875 or 1876 he frequently had Badgers to stuff from
Linlithgowshire. One, which I saw in Mr Small’s shop,
was killed on 29th September 1887, at the Witch-craig,
by the Linlithgow and Stirlingshire fox-hounds. In the

46 CARNIVORA

summer of 1881 the Earl of Rosebery had a pair sent from
the south of England and liberated in Dalmeny Park, but
both are supposed to have wandered and been killed. In
1889, as I am informed by Mr Bruce Campbell, three others,
also from the south of England, were introduced into the
erounds at Dalmeny, where they have bred, and seem now to
be fairly established. I'saw their earth recently (April 1891),
and was told that four of the animals were seen near it a
short time before.

The hilly districts of Stirlingshire, on the Forth and Clyde
watershed, would seem at one time to have been quite a
stronghold of beasts of prey, including “ two species of Badger,

. the one somewhat resembling a sow, the other a dog”!
(“ Old Statistical Account,” Campsie, xv., p. 322); and the
abundance of the animal in Doune (on the north side of the
valley) and the neighbouring parishes has already been cited
(p. 11). Brocks-brae, in the parish of St Ninian’s, is a
Stirlingshire place-name. As might be expected, a few
still exist in the mountainous country at the head of the
Forth valley. On 17th April 1889, I examined a fine
male from the neighbourhood of Callander, and a little
farther off, in the braes of Balquhidder, one was trapped
last winter (1890-91).

Fife, like the other counties, had its Badgers at one
time too, but they must have been rooted out many years
since. In the days of my father’s boyhood, some sixty
years ago, they had not ceased to exist in the woods at
Dysart. Mr Gilmour of Montrave writes me that a Badger
was got in Wemyss woods some years back, but he thinks
it was an escaped one; and from Mr Charles Cook I learn
that another was caught on Benarty hill “some few years”
prior to 1880.

PINE MARTEN 47

PINE MARTEN.

MUSTELA MARTES JZ.

Once common, and with practically the same distribution
as the Wild Cat, the Marten seems to have been extirpated
as a resident species in the district even earlier than that
animal; but, being apparently more given to wander, it has
since turned up at wide intervals in localities from which it
had long disappeared as a resident. Now, however, that it is
being daily driven farther and farther into the Highlands, the
chances of such stragglers reaching us are becoming more and
more remote.

To Dr Hardy, of Oldcambus, we are indebted for bringing
together what little is known of the occurrence of the Marten
in the south-eastern part of the district, and I think I
cannot do better than quote his remarks as printed in
the “Proceedings” of the Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club,
vol. viii, page 527:—“In the Statistical Account of the
united parishes of Cockburnspath and Oldcambus, p. 299,
prepared in December 1834, the Rev. Andrew Baird reports
that the Marten (Martes Fagorwm) is said, a good number
of years ago, to have inhabited the woods near the Pease
Bridge. Till lately I had supposed that this hearsay had
originated from some traditions of the Wild Cats that
once made those woods their rendezvous; but now I think
its correctness is undoubted, as Mr Peter Cowe, of Lochton,
has an actual specimen of the Marten to show, and had
heard of another in the very locality that I had questioned.
The one preserved in Mr Cowe’s collection, he writes
of date 27th March 1879, ‘was caught in Dowlaw dean
in 1862 in a rabbit-trap. I had it alive for a week,
but it would not eat. A short time, say a few weeks,

48 CARNIVORA

after, another was caught about the Pease Bridge, but was
destroyed before I heard of its capture. Mr Kelly records
that a Marten was trapped in 1848 in Lauderdale, by Mr
Scott, which was the only example known there for half-a-
century. It was stuffed by Walter Simson, Lauder. This
furnishes us with four Berwickshire instances of the
animal,”

For the rest of the district I have practically nothing to
add to what is recorded in Mr Harvie-Brown’s article on the
species contributed to the “ Zoologist” for 1881, p. 81. In
the “Old Statistical Account” it is mentioned as occurring
among the rocks on the Campsie Fells (vol. xv., p. 323),
and in the neighbourhood of Callander (vol. xi, p. 598); and
in 1838 MacGillivray described a specimen from Lanarkshire
(“ British Quadrupeds,” p. 168). Since then examples have
turned up unexpectedly in a number of places. Thus on
10th May 1870 a very fine male, which I had the pleasure
of exhibiting at the meeting of the Royal Physical Society
in April 1891, on behalf of its owner, Mr Charles Cook,
was caught in an ordinary rabbit-trap on the wooded slopes
of the East Lomond hill, near Falkland, Fife; and in the
summer of 1873 another male was trapped in the woods
at Broomhall, near Dunfermline, in the same county, by Mr
Stark, gamekeeper there, in whose hands I have recently
seen it. In the beginning of June 1879, Dr A. C. Stark
had an excellent view of one in the fir wood behind Callander,
as he informed me shortly afterwards; and in February of
the same year one was killed in Glenartney. In April 1880
one which was killed in Balquhidder on the 2nd of the
month, was exhibited at a meeting of the Royal Physical
Society; and, so recently as August 1888, another (a male)
was caught on Urie estate, near Stonehaven (“Scotsman,”
1st September 1888).

POLECAT 49

POLECAT or FOUMART.

MUSTELA PUTORIUS JZ.

Seldom have the processes of extermination worked more
rapidly and effectually than in the present case. Formerly
abundant and generally distributed in the district, the Polecat
has for many years been practically extinct, even in the more
outlying localities. From the day that steel-traps came into
vogue for the capture of the Rabbit, the fate of the Polecat
in the lowlands was sealed.

The frequency with which it is mentioned, without any
qualifying remarks, in the volumes of the “ Old Statistical
Account” is excellent evidence that it was a common animal
in many localities, if not indeed in all, up to the closing years
of last century. For thirty or forty years more it was still
well known, but its numbers had been terribly thinned in the
interval, and by about 1850 it had practically ceased to exist
within our limits, so that the subsequent appearance of an
example here and there has always been regarded as an
exceptional event, and very likely some of these have merely
been escaped Ferrets. Even the memory of it is fast dying
out, and comparatively few of the keepers I have questioned
can give me any information regarding it. Neill, in his
Newhall list (1808), and again in his Tweeddale list (1815),
includes the “ Polecat or fitchet” without remark, but
neither Stark (1834) nor Rhind (1836) mentions it among
the animals to be found in the immediate neighbourhood of
Edinburgh; while MacGillivray, writing in 1838, speaks of it
as “of rare occurrence in the more cultivated tracts.” Game-
keepers who have known some of the largest estates in

Midlothian and East Lothian for more than half a century,
D

50 CARNIVORA

are nearly unanimous in fixing the date of their last Foumart
somewhere between 1840 and 1850, According to Dr
Crombie, one was shot about a mile from North Berwick about
1860, and the only Midlothian Polecats Mr Charles Cook has
a note of are one obtained on the farm of Fala Hill, and one
seen at Crosswood Hill, both a number of years prior to 1880.
At Edmonstone, near: Liberton, one, which was afterwards
trapped by the keepers, was seen by Mr James Haldane about
thirty-five years ago (vide Mr Harvie-Brown’s article on the
Polecat in the “ Zoologist” for 1881, p.161). In Linlithgow-
shire nine were killed at Lochcote between 1838 and
1845 by the keeper, David Kerr, whose son I have recently
interrogated on the subject. In 1847 Kerr also killed two
at Champfleurie in the same county; and Professor Duns
tells me that shortly after he went to Torphichen, in 1844,
he noticed Polecats nailed to a keeper’s wall. In Fyfe’s
“Summer Life on Land and Water at South Queensferry”
(1851), the following passage occurs at page 148 :—“ Amongst
the ferw nature of Barnbougle, or rather of Dalmeny Park,
no rambler, gifted with the sense of smell, could possibly
omit the fitchet, foumart, or polecat (Mustela putorius), one
of our finest furred animals, which we have reason to judge
must be abundant in these woods, although indeed a species
of fungus is found in them, which might, from its alarming
smell, be apt to mislead to the belief that a polecat
was near.” The qualification with which the author closes
his remarks will, it is to be feared, render the rest of his
statement practically worthless in the eyes of most
naturalists.

Mr Sam Martin, for many years keeper at Hopetoun,
writes me that the last was killed there fully thirty years ago.
Mr Durham of Boghead, near Bathgate (son of the late
Mr Durham Weir, MacGillivray’s able correspondent), has

POLECAT 51

recently shown me two stuffed specimens which were cap-
tured there about forty-five years ago, and he further assured
me that one was seen at a farm close by so recently as 1884.
But this is not the latest record, for Mr W. H. Henderson,
Linlithgow, writing to Mr Eagle Clarke in November 1890,
states that at Kinneil, on the western confines of the county,
on the 15th of November 1886 one ran out of a covert
into a whinny mound. Mr Henderson had not seen or
heard of one before in the county during a residence of
thirty-five years. In the east of Stirlingshire Mr Harvie-
Brown is of opinion it cannot have been common even
sixty to sixty-five years ago. About 1860 several are said
to have been seen on Gallowmuir by an old mole-catcher,
and Mr James Stirling of Garden heard of one near there
in the winter of 1879-80.

For Perthshire there are many records during the last forty
years, but very few of them fall within the scope of this
memoir. At Leny, near Callander, one was trapped in 1855,
and another in 1858, while on Lord Moray’s estate above
Doune one was caught about 1850. In Kinross one was seen
at Turfhills about 1845, and another on Scotlandwell Moss
about 1860. With regard to Fife, I have often heard my
father relate his experiences when a lad in connection with
the trapping of Polecats in a poultry-yard near Dysart; this
would be between 1830 and 1835. According to Mr Harvie-
Brown’s information, none have been seen at Lathirsk since
about 1860, and at Lawhill one was obtained in 1866. In
1880 one was often seen in the grounds at Falkland, and
when chased it took refuge in the thick ivy of the palace
walls; the keeper tried to trap it, but without success
(“ Zoologist,” 1881, p. 166). Mr Gilmour of Montrave writes
me that he has not heard of a Polecat in Fife since he went
to reside there in 1873.

52 CARNIVORA

Within Dr Hardy’s recollection they were plentiful in the
east of Berwickshire, in such localities as Dowlaw dean and
the Pease dean woods, but he has not seen one “ nailed up”
for a long time, though he believed it had not been extirpated
in the former of these localities so recently as 1880 (Harvie-
Brown in “ Zoologist,” 1881, p. 162). From Mr R. Inglis,
keeper, Tyninghame, I learn that a brother of his killed a
number at Dunglass about fifty years ago. Mr Thomas
Hope, taxidermist, Edinburgh, tells me he has seen a good
many killed in the neighbourhood of Jedburgh—the last
about thirty years back; and in the Berwickshire Naturalists’
Club “ Proceedings” for 1883 (vol. x., p. 269), it is stated
that the last in “Black Andros” wood in Yarrow was killed

“some years ago.”

WEASEL.

MUSTELA VULGARIS Lal.

This, the smallest of our Carnivora, is also the commonest,
being still fairly numerous and generally distributed. About
the farms and plantations of the Lothians it is a familiar
object, preying for the most part on mice and small voles,
which I have frequently watched it capturing. The actions
of the Weasel when driven from its prey are most interest-
ing, but require to be seen to be properly appreciated. On
9th January 1886, I observed one crossing the path in
Dalmeny Park with something dangling from its mouth.
On my throwing a stone at it, it dropped the object—a pretty
little Bank Vole—and darted out of sight among the rough
herbage. Taking my stand within two yards of the dead
vole, I had not many seconds to wait till the Weasel

WEASEL 53

ie

reappeared, now sitting bolt upright (its heart throbbing with
excitement), now plunging out of sight again, or bounding
along the bank and across the road to see if the lost dainty
could not be more easily recovered from the opposite bank.
Having repeated these manceuvres for some time, it at last
made a bold dash at the vole, and would have carried it off,
but for my interference. Occasionally, however, one sees
manifestations of its cruelty that make us think of revenge.
In June 1890, while sauntering along a secluded path in
Gosford woods, I noticed a thrush’s nest in a bush about five
feet from the ground, and being curious to see what it con-
tained, I proceeded to pull the branch on which the nest rested
towards me, when out sprang a Weasel. In the nest were
the mangled remains of several young mavises not more than
five or six days old, on which it had feasted. Nevertheless,
I would be extremely sorry to see so interesting a member
of our fere nature wiped out of our fauna. To the farmer
it is an undoubted friend, and he should certainly be the last
to lift a hand against it.

In 1888 Mr T. Speedy obtained from this and other parts
of Scotland several hundred Weasels and Stoats for trans-
portation alive to New Zealand, where they have been turned
down in the hope that they may provide a natural remedy
for the Rabbit plague in that country.

STOAT or ERMINE.

MUSTELA ERMINEA JL.

In spite of persistent persecution, the Stoat is still by no
means rare, though not so numerous as the Weasel. It is
of course more confined to the hilly districts than that

54 CARNIVORA

species, but I have met with it in the low country as well
as on the hills, and in the plantations as well as in the
open. When ferreting Rabbits on the wooded banks of the
Esk above Penicuik, I have several times seen a Stoat bolt
before the Ferret; and in the spring of 1888, while resting
by the side of a fir plantation at Loganlee in the Pentlands,
where numbers are trapped every season, I watched one climb-
ing the trees and jumping from bough to bough almost as
nimbly as a Squirrel. When pursued it leapt to the ground
from a height of nearly ten feet, preferring evidently to make
its escape on terra firma. The speed at which a Stoat can
move along on the ground is astonishing.

During the winter months numbers are received by the
Edinburgh taxidermists for preservation. They are then in
the white or ermine state. Of between twenty and thirty
examined by me during the winter 1890-91, only two
or three—obtained near Lauder and Gorebridge in the end
of January and February—had changed colour completely ;
all the others were more or less brown on the upper part of
the head and neck, and many of them had also a dorsal line
of the same colour, but much paler, owing to a large
admixture of white hairs. By 26th March specimens in
perfect summer dress began to come in.

GREY SEAL 55

GREY SEAL.

HALICH@RUS GRYPUS (Fabr.).

This large Seal is well known in fluctuating numbers at
the mouth of the Tay, whence Professor Turner has received
specimens; and though I cannot point to a record of its
actual capture in the waters of the Forth, there can be no
doubt it has frequently visited, if indeed it does not habitually
frequent, the seaward portion of that firth as well. The
discovery of bones, identified by Dr M‘Bain as belonging to
this species, in a kitchen-midden on Inchkeith, proves it to
have been an inhabitant of the firth in former times (“ Proc.
Soc. Antiq. Scot.,” 1x., p. 453).

So long ago as 1841, Selby recorded, in the “ Annals and
Magazine of Natural History,” the plentiful occurrence of
the Grey Seal on the Farne Islands off the coast of
Northumberland; and the “Great Seal” of Don’s List of
Forfarshire Animals (Headrick’s “Agriculture” of Angus,
1813, App., p. 37) is no doubt also referable to this species.
The late Mr Robert Walker, in an interesting article on the
species contributed to the “Scottish Naturalist” for 1875
(vol. 111, p. 158), expressed the opinion that it was then
the Seal most commonly met with on the east coast of
Scotland, but I scarcely think this is the case now, whatever
it may have been at that time. “It may be seen,” he says,
“all the year through at the mouth of the Tay, and along
by the Carr Rock chiefly in summer. In autumn they
congregate in great force in the vicinity of the banks of the
Tay. These banks form a favourite resting place for them
when the tide is out, as many as twenty having been counted
at atime. In 1863 six specimens of this seal were caught
in the salmon nets at Tentsmuir, some of them large animals,

56 CARNIVORA

and all more or less ferocious and difficult to secure. The
largest example was estimated by the fishermen to weigh
fifty stones.”

Early in March 1870 an adult female, measuring 7} feet
in length and weighing 33 stones, was captured in Mr
Speedie’s stake-nets, at the Tentsmuir station, mouth of the
Eden, near St Andrews, and secured for the Anatomical
Museum of the Edinburgh University by Professor Turner,
who gave an account of it in the “Journal of Anatomy and
Physiology” (vol. iv., p. 270). According to Mr Walker
(“Scot. Nat.,” iii, 159), another was captured along with the

above; and Professor Turner states that in the previous
spring two young examples, captured in the salmon-nets
near Montrose, were sent to the Anatomical Museum.

At the mouth of the Tay I have myself frequently seen
large Seals, undoubtedly belonging to this species. In the
autumn of 1886 I had an excellent view of one gamboling
with its cub on a sandbank at the mouth of the Eden.
Walker, it will be observed, notes it to the Carr Rock, which
therefore gives it a place in the fauna of the Forth. I well
remember the large number of Seals which, twenty-five to
thirty years ago, annually appeared about harvest-time in the
Tyne estuary near Dunbar, many of which, I am persuaded,
belonged to this species.

[GREENLAND or HARP SEAL.

PHOCA GRENLANDICA Fabr.

A young Seal obtained many years ago at the mouth of
the Firth of Forth was somewhat doubtfully referred by
MacGillivray to this species (“ British Quadrupeds,” 1838,
p. 209). It does not appear to have been preserved, so that

COMMON SEAL 57

we have now no means of judging of the correctness of his
surmise. In former years, when this Seal was more abundant
in its northern habitats, it is not improbable that one or
two may have occasionally wandered to our shores, but as
our information at present stands, we would scarcely be
justified in giving the species a full place on our list. ]

COMMON SEAL.

PHOCA VITULINA JL.

Although not so abundant as formerly, this is still a
common animal in the Firths of Forth and Tay, where it
may be seen all the year round. Off the southern shores of
the Forth, from Dunbar to Prestonpans, I have watched them
on many occasions, and I recently saw one living in confine-
ment which had been taken in the salmon-nets at Dalmeny.
But their headquarters appear to be on the north side of the
firth westward from Aberdour, and in the bay above North
Queensferry within the estuary proper. When boating among
the islands off Aberdour during the summer months, I have
invariably found them present, occasionally in considerable
numbers. On New Year’s day 1886, I discovered a small
one, apparently asleep, on a rock in Dalgetty Bay. It being
low water at the time, I was able to walk within 12 to 15
yards of the animal, whose slumbers I rudely broke by a
thump on the ribs with a good-sized stone. Instantly bending
itself like a bow, with the central part alone resting on the
rock, it gave a sudden jerk and sprang into the water. Once
there it evidently considered itself safe, and, reappearing
about 20 yards farther off, gazed in astonishment at the
cause of the sudden interruption.

58 CARNIVORA

The Du Craig, a small islet off Rosyth Castle above
North Queensferry, has long been noted as a favourite
haunt of the Common Seal (vide, for instance, Fyfe’s
“Summer Life on Land and Water at South Queensferry,”
1851, p. 270). When visiting this rock on 5th July 1884,
for the purpose of identifying the terns which annually
resort to it to breed, I noticed a number of Seals, some of
which followed our boat at close quarters for a considerable
distance.

The following extract from the Accounts of the Lord High
Treasurer of Scotland in the days of James IV., shows that
Seals then, as now, frequented the Isle of May, to which
that monarch was a frequent visitor:—“ 1508 [8 Mar.] Item,
that day to the heremyt of Maij that brocht ane Selch to
the King . . . . xiiijs.” (Stuart’s “ Records of the Priory
of the Isle of May,” p. lxxix). Sibbald, in his “ History of
Fife and Kinross” (1710), mentions the Seal several times.
Many of the “Phoca, or Vitulus marinus, the Seal: our
fishers call it a Selch,” he says, “frequent the coasts of these
two firths” (op. cit., ed. 1803, p. 114); and, speaking of the
Isle of May, he remarks that “many Seals are slain upon
the east side of it” (2b., p. 101). Quoting from a charter of
David I. to the Monastery of Dunfermline, Sibbald further
shows that Seals were a matter of trade in the twelfth
century (id., p. 295).1 In Stark’s “ Picture of Edinburgh ”
(1834), p. 322, we are told that “in the Firth of Forth the
Seal (Phoca vitulina) is continually showing its black head ;”
and in the “ New Statistical Account” of Alloa (1840), it is
recorded that Seals “are constant inhabitants of the Forth
here.”

1 The words of the charter are:—‘‘ Et de seliches qui ad Kingornum

capientur, postquam decimati fuerint ; concedo ut omnes septimos seliches
habeant.”

HOODED SEAL 59

HOODED or BLADDER-NOSE SEAL.

CYSTOPHORA CRISTATA (Hral.).

One of the very few authentic instances of the capture
of this inhabitant of high latitudes on the British coasts, is
that of a young male taken opposite St Andrews on 22nd
July 1872, and of which the late Mr Robert Walker, of the
University of that town, gave a detailed description at the
time in the “Scottish Naturalist” (vol. ii, p. 1). It was
about 4 feet in length—47 inches was the exact measure-
ment—and “when discovered it was reposing, near low-
water mark, on the top of one of the ledges of rock that
stretch out into the sea.”

It has been suggested that the “sundry fishes of monstrous
shape,” mentioned by Boece, “with cowls over their heads
like unto monks, and in the rest resembling the body of
man,” whose appearance in the Firth of Forth in 1577
caused such consternation among the superstitious folks of
those days, may have been Hooded Seals.

60 RODENTIA

OrpEr RODENT:

SQUIRREL.

SCIURUS VULGARIS JL.

AT the present time the Squirrel is a common animal
throughout the length and breadth of the district; indeed it
is safe to say there is scarcely a wood of any extent in any
part of it which does not contain at least a few. Yet it was
not always so, for apparently the Squirrel was either entirely
absent or very scarce in the south of Scotland when intro-
duced at Dalkeith in the latter part of last century. Mr
Harvie-Brown, who has made the history of the animal a
special study, and, as the outcome of his investigations, has
published a long and interesting paper in the “ Proceedings”
of the Royal Physical Society (vols. v. and vi.), considers
there is no evidence of its prior existence in this section of
the country, and lays little stress on the statement in the
“ New Statistical Account” of Berwickshire (1841, page 299),
that “the Red Squirrel is said to have been at one time a
denizen of Dunglass woods, in Cockburnspath parish.” I
cannot help thinking, however, that it must at one time have
been indigenous in the Lowlands, and have gradually retired
to the Highlands in consequence of the destruction of the
ancient woods and forests; otherwise, what are we to make
of Sibbald’s statement (“Scotia Illustrata,” 1684),—*«In
Meridionalis Plage Scotiz Sylvis reperitur” (It is found in
the woods of the southern part of Scotland)? There can be
no doubt, however, that the south-eastern counties owe their
present stock very largely, if not entirely, to the introduction

SQUIRREL 61

of a few, first at Dalkeith Park about 1772, and then at
Minto in 1827. The history of these introductions, and the
subsequent spread of the species, are so very fully set forth
in Mr Harvie-Brown’s paper, that I need only refer to a few
of the leading facts, and draw attention to one or two records
which he does not allude to.

The current belief, from the time of the “Old Statistical
Account” till now, is that Elizabeth, Duchess of Buccleuch
(the present Duke’s great grandmother), introduced Squirrels
from England about 1772 to the menagerie which her
husband (Duke Henry) then kept in the park at Dalkeith.
Gaining their liberty either accidentally or by design, and
finding a congenial home in the woods of the park, they
increased with astonishing rapidity, so that in the course of the
next twenty or thirty years they had spread eastward into
Haddingtonshire and westward over the entire valley of the
Esk. Here is what the minister of Pencaitland, in East
Lothian, had to say of it in 1796: “The young woods on
the estate of Fountainhall, it has been observed, have of late
suffered much from Squirrels, which were introduced some
years ago at Dalkeith, and have spread to this neighbourhood.
They have attacked the Scotch firs in the proportion of about
one in twenty, and almost every larix and elm. Already
many of each of them are killed. If the harm they do in
other places be as great, and be progressive as they multiply,
this intended improvement will be unfortunate” (“Old
Statistical Account,” vol. xvii, p. 36). In 1791 it had
“lately arrived at Penicuik from the menagerie of the Duke
of buceleuch”~ (op. cit; vol. 1., p. 182); and in 1795 the
writers of the account of the parish of Glencross, of whom
Professor J. Walker was one, record that “the Red Squirrel
has become extremely common of late years. In this neigh-
bourhood, the woods abound with them, and they are pretty

62 RODENTIA

numerous at Woodhouselee ” (op. cit., vol. xv., p. 439). Then
in 1808 Patrick Neill records it for Newhall, which is much
farther up the Esk, and where it had already given its name
to the Squirrel’s Haugh, adding, “introduced from England,
but now common” (“Gentle Shepherd,” i., pp. 270 and 279) ;
and it is evidently the same naturalist who, in Pennecuik’s
“Tweeddale” (ed. 1815, p. 103), states that the animal was
“Tntroduced on the North Esk, from England.” This looks
not unlike a separate introduction, but it may, of course,
merely refer to the Dalkeith one. In the course of the next few
years it had spread through Linlithgowshire into Stirlingshire,
and even beyond the Forth into Clackmannan and South
Perthshire,—where no doubt colonists from the north were
met,—so that when the “New Statistical Account” was
drawn up it was frequently alluded to. The colonisation of
Fife seems to have been entered on somewhat later, and
to have proceeded more slowly. Peeblesshire is also supposed
to have been colonised from Dalkeith (the doubt expressed
in Chambers’s “ History of Peeblesshire,” Appendix, p. 525, is
scarcely worth considering) ; but Roxburghshire, Selkirkshire,
and Berwickshire are thought to have been stocked mainly from
Minto, where several which the gardener there had obtained
from Dalkeith in 1827 shortly afterwards made their escape.
According to Dr Hardy, it appeared in Penmanshiel wood,
in the east of Berwickshire, as early as 1850 or 1831; and
1838 or 1839 is the date fixed by Mr Kelly for their first
appearance in Lauderdale, where they rapidly increased, and
necessitated an order for their destruction in 1849, in con-
sequence of the damage they were committing among the
young fir trees (“ Proc. Berw. Nat. Club,” viil., p. 527).

The Squirrel has sometimes been accused of killing birds,
merely because their bones have been found in its dreys, but
as well might I argue that it occasionally kills sheep, because I

SQUIRREL 63

recently observed one gnawing a shank-bone of that quadruped.
Observing the little animal busy with something on the
ground in a large fir wood, I walked towards it, when it at
once scampered up a tall clean-stemmed tree, holding the
object in its mouth. Having reached a branch about fifty
feet from the ground, it sat down, and, grasping the prize
between its fore-paws, began nibbling at the end of it. On
my striking the branch with a stone, it dropped the object,
which, to my surprise, was a sheep’s shank-bone, measuring
fully seven inches in length. A large hole had already been
gnawed in the thick end of it.

According to Bell, the young are born in the month of
June,and MacGillivray’s statement is to the same effect; but
I am inclined to think April is the more usual time, and that
a second litter may frequently be born in the latter part of
summer. Unfortunately I can only give one exact date,
namely, 23rd April, on which day a nest containing several
young Squirrels was discovered. At least two other instances,
however, of young in April have come to my knowledge;
also one in August. As to the supposed hibernation of the
Squirrel, I can only say that I have seen them frisking about
in every month of the year.

[DORMOUSE.

MUSCARDINUS AVELLANARIUS (Z.).

In 1838 MacGillivray wrote, “This species .. . has not
hitherto been satisfactorily proved to exist in Scotland,
although it has been reported to me to occur near Gifford in
East Lothian” (“ British Quadrupeds,” p. 236). No evidence
in support of this statement has ever been forthcoming, and
we must therefore conclude that his informant was in error.]

64 RODENTIA

WATER VOLE.

ARVICOLA AMPHIBIUS (Z.).

This well known and, for the most part, harmless creature,
is abundant on the banks of all our streams, ditches, and
ponds, where it may be constantly seen and its habits studied
without difficulty. Any kind of country appears to suit it,
so long as there is water at hand. It is equally at home, for
instance, by the marshes on the coast, the ditches bordering
the corn-fields, the ponds in the midst of plantations, or the
burns meandering among the hills. It reaches a considerable
elevation, for in May 1887 I saw a buzzard capture one on
the hills above Loch Skene. When the bird had devoured
it, I went to the spot and picked up the skin, which was so
little damaged that it might very well have done for making
into a stuffed specimen.

Occasionally this animal takes up its abode in our gardens,
where it makes “runs” and commits considerable damage,
destroying even shrubs and young trees by gnawing their
roots. Several instances of this have come to my own
knowledge. In March 1887 I obtained an old male from
Dr Ronaldson’s garden, Bruntsfield Place, Edinburgh, which
had almost killed several bushes and young apple-trees
by cutting off their roots. I handed the Vole and a speci-
men of its work to Professor Duns, who recorded the facts
in a note which was published in the ninth volume of the
“Proceedings” of the Royal Physical Society, p.325. Ina pre-
vious note bearing on the habits of this species (op. cit., vol. v.,
p. 352), Professor Duns recorded the capture of another in an
Edinburgh garden, where it had been feeding on beetroot.

The Water Vole is sometimes accused of killing young
birds, and I am not prepared to affirm that it never does;

WATER VOLE 65

but I believe such an occurrence must be very exceptional.
On Luffness marshes, where the animal is very abundant,
I have seen a young redshank lying half-eaten at the
mouth of one of their burrows,—no proof, however, that the
Voles had killed it. My explanation is that, finding the
bird dead, they were tempted to eat it, in the same way
that Field Voles will devour a dead companion.

In the spring of 1890 a colony established themselves in
a piece of rough, sandy ground by the public road near
where a small stream enters the sea at Gosford Bay. For
fully a month I passed the spot twice a day, and was much
struck with the want of fear which they displayed, several
always sitting unconcernedly about the entrances to their
burrows while vehicles and pedestrians moved past within —
a few yards; indeed, so little notice did they take of people
passing by, that Mr Eagle Clarke knocked one over with his
walking-stick.

The black variety—the Arvicola ater of MacGillivray—is
not common, but occurs from time to time in every county.
I have notes concerning examples taken in Berwickshire,
Roxburghshire, the three Lothians, Stirlingshire, Perthshire,
and Fife. The Fife specimens, which as usual were small
animals, were captured near Colinsburgh, where the form
appears to be not uncommon. In the Highlands it is
decidedly more numerous than in the Lowlands.

FIELD VOLE.

ARVICOLA AGRESTIS De Selys,

The Field Vole is abundant and generally distributed from
the coast-line to the most inland localities, living among

rough grass in meadows, young plantations, moors, and_hill-
E

66 RODENTIA

pastures alike. Formerly I was in the habit of looking upon
it as everywhere more abundant than the next species, but
this view has not been borne out by my recent investigations.
In the immediate neighbourhood of Edinburgh, for instance,
I have trapped three Glareolus for one of Agrestis, and I am
inclined to think that the former is likewise at the present
time the commoner animal in many other parts of the fertile
belt of country bordering the shores of the Forth, and
probably the same may be said of the valleys of the Tay
and the Tweed. But the moment we reach the hills and the
moorlands, Agrestis becomes the commoner, and is in many
districts apparently alone present. A number of years ago,
when my home was at Macbiehill in Peeblesshire, it was
very common there, and Mr J. Thomson, who has sent
me a specimen, tells me it is abundant about Stobo in
the same county. Within the last two years I have
obtained very typical specimens from Aberlady, Dalmeny,
Colinton, Dreghorn, the Braid hills, and the Pentlands.
On the southern slopes of the Pentlands, near the farm
of Boghall, there is a young fir plantation filled with
tussocks of the Azra cewspitosa grass, and here Agrestis is
in its element, burrowing under the tussocks, whose tender
shoots supply it with abundance of food during winter and
spring. By setting a few traps in the little “seats” at the
mouths of the burrows, I have had no difficulty in capturing
the inmates. Beds of Juncus also form favourite haunts.
Though they certainly remain more at home in winter than in
summer, they do not in any sense hibernate, and while they
probably move about more or less at all hours, I am inclined
to think they are most active towards evening. In winter
afternoons I often see them about the entrances to their
burrows. Owls and kestrels (to say nothing of weasels) of
course destroy great numbers. Besides finding their remains

FIELD VOLE 67

in the “castings” of these birds, I have seen in the nest of a
long-eared owl near Balerno several of this and other small
rodents lying ready for consumption.

In the Southern Uplands the Field Vole, or Hill Mouse as
it is there often called, at times multiplies to such an extent,
and with such astonishing rapidity, as to assume the character
of a veritable plague. The year 1876, for instance, was a
memorable example. For a year or two previously they had
been observed steadily increasing, no doubt in large measure
owing to a succession of favourable winters, and reached a
climax in 1876, when the pasture on whole hill-sides was
destroyed by them. The country about Hawick seems to
have suffered most. In the Borthwick-water district alone
10,000 acres of pasture were wasted to a greater or less
degree—the damage being estimated at not less than £5000.
A full account of this plague was prepared by Sir Walter
Elliot for the “Proceedings” of the Berwickshire Naturalists’
Club (vol. viii, p. 447). Sir Walter speaks of the present
species only, but I imagine that in some localities at any
rate the Bank Vole, which Dr Hardy (who identified speci-
mens) tells us in a subsequent volume of the “ Proceedings”
(x., p. 278) was in great numbers at Faldonside in 1883,
would also be present.

Since the above was written in April 1891, another Vole
plague in the Border counties has become notorious. The
subject is thus referred to in an article in the “Scotsman”
of 12th November :—“ Some three months ago reference was
made to what is spoken of and felt as the mice plague on the
Borders, and which was then affecting to a serious extent
most of the farms in the western portion of Selkirkshire and
the adjacent districts of Dumfries and Roxburgh shires. Since
then there has been no mitigation of the pest, but on the
contrary a great extension of the area over which it is spread,

68 RODENTIA

and an intensifying of its ravages. From inquiries made
within the past week, it has been ascertained that the outlook,
as the winter approaches, becomes more and more serious.
The vermin have multiplied greatly during the summer, and
they now swarm in numbers which defy computation. The
high-lying farms on the western border of Selkirkshire seem
to be suffering most. . . . Throughout the summer, grass
and other herbage chiefly were preyed upon. The grassy
farms have suffered, and are suffering most. The vermin do
not seem to live on the lea grasses or dry hill-sides ; the grassy
bogs and white bent are the places where they abound most.
Wherever the ground is what the shepherds speak of as ‘not
bare,’ there they swarm in greatest numbers. They nibble
and gnaw the long grass close to the ground, and the land is
rendered altogether valueless for winter and spring feeding.
Hundreds of acres of the best pasture land on many farms
have thus for the present been totally destroyed, and whole
hill-sides wear a blasted and desolate aspect, the ground being
perfectly riddled by their holes and runs. In the autumn
months hayricks were infested by the mice in countless
numbers, and the hay has in many cases, as one observer
expressively says, been minced into perfect chaff. Then the
corn-stooks swarmed with them, as many as four or five nests
being frequently found in a single sheaf. Now they have
found their way to stackyards, barnyards, and outhouses, and
are doing vast damage there. Even in gardens they are
destroying the roots of plants and flower bulbs. . . . To
exterminate them seems beyond the province of hope. Burning
the ground where the destruction is greatest does no good,
says one, they fly to their holes and ere long again appear ;
heavy rain does not drown them; some people, remembering
how they disappeared after a similar but not so serious a
plague about fifteen years ago, believe that a fall of slushy

FIELD VOLE 69

snow would kill them [a ‘black’ frost would have more effect],
but slushy snow does not suit sheep, and such a remedy for
the plague would of necessity involve great loss of stock. In
some places more than the ordinary number of cats are kept,
and these are credited with doing good work on the farmers’
side. It is remarked that owls and hawks have been increas-
ing all over the infected region; one informant mentions that
in his locality the latter are as plentiful as crows; and in
such an emergency all are gladly welcomed. But all that
is being done in these various ways does not tell in any
appreciable degree on the myriad swarms.”! The only
Peeblesshire farm I hear of being much affected by the
plague is Fruid, in the southern part of the county. Rooks,
I am told, devour great numbers of the young.

Desiring to see a few examples from different elevations, I
applied to Dr J. R. Hamilton, of Hawick, who very kindly
procured me a dozen from that neighbourhood. They were
captured at various altitudes, from about 600 feet to close on
1000 feet above sea-level, and belonged without exception to
the present species, Arvicola agrestis. One was cream-
coloured (with black eyes), and the rest gave me the impres-
sion of being a shade darker than specimens I have examined
from other localities. In acknowledging receipt of a couple
I sent to the British Museum, Mr Oldfield Thomas, while
unable to say that they present any peculiar features, adds
that there can be no doubt about the species. My children
have appropriated half a dozen of them as pets, and I don’t
think I ever before saw a wild animal take so readily to con-
finement. They exhibit practically no fear, and will sit on
the hand for any length of time, regaling themselves on apple
parings, bread soaked in milk, etc. The tender shoots of
grasses they are very fond of, using the fore feet singly after

1 Consult also Report by Board of Agriculture, March 1892.

70 RODENTIA

the manner of a hand to bring the stems to the mouth and
hold them in position. They show no desire to harm each
other when in life, but the body of a dead companion is soon
attacked and devoured. Furnished with strong chisel-like
teeth, they are capable of making their escape in a very short
time from almost any kind of wooden box. When disturbed
or hungry they make a half grumbling, half squeaking noise,
very much the same as guinea-pigs do, only not so loud.

The dimensions of this animal vary considerably, and do
not appear to me to be always accounted for by age and sex.
The following are a few measurements taken by myself from
specimens captured in the months of January, March, and
November :—

Length of head and body, | 3°9 in. | 4:0 in. | 4°5 in. | 3°75 in.| 3°5 in.
Length of head alone, . | 1°72 ,, | 1°2 ,, | 14,, | 12 ,, | 11 ,;
Length of tail, : : $2 ,, [155,, [13., 12. | ten

BANK VOLE.
ARVICOLA GLAREOLUS (Schreb.).

My recent investigations among our micro-mammals have
convinced me that the Bank Vole is common all along the
valley of the Forth, and in all likelihood the same may be said
of the Tay and the Tweed. It appears, however, to be in a
great measure confined to the fertile belts in the lower parts
of the valleys, becoming much scarcer or altogether absent in
the upland districts, exactly where the Field Vole becomes
most abundant. In the immediate neighbourhood of Edin-
burgh I find the Bank Vole the commoner of the two, and I
am inclined to think this has long been the case, but there is

BANK VOLE 71

no evidence to point to, as the earlier writers seldom dis-
tinguished between the two species—indeed, MacGillivray is
the only one who does so with regard to the Forth area, and
the only locality he mentions is near Bathgate, in the county
of Linlithgow, where specimens were procured by Mr Durham
Weir (“ British Quadrupeds,” 1838, p. 272). The only other
Scotch locality given by MacGillivray for the animal is near
Kelso, and on 6th May 1840 Dr Johnstone announced its
occurrence at Mayfield in Berwickshire (“ Proceedings” of
the Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club, vol. i, p. 214). Faldon-
side is another Border locality, in which, according to
Dr Hardy (op. cit., x., 278), it was abundant in 1883.
During the last four years I have observed it at Rosetta
and other places near Peebles, and Mr John Thomson has
sent me one from Stobo,a few miles higher up the Tweed,
where he tells me it is common about potatoe-pits during
winter. Mr Harvie-Brown has sent it from Stirlingshire.
Seeing so little has been recorded of the Bank Vole in the
neighbourhood of Edinburgh, the following facts from my own
experience may not be without interest. In January 1886
I obtained one which had been killed by a weasel in Dalmeny
Park, close to the Cramond ferry, and I then learned from
the ferryman that the animal was common in the park, and
did considerable damage during winter and spring to carna-
tions and other flowering plants in his garden. The same
complaint is made against it by Mr Bruce, gardener, Colinton
House, from whom I have received many examples, and Mr
Mackenzie, factor, Mortonhall, has also found it very trouble-
some in his garden of late. From Cramond I have obtained
some very typical specimens, one of which I exhibited at a
meeting of the Royal Physical Society on 15th January 1890.
Since then I have trapped numbers in the following localities,
namely, by the banks of the Braid burn below Comiston, on

72 RODENTIA

the Braid hills, by the roadside between Fairmilehead and
Kaimes, at Dreghorn, at Lothianburn, and on the south side
of the Pentlands, both by the roadside beyond Hillend and in
the young plantation on the hill-side at Boghall. I have also
obtained it at Gosford, in East Lothian. A bank on the
sunny side of a wall is a favourite habitat, especially if well
clothed with tussocks of cock’s-foot grass (Dactylis glomerata).
They may be seen sitting near the entrances to their burrows
at all hours of the day, but the afternoon seems to be the time
of their greatest activity. On a winter’s day, if the sun has
been bright, I can always depend on seeing numbers towards
sunset feeding by the roadside which skirts the southern
confines of Mortonhall grounds. As the spring advances
they may be observed climbing the briars, thorns, and
sapling elms, and nipping off the expanding leaf-buds.

The following are a few measurements taken from examples
captured in January and March :—

Length of head and body, | 3°2 in. | 3°25 in.| 3°25 in.| 3°2in. | 3°5 in.
Length of head alone, . 10) 55 Ree sae es) alee
Length of tail, . «| 234555, 15 an 2°45 in. eG ele

While these pages were passing through the press (March
1892) I sent to the British Museum a few small Mammals,
including a couple of critical specimens of the Bank Vole
and a Lesser Shrew. Regarding the former, Mr Oldfield
Thomas writes me as follows :—“They are very interesting
specimens, and I was quite doubtful as to whether they
were Agrestis or Glareolus, as they are so much less rufous
in tint than the latter usually is. The teeth, however, show
that they certainly are Glareolus. . . . Their tails are
also a little shorter than usual.” These peculiarities are
characteristic, more or less, of a large proportion of the
examples I have examined.

BROWN RAT

~I
St)

BROWN RAT.

Mus DECUMANUS fall.

The Brown Rat is only too well known wherever human
habitations and industries have been established, finding a
congenial home alike in town and country. It seems to
be living more in the open fields now than formerly,
and at times it increases to such an extent in certain
localities as to become a serious agricultural pest, as has
recently happened in Kast Lothian and the adjacent parts
of Midlothian, where meetings of the farmers have been
held to discuss the situation, and if possible devise a remedy
(see numerous communications in the “Scotsman” during
December and January 1890-91).

The first appearance of the Brown Rat among us does not
seem to have been placed on record, but we may safely
assume that the ports of the Firth of Forth were among the
earliest localities in which the immigrants obtained a footing in
Scotland ; and we shall probably not be far wrong in referring
the event to about the middle of the eighteenth century. By
the beginning of the present century it was apparently only
too common almost everywhere. .

Walker, writing probably between 1764 and 1774, says of
it, “ First brought, as is reported, into Scotland in ships from
Norway. Wherever it set up its abode, it entirely put to
flight the Mus rattus.” The following interesting account of
its progress from Selkirk to the upper valley of the Tweed, as
narrated in the “ New Statistical Account” of the parish of
Newlands (Peeblesshire, 1834, p. 137), is worth repeating
“ Zoology :—Under this head may be noticed the brown, or

1«* Primum delatus, ut fertur, in Scotia, navibus e Norvegia. Ubicunque
sedes suas figit, Murem Ratiwm penitus fugat” (Mammalia Scotica, p. 498).

74 RODENTIA

Russian, or Norwegian rat, which a good many years ago
invaded Tweeddale, to the total extermination of the former
black rat inhabitants. Their first appearance was in the
minister’s glebe at Selkirk, about the year 1776 or 1777, where
they were found burrowing in the earth, a propensity which
occasioned considerable alarm, lest they should undermine
houses. They seemed to follow the courses of waters and
rivulets, and, passing from Selkirk, they were next heard of
in the mill of Traquair; from thence, following up the Tweed,
they appeared in the mills of Peebles; then entering by Lyne
Water, they arrived at Flemington-mill, in this parish; and
coming up the Lyne they reached this neighbourhood about
the year 1791 or 1792.” Neill includes it without remark in
his Newhall list (1808).

BLACK RAT.

Mus Rattus ZL.

Prior to the invasion of its haunts by J/us decumanus, the
Black Rat infested all our towns and villages, and doubtless
farm-steadings too. It seems to have been quite unable to
live in competition with its more vigorous congener; and
simultaneously with the rapid increase of the one, there took
place a corresponding decrease of the other—cause and effect
unquestionably—so that, by the early years of the present
century, Mus rattus had practically ceased to exist in the
coast towns, and a few years more sufficed to carry the exter-
mination to its inland haunts as well. At the present time
we have no proof of its existence on shore, though it is not
improbable that a few now and again attempt to establish
themselves in Leith and other ports, seeing they are known

BLACK RAT 75

to exist in considerable numbers in vessels in the docks. A
typical example (one of many) captured by a professional rat-
catcher on board one of the Leith and Hamburg steamers while
lying in Leith harbour in June 1890, was procured by Mr
Eagle Clarke for the Edinburgh Museum, and recorded in the
“Scottish Naturalist” (1891, p. 36); and I have seen another
specimen, also taken on a Leith steamer, still more recently.
Mr Thomas Hope, taxidermist, George Street, tells me that
some nine or ten years ago, one, which had been captured in
an Edinburgh skinnery, was brought to him for preservation.
If his identification, which I have no reason to doubt, was
correct, this is the last Edinburgh Mus rattus I have been
able to trace.

The Black Rat was, of course, well known to Sibbald,
Walker, and other early writers. Neill includes it in his
Habbie’s Howe and Tweeddale lists (1808 and 1815), and
Stark (“ Picture of Edinburgh,” 1834) tells us that it “still
inhabits the garrets of the high houses in the old city.” Two
years later Rhind dismisses it with the remark, “ now
rare” (“Excursions,’ p. 132); and in 1838 MacGillivray
(“ British Quadrupeds,” p. 238) wrote thus—“ In Edinburgh it
appears to be completely extirpated, as I have not seen a
specimen obtained there within these fifteen years.”

In his list of Forfarshire animals (1813), Don says the
Black Rat “is the only species I have seen in the town of
Forfar, and it is not rare in all the inland parts of Angus-
shire” (Headrick’s “Agriculture” of Forfar, App., p. 38).

The brown furred or tropical race, known as Mus alexan-
drinus, though abundant in the shipping in the Forth,
apparently more so than the typical form, is not yet known
to have obtained a footing on shore. The first record is that
of an example received in Dec. 1888 by Mr Harvie-Brown
from H.M.S. “ Devastation,” then stationed at Queensferry,

76 RODENTIA

and reported by Mr Eagle Clarke at a meeting of the Royal
Physical Society on 19th March 1890: subsequently (August
1889) Mr Clarke had a cageful brought to him by a professional
rat-catcher, who had just captured them on board one of the
Leith and Aberdeen steamers (“Scot. Nat.,” 1891, p. 36). I
have since examined several others, also from Leith steamers.
In Bell’s “ British Quadrupeds” the occurrence of this race in
Britain is not positively asserted, though Lord Clermont, in
1859, had written—“Is often found in numbers in vessels
from Egypt when discharging their cargoes of corn in British
ports, but does not appear to spread in those towns, being
probably kept down by the common species” (“ Quadrupeds
and Reptiles of Europe,” p. 100).

HOUSE MOUSE.

Mus muscuuus JL.

The House Mouse is only too common throughout the
length and breadth of the district, establishing itself in and
about human dwellings and other buildings, no matter how
isolated they may stand. Having been for many years
intimately connected with farming operations, I have often
witnessed the havoc they commit in the stackyard, but their
habits and economy are too well known to justify any
remarks upon them here. Several specimens of a pale buff
or cream-coloured variety were obtained for me in April 1890
by Mr R. 8. Anderson of Peebles, from the farm of Lyne,
where they were then in some abundance.

It is now impossible to trace the origin of this animal in
the district. All that can be said is that its first appearance
must have taken place many centuries ago.

WOOD MOUSE fGlh

WOOD or LONG-TAILED FIELD MOUSE.

Mus syuvaticus JZ,

This timid but destructive creature is very common
throughout most parts of the district, ranging from sea-level
to a considerable elevation, and inhabiting woods, fields, and
natural pastures alike. Though thus widely distributed,
there can be no doubt it occurs in greatest numbers in the
plains and warmer parts of the valleys, and practically avoids
the damp upland tracts in which the Field Vole seems to
delight. In the immediate neighbourhood of Edinburgh,
where it is very abundant, I have recently trapped numbers
among the furze bushes on the Braid and Blackford hills,among
rough grass by the Braid burn, in the woods at Dreghorn,
and at the foot of the Pentlands near Swanston; and have
otherwise captured or identified it near Balerno, near Currie,
at the head of Bonaly glen in the Pentlands, and in the woods
at Rosslyn, Glencorse, Penicuik, etc. Many specimens have
also been obtained for me in the garden and grounds at
Colinton House, and in the woods and cottage gardens in
Dalmeny Park. In East Lothian, where it is also abundant,
I have trapped it on Luffness Links near Aberlady, and in the
woods at Gosford; while in Fife I caught one at Otterston last
August, and have lately detected it in the woods at Broomhall
near Dunfermline, and in the neighbourhood of St Andrews.
In Peeblesshire I have observed it at Macbiehill and at Eshiels-
hope; and Mr J. Thomson tells me it is common at Stobo.

I have thrice had examples handed to me which were
captured in dwelling-houses during winter, and have often
seen its nests turned up by the plough. Having trapped
them commonly in January and February during frost and
snow, I conclude it does not hibernate in the true sense

78 RODENTIA

of the word, but we know it lays up stores of food for
winter consumption. Being strictly nocturnal, these pretty
little animals, though so abundant, are—unlike the Voles
—seldom seen abroad in the daytime. During the last
four months I have kept several in a cage with a
covered-in portion at one end. In this den they have
formed a nest of cottén and other soft materials, in which
they pass the day snugly curled up and apparently fast asleep.
After dark they come out to feed, and remain very active
throughout the night, even although the gas be burning
brightly in the room. When feeding, the motion of the under
jaw is so rapid as almost to amount to vibration. Some
weeks ago one escaped from the cage, and has since lived
at large in the room, hiding itself during the day in a
fold of the window-curtain. When surprised on the floor at
night it climbs the curtains with astonishing rapidity, runs
along the picture-rods, and, with a knowing look, sits up in
kangaroo-fashion cleaning its face with its paws.

Among those that have passed through my hands I have
noticed considerable variation in size and also in colour,
some being much darker than others, the result of more black
on the tips of the hairs. Probably these differences of tint
are connected with the seasonal changes of fur.

Mus sylvaticus is included in Neill’s list (1808), and in
Rhind’s list (1836).

HARVEST MOUSE.
Mus minutus Pall.
My efforts to obtain specimens of this interesting little

animal from the district have proved singularly unsuccessful,
and I find myself practically unable to add to the few records

HARVEST MOUSE 79

already in existence. Not only must it be very local, but I
do not think it can be anywhere numerous, and it would
seem to have been more easily procured in MacGillivray’s
day than now.

In Rhind’s list of mammalia found in the immediate
neighbourhood of Edinburgh (“ Excursions,” 1836, p. 152),
“Mus messorius,” the “ Harvest Mouse,” is entered with the
remark, “ not uncommon” against it; and MacGillivray states
in his “ British Quadrupeds” (1838, p. 257) that one was sent
to him “from the neighbourhood of Edinburgh,” and also
that he once “found its nest in Fifeshire.’ In the “ New
Statistical Account” (Clackmannanshire, 1840, p. 9) it is
included in a list of the animals of the parish of Alloa, and
as pointed out by Mr Alston (Scottish Mammalia, p. 28),
its size and weight correctly noted.

Mr Small, taxidermist, Edinburgh, assures me that about
thirty years ago he received two, and within a week a third
specimen for preservation. They were all from the same
person, and Mr Small believes they were captured near Duns
in Berwickshire. Curiously enough, I learn from Professor
Duns that he once found a nest in the neighbourhood of the
same town; this was prior to 1844. In August 1885 I found
an unmistakable nest of this Mouse in a tuft of coarse eTass
growing under a hedge surrounding a corn-field behind
Aberlady in East Lothian. It was about eighteen inches
above the ground, and was supported entirely by the stems
of the grass and a few of the twigs of the hedge.

Since the above was written, Mr D. F. Mackenzie, factor,
Mortonhall, near Edinburgh, has informed me that in 1890
he observed a number of compact round nests among a
heavy crop of oats on the home-farm there. They were
placed one to two feet from the ground, and belonged to a
small reddish mouse which he saw more than once sitting on

80 RODENTIA

the heads of the corn. Hoping they would reappear in the
barley with which the field was last year cropped, a strict
lookout for them was kept, but to no purpose, nor were
they seen in any of the other fields on the farm, From
Mr Mackenzie’s minute description, I have no doubt the
animals were a small colony of Harvest Mice, but it would
have been more satisfactory had I been able to examine a
specimen.

COMMON HARE.

LEPUS TIMIDUS L.

The Common Hare is, and seems from time immemorial to
have been, one of the best-known of our low-country animals.
The volumes of the “ Old Statistical Account” testify to its
former abundance in the district, and no doubt the protection
afforded by the game-laws, and the destruction of its natural
enemies, tended to still further increase its numbers during
the present century. A turn of the tide, however, has set in
since the passing of the Ground Game Act in 1880, which
gives the farmer the right to kill hares on the land he occupies.
The result, which the proprietors are naturally enough deplor-
ing, has been a marked decrease in most localities, in some
amounting almost to extinction. In the immediate neigh-
bourhood of Edinburgh, fifteen years ago, I am certain I used
to see twenty for every one observed at the present day. As
a rule, it is now only where the grounds in the proprietor’s
own hands are of large extent that the Hare is to be seen in
numbers. A close time, say from some date in February to a
corresponding date in September, is urgently needed.

Though mainly an inhabitant of the plains, it occurs in
the valleys of all our hill-ranges, extending in summer up

COMMON HARE 81

the slopes of the hills themselves, even encroaching on the
pastures of its congener, the Mountain Hare.

Coursing—the chasing of hares with greyhounds—is a
favourite sport in the district. A pack of harriers also hunts
the east of Fife, and there is at the present time a pack of
beagles in Linlithgowshire.

Fleming tells us that in Scotland the skins were formerly
“collected by itinerant dealers, and annually sold in the
February market at Dumfries, sometimes to the amount of
30,000” (“ British Animals,” p. 21).

MOUNTAIN HARE.
LEPUS VARIABILIS Pall.

North of the Forth the Mountain Hare is abundant and
indigenous among the Grampians, where I have seen it on
many occasions, especially on the hills near Callander.
Colquhoun, from what he says in his “ Lecture on the Ferz
Nature of the British Islands,’ would have us understand
that in his young days it was very scarce on the Loch Lomond
hills. In 1822 he “had shot over the whole rugged ground
at the head of Loch Lomond without moving a single blue
hare, barring the hermit on Ben Voirla’s crags.” It is in-
cluded, however, in an excellent list of the animals of the
parish of Luss, written nearly thirty years before the above
date (“Old Statistical Account,” xvii, p. 247). Farther east
I observed one—still very white—in the third week of April
1891 on a high ridge of the Ochils above Tillicoultry, and
learned from a shepherd that the species is fairly numerous

“on that range.

South of the Forth it is abundant on most of the higher
F

82 RODENTIA

parts of the uplands from Lanarkshire through Peeblesshire
to Selkirkshire, and extends along the Pentlands well into
Midlothian. There are some now on the Moorfoots also,
but I have not yet had any indications of its existence
on the Lammermoors, though I have made a number
of inquiries on the point. Mr Harvie-Brown informs me
that it is not uncommon in the central range of the Stirling-
shire hills.

It is generally understood that we owe their presence
on the southern uplands entirely to the action of a few
of the hill proprietors, by whom they have been introduced
at different times within the last fifty to sixty years.
Alston dates its existence in the south of Scotland from
about 1860, but this is much too recent, as the follow-
ing extracts show. In Chambers’s “History of Peebles-
shire,” published in 1864, the following interesting passage
occurs at page 525 :—“ The Variable or Alpine Hare is now
not unfrequent on the hills, but is known to have been intro-
duced from the north by the late Mr Clason of Hallyards
about seventeen or eighteen years ago. The first of the
species in Peeblesshire were set free by Mr Clason on one of
the highest hills in the parish of Manor. The species seems
now to be fully established and naturalised over a very con-
siderable district, extending many miles from the original
spot.” It would appear, however, to have been known in
Manor a number of years before the date here assigned,
as it is included in a list of the quadrupeds of the parish
published in the “ New Statistical Account” in 1834. An
extract from one of Mr Alston’s note-books, published
in the “Proceedings” of the Natural History Society of
Glasgow, vol. v., p. 73, records “that a Mr Hunter over at
Glenbuck [on the borders of Lanarkshire and Ayrshire]
turned out a number” about 1861. Mr B. N. Peach tells

2

MOUNTAIN HARE 83

me that they increased very rapidly in that district, and
that when living at Muirkirk, about twenty-five years
ago, he found them quite plentiful. A few were also
turned down by Mr Cowan about twenty-four or twenty-
five years ago on the Silverburn hills, the highest of the
Pentlands. From these three, and probably other points of
introduction, the species has now spread over the greater
part of the southern hill-country, where I have myself
frequently observed them at various times of the year.
In Peeblesshire I have recently come across them on the
hills above Glen Sax and at the head of Manor; while
in Selkirkshire I met with a few on Ettrick Pen and
the hills above Tushielaw in June 1889. On the Pent-
lands they are well known as far east as the Cairn hills
on the one hand, and Scaldlaw on the other; and Mr
Cowan’s keeper tells me they are still spreading. There
are now a few on the north Black-hill, and on the south
side of the range he saw one on Capelaw during the
winter of 1889-90; another came under my own observa-
tion recently on a spur of Carnethy. On Ist January
1889, I made an excursion to the tops of Craigengar and
the West Cairn-hill for the express purpose of seeing
these Hares in their white coats, and was rewarded by
the sight of several. Mr P. Adair, who has shot many
of them on the latter hill during the last nine or ten
years, informs me he has there seen a hybrid between
this and the Common Hare, and in January 1891 I examined
an undoubted example from near Cardrona in Peebles-
shire.

84 RODENTIA

RABBIT.
LEPUS CUNICULUS L.

At the present time the Rabbit is perhaps the most
ubiquitous of all our mammals, abounding alike on the islands
of the Forth, and the dunes by the shores of the firths and
estuaries; in the fields and woodlands of the plains; and
among the rocks and pastures of the hills, where it lives at
almost all elevations. From Sibbald’s statement (quoted
below) we may infer that it was also common and widely
distributed in the district in the seventeenth century, though
probably much less so than now; but I am inclined to think
that between that time and the early part of the present
century there was little if any increase in its numbers, except
perhaps in a few localities. According to Don, it was rare
in Forfarshire in 1813 (Headrick’s “Agriculture” of the
County, App., p. 38). A combination of circumstances,
however, among which the destruction of its natural enemies
has probably not been the least important, has since favoured
its increase, and now it can only be kept within bounds by
systematic trapping and snaring.

On 25rd May 1891 I found a Rabbit’s nest at the foot of
Auchinoon hill, in the parish of Midcalder, in an exceptional
position. It was placed in the centre of a tuft of coarse grass,
in what might have been a hare’s “form,” without the
semblance of a burrow. In it were five young ones—blind
and naked—enveloped in a mass of warm fur.

From Boece’s “ Description of Scotland,” we learn that in
the early part of the sixteenth century the islands of the
Forth were “verie full of conies” (Holinshed’s translation,
1805 edition, p. 13); and in Stuart’s “Priory of the Isle of
May,” page xl, reference is made to a deed, by which in 1549

RABBIT 85

the prior of Pittenweem conveyed the island to Patrick
Learmonth of Dairsy, in which deed the island is described
as now waste, and spoiled by rabbits from which the
principal revenue used to accrue, but of which the warrens
were now completely destroyed and the place ruined by
the English. Bones of the Rabbit found in a “kitchen
midden” on Inchkeith (“Proceedings” of the Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland, ix., 453), may point to it as an
inhabitant of the islands of the Forth at a still earlier date,
though they may merely have belonged to an animal that had
made its burrow in the mound, and died there. In a charter
granted on 10th November 1621 by James VL. in favour of
the burgh of Peebles, we find “cunnings” and “cunningaries”
specifically mentioned (Chambers’s “ Peeblesshire,” p. 544).
Sibbald, in his “Scotia Illustrata” (1684), says of the
Cuniculus, “of these there is great plenty everywhere
with us, especially on the coasts.”! In the “Old Statistical
Account of Scotland,’ the Rabbit is often mentioned,
but chiefly as an inhabitant of maritime localities. In
vol. xvi, p. 577, we are told that when Binning wood,
at Tyninghame, was planted in 1707, “the East Links

were a dead and barren sand, with scarcely any
grass upon them, and of no use but as a rabbit-warren.”
The extensive sand-dunes stretching along the coast behind
the village of Gullane, in East Lothian, have long been a
noted warren. De Saussure, the Swiss naturalist, who
visited these “grandes plaines de sable” in June 1807,
in company with Patrick Neill, tells us that “un tres-grand
nombre de lapins sauvages habitent ces dunes” (“ Voyage
en Ecosse,” vol. i, p. 162). Again, we read in Stark’s
“Picture of Edinburgh” (1834, p. 297), that the city market
was then plentifully supplied with rabbits “brought chiefly

1 «*Horum magna ubique apud nos copia, in Littore preesertim.”

86 RODENTIA

from the extensive warrens at Gullane Zinks or downs in
East Lothian.”

Several varieties, doubtless the descendants of domestic
animals run wild, are to be met with. One of these is thus
referred to by Neill in the “Scots Magazine” for 1816,p.170:—
“On the Isle of May, in the entrance of the Firth of Forth,
there exists a well-marked variety of the rabbit, distinguished
not only by the great length of the hair, but by its silky
fineness.” Mr Agnew, for many years lighthouse-keeper on
the island, tells me this form was still there when he left
five years ago. I have recently observed a yellowish variety
in some numbers on Gullane hill, and others with black fur
near Cramond and on the Pentlands.

A hundred years ago the skin was the most valuable part
of the animal; “The skins may be valued at 6s. a dozen, and
the body sells at the rate of 5d. per pair” (“ Old Statistical
Account,” parish of Dowally, vol. xx., p. 472). Now the
skins are worth about 2s. a dozen, and the bodies are sold
at 2s. 6d. a pair. Within the last two or three years the
price of the skins has fallen by about one-half, owing to the
large importation from Australia and New Zealand.

If, as seems highly probable, the Rabbit was originally
introduced into Scotland, it was most likely by the monks.
The monastery on the Isle of May was founded by David I.
before the middle of the twelfth century.

RED DEER 87

OrvER UNGULATA.

RED DEER.

CERVUS ELAPHUS JZ.

But for the protection of the deer-forest, it is very doubtful
if I should have been able to mention the Red Deer as still
an indigenous animal anywhere in the district. Semi-
domesticated animals are kept in a few of the parks of the
nobility, but we must pass beyond Dunblane before there
is even a chance of seeing the Stag on his native heath.
The only deer-forest having any connection with the dis-
trict is Glenartney, the southern portion of which touches
the valley of the Forth, on the water-shed behind Doune and
Callander. It has been fenced in about twenty years, and at
the present time is said to contain fully 1000 deer. Stragelers
are occasionally to be seen outside the precincts of the forest,
but, as a rule, they do not wander far from it. I have
myself observed them on the hills to the east of Loch
Lubnaig, and Colonel Duthie informs me that he saw six,
marching in line, on the braes of Doune, on the 22nd of
July 1889—they were on the Doune side of the wire fence,
which marks the march between Lord Moray’s moor and the
Glenartney forest. In the “Old Statistical Account” of the
parish of Doune (xx., p. 49), it is recorded that: “On the
sides of Uaighmor, the stag bounds along the heath;” and in
Graham’s “Sketches of Perthshire” (ed. 1812), it is stated to
have been then (as now) occasionally seen in the neighbour-
hood of the Trossachs. “In hard winters,” he says, “when

88 UNGULATA

provender is scarce, the Red Deer of the northern forests
sometimes wander in quest of food and shelter, as far as
Glenfinglas and the heights of Craig-vad” (see also the
“Old Statistical Account” of the parish of Callander, 1794,
vol. xi., p. 598).

About ten years ago Red Deer were introduced to the park
at Hopetoun, Linlithgowshire, where I have seen them on
several occasions. The keeper tells me there are twenty-six in
the park at present, but that four years ago there were fully
double that number. During the winter of 1889-90 a hind,
doubtless an escape from Hopetoun, made its appearance in
Dalmeny park, where it remained some months, but had
ultimately to be shot owing to the damage it committed
among the young trees. In the park at Dalkeith Palace,
a single hind may now be seen feeding with the herd of
Fallow Deer kept there.

In former times the Red Deer must have been abundant
and generally distributed in the south of Scotland. Tradition
tells us that during the Middle Ages the Scottish kings and
nobles were wont to hunt deer in the immediate neighbour-
hood of Edinburgh, and doubtless such was the case, though
there is little reliable historical evidence to point to. Such
tales, for instance, as that of the royal hunt of Roslin, in which
King Robert the Bruce is represented to have staked the forest
and estate of Pentland against the head of Sir William St Clair,
must be regarded as in the highest degree legendary (vide
Wilson’s “Annals of Penicuik,” 1891, p. 165), The Red Deer,
which was probably in most localities long survived by the Roe,
must now have been extinct in the lowlands for many centuries.
Even in the mountainous country around St Mary’s Loch, it
seems to have been practically extinct for at least two hundred
years. Professor Walker, after informing us that, according
to Bishop Leslie, numerous stags of great size were found

RED DEER 89

in the Meggat district about the year 1578, adds that the
last of that region, after wandering solitary among the
mountains for about thirty years, and. known to all the
inhabitants, was killed on the neighbouring hills of Annan-
dale in 1763 (“ Mammalia Scotica,” 1808). It must indeed
have been rare if it existed at all in that district in the
beginning of the eighteenth century, for in Dr Pennecuik’s
“History of Tweeddale,’ published in 1715, it is thus
referred to,—‘ Upon the head of this water [Megeat] is to
be seen, first, a house deservedly called Dead-for-cald; then
Wintrop-burn; Meggit-knows; the Crammel, which seems
to have been an old hunting-house of our kings, for I saw
in the hall thereof a very large Hart’s-horn upon the wall
for a clock-pinn; the like whereof I observed in several
other country men’s houses in that desart and _ solitary
place, where both Hart and Hynd, Dae and Rae have been
so frequent and numerous of old, as witness the name of the
hill, Hartfield” (ed. 1815, p. 248). Hartlaw, Hartside, and
Hindsidehill are Lammermoor place-names (Muirhead’s
“ Birds of Berwickshire,” Introd., p. xv).

Remains of the Red Deer have been unearthed in almost
every part of the district, thus proving what history and
tradition vaguely indicate, namely, that the animal once roamed
over the entire area. The following list of localities is taken
from Woodward and Sherborn’s “Catalogue of British Fossil
Vertebrata” — Edinburgh, Elphinstone, Cockenzie, Drem,
Athelstaneford, Seacliffe, Coldingham, Westruther, Kimmerg-
hame, Whitrig Bog, Selkirk, Maxton, Linton, Uphall, Dundas
Castle, Stirling, etc. Little more than a year ago I was shown
several leg-bones, which had just been found on the Pentlands,
a locality whence many examples of Red Deer remains have
been procured—specimens from near Bavelaw, for instance,

also came under my notice not long ago,
G

90 UNGULATA

FALLOW DEER.

CERVUS DAMA JL.

Seeing the Fallow Deer is not an indigenous animal in the
country, and exists only in a semi-domesticated state in
parks specially enclosed for its reception, its right to a place
in this memoir may be questioned. With Bell’s “ British
Quadrupeds” as a precedent, the usual practice, however, has
been to include it in local faunal lists, and I see no reason
to depart from that rule in the present instance. After
all, it is practically as much entitled to a place in our fauna
as the pheasant, and its claims to that distinction are
certainly quite as good as those of the Canada goose or the
mute swan.

Without attempting to give a list of the deer-parks in
the district, I may mention the following, with which I am
personally familiar, namely :—the Duke of Buecleuch’s park
at Dalkeith, and the Earl of Morton’s at Dalmahoy, both in
Midlothian ; the Earl of Hopetoun’s, at Hopetoun House,
Linlithgowshire; and Mrs Hamilton-Ogilvy’s, at Biel, in
East Lothian.

The regulation strength of the Dalkeith herd is 300, and
at the present time it contains rather over than under that
number. Their presence adds another to the many charms
of that fine park, and I know few more enjoyable sights than
to see them bounding through the tall brackens in the depths
of the old oak-wood. Mr Chouler, the Duke’s gamekeeper,
tells me the bucks begin with great regularity to “bellow”
on or about the 9th of October, and by the middle of the
month they may be heard grunting in all directions. During
still moonlight nights the park then resounds with their
hoarse voices, the general effect being sufficiently wild, in my

FALLOW DEER 91

estimation, to afford genuine pleasure to the naturalist.
The first fawns are almost invariably dropped on 16th June.
The number of Fallow Deer in the Hopetoun park at
present is only 140; fifteen years ago they numbered
fully 250. In the Biel park there are between 200 and
300, and I understand the Dalmahoy park contains about
the same number. These herds, which contain both spotted
and uniformly dark animals, of course serve a useful as
well as an ornamental purpose, and furnish their owners
and the game-dealers with a constant supply of excellent
venison. ;

In 1889 I observed Fallow Deer in Eshielshope, near
Peebles, on the property of Sir John Hay, Bart. They
were introduced, I am told, forty-two years ago, and at
one time numbered nearly two hundred, but lately they
have been killed down owing to their destroying young
trees and the adjoining farm crops, and now only about a
dozen remain.

So far as I am aware, the date of the introduction of the
Fallow Deer into the district is not known. We have
positive knowledge of it, however, as far back as 1283, for
which year the accounts of the king’s chamberlain record,
among other expenses connected with the royal park at
Stirling, an allowance for mowing and carrying hay and
litter for the use of the Fallow Deer in winter (Cosmo
Innes’s “Scotland in the Middle Ages,” p. 125). From an
observation made by Walker in his “Mammalia Scotica,”
which is supposed to have been written between 1764 and
1774, it appears that Fallow Deer have been kept in
Hopetoun park for at least a couple of centuries. The white
and the black varieties, he tells us, had existed there for
sixty years without intermingling, until the mottled form
was introduced, from which time all three forms brought

92 UNGULATA

forth young differing in colour from their own kind. He
also states that the dark variety was first introduced into
Scotland by James VI. The Dalkeith deer-park is mentioned
in the “ Old Statistical Account” (vol. xii, p. 27).

. ROE DEER.
CAPREOLUS CAPRHA Gray.

At the present time the Roe Deer is locally not uncommon
in the district. In Midlothian it is practically confined to
the upper section of the country drained by the two
branches of the Esk, the individuals now and again seen
in other parts of the county being mere wanderers. From
1865 to 1872 I was very familiar with it on the wooded
banks of the North Esk above Penicuik, where as many as
eight or nine might occasionally be seen together. A few
were shot annually, so that their numbers scarcely varied
from year to year, but there is reason to believe a heavy toll
has occasionally been levied from them during recent years.
About three years ago, I startled one in the old haunts, and
the head of another, which had been killed in the woods
near Glencorse in December 1890, has since been shown to
me. Wanderers may be seen almost every year crossing
the Pentlands, and I have a record of one shot in Midcalder
parish. On the South Esk it is well known in the country
around Temple, and quite recently I had an excellent
view of one in a large wood between that village and
Gorebridge. It may also be seen from time to time in the
adjacent parts of East Lothian (the woods at Humbie and
Salton, for instance, are localities from which I have had it
reported), but throughout the rest of that county it seems
to be entirely absent, nor can I hear of it in the adjoining

ROE DEER 93

parts of Berwickshire, except as a rare straggler as far east,
however, as the Pease dean woods (Letter from Dr Hardy). In
Peeblesshire they have established themselves in most of the
large fir plantations which now clothe the hill-sides on both
banks of the Tweed, and a few are annually shot by the sports-
men of that district. In November 1888 I was delighted to
see a party of six bounding through a thicket in the grounds
at Portmore, near Eddleston, and a similar group may be
seen in the woods at Dawyck. In Linlithgowshire, I am
told, it is occasionally seen, chiefly in the more inland parts ;
and in most of the woodlands of Stirling and south-west
Perth it is more or less common. It inhabits the extensive
woods at Tulliallan, where I have myself seen it, and its
appearance in the plantations of some of the adjoining
properties is a common occurrence. In the west of Fife
it is not uncommon in the neighbourhood of Saline, for
instance ; but in the east of the county it appears to be rare
—a few, however, still exist in the woods at Falkland.

In olden times the Roe was, without doubt, much more
abundant and generally distributed in the district than now,
but the destruction of the forests and thickets, the growth
of agriculture, and the loss of protection, gradually drove it
from the southern section of Scotland, so that during the
whole of the eighteenth century, and probably longer, it
seems to have been entirely absent from our bounds, except
in the mountainous country around Callander. In most
localities the “Rae” probably long survived the Red Deer, but,
apart from tradition and a few place-names, there is compara-
tively little evidence of its former abundance. I cannot recall
any direct historical evidence for the area with which we are
more immediately concerned, but as proving the existence
of the animal in the south of Scotland during the reign of
Alexander II. (1214-1249), I may refer to the oft-quoted

94 UNGULATA

agreement between the Avenels and the Monks-of Melrose,
by which the latter were expressly precluded from hunting
Hart and Hind, Boar and Roe, in the forest of Eskdale (C.
Innes’s “Sketches of Early Scotch History,” p. 103, and the
Duke of Argyll’s “Scotland as It Was and as It Is,” 2nd ed.,
p. 52). Remains of the Roe seem to be less frequently
brought to light than those of the Red Deer. The discovery
by Dr Hardy of a portion of an antler in the vicinity of an
ancient British camp at Oldcambus, in the extreme east of
Berwickshire, is a fact of much interest (“ Proc.” Berw. Nat.
Club, ix., p. 242). As already mentioned (p. 89), the
animal is alluded to by Dr Pennecuik (1715) as a former
inhabitant of Tweeddale, and in Chambers’s “ History of
Peeblesshire” (1864, p. 525), we read, “Of the animals
which have become extinct in Peeblesshire, tradition pre-
serves the memory only of the Red Deer and the Roe. The
latter seems to have survived after the extinction of the
former. It is probably, however, at least two hundred years
since the last really wild deer was killed in the county.”
The nearest parish in which I find it mentioned in the “Old
Statistical Account” is Callander; “ Roes,” says the writer,
“breed in our woods” (vol. x1., p. 598).

Prior to the middle of the last century, comparatively few
artificially-planted woods of any extent existed in the district.
About that time, however, the planting of trees became very
popular among the proprietors of the land, and in the course
of the next twenty or thirty years thousands of acres in all
parts of the country were utilised in this way. By the
beginning of the present century many of these plantations
were of sufficient growth to afford excellent shelter to such
an animal as the Roe, which was now, so to speak, being
invited to return to its former haunts. The return movement

1 See also Graham’s Sketches of Perthshire.

~

- ROE DEER 95

soon set in, and in the course of a few years the Roe had
made its appearance in many localities from which it had
long been absent.! In the “ New Statistical Account” of the
parish of Alloa (page 9), we read that “ Roe-deer. . . . have
been seen occasionally for more than thirty years in Tullibody
woods,” and the writer of the article on Tillicoultry, in the
same volume (Clackmannanshire, p. 70), says of it, “ occasion-
ally seen in the neighbouring plantations.” In the same
publication it is included among the wild animals of
Gargunnock and Fintry in Stirlingshire. “In Fife,’ writes
Fleming (1828), “they have reappeared of late years, in
consequence of the increase of plantations” (“ British
Animals,” p. 26); and Professor Duns, in an article on the
migration of mammals, contributed to “Science for All,”
mentions their subsequent periodical appearance in a planta-
tion bordering on the banks of the Avon, in Linlithgowshire.
From an incidental remark in Jackson’s “ Chivalry of Scot-
land in the Days of King Robert Bruce, including the Royal
Hunt of Roslin,” published in 1848, the date of its reappear-
ance at Penicuik, on the south side of the Pentlands, may be
fixed at from 1840 to 1845. “Deer in a wild state have,” he
says, “lately come to the woods of Sir George Clerk, Bart.,
about two miles from King Side Edge” (page 109).

1 A return movement was noted before the close of last century in the valley
of the Tay (‘‘ Old Statistical Account,” Little Dunkeld, vi., p. 361).

96 CETACEA

Orper CHLACE A:

HUMP-BACKED WHALE.

MecaPTera Boops (Fab.)=M. LONGIMANA (Rudolphi).

TuE true or “ whale-bone” Whales mentioned in this memoir
can only be looked upon as casual visitors to our waters,—
wanderers from their proper habitats in the North Atlantic
and Arctic Oceans. They appear to be all more or less
migratory, but the North Sea scarcely falls within the area
of their periodical movements. Except in a very few
instances, the occurrences cited in the following pages have
taken place during the autumn and winter months, September
being the most productive. Semi-fossil remains of large
Whales have been found on several occasions (see Milne
Home’s “ Estuary of the Forth,” p. 25).

With us the Hump-backed Whale is a casual visitant
of very rare occurrence. Of the three examples that have
been recognised in Scottish waters, two may be mentioned
here, namely, one which was cast ashore about two miles
north of Berwick-upon-Tweed on 19th September 1829, and
the famous “Tay Whale,” which for five or six weeks in the
end of 1883 disported itself frequently in the Firth of Tay
opposite Dundee, to the astonishment of the good folks of
that town.

The Berwick specimen, which was described and figured
by Dr George Johnston in the “Transactions” of the
Natural History Society of Northumberland, Durham, and
Newcastle-on-Tyne (vol. i. p. 6), was between 35 and 36 feet
in length, 24 feet in girth, and had pectoral fins 9 feet long.

HUMP-BACKED WHALE 97

It was a female. In its stomach were six cormorants, and a
seventh, on which it was presumed to have choked, was
sticking in its throat. It was sold for £17, 2s. 6d, and
yielded only about eighteen gallons of very inferior oil. In
Bell’s reference to this specimen (“British Quadrupeds,”
2nd ed., p. 394) there are two mistakes, namely, that it was
cast ashore near Newcastle, and was 26 feet long.

Notices of the “Tay Whale” appeared in most of the
newspapers at the time, the best account perhaps being
that in the “Weekly Scotsman” of 5th January 1884.
Subsequently, in 1888 and 1889, a very elaborate account
of it by Professor Struthers was published in the “Journal
of Anatomy and Physiology” (vols. xxii. and xxii.) It
was a male 40 feet in length, with pectoral fins 12 feet
long, and was believed to have been attracted to the Tay
by the abundance of young herring then in the firth.
Some idea of its great strength and endurance may be
formed from the following facts:—After several fruitless
attempts, the animal was at length successfully harpooned
on 31st December (1883)—two, and finally three harpoons
being shot into it. Large iron bolts, &c., were also fired
into it, and hand-lances were driven three feet deep in its
back. At first two six-oared rowing boats and a steam
launch were made fast to it, and four or five hours after-
wards a steam tug was added. With this heavy drag it
swam wildly about the firth for a time, and then took out to
sea, pulling all but the launch after it. For some time it
pursued a northerly course till off Montrose, when it turned
and proceeded towards the Bell Rock, then towards the mouth
of the Firth of Forth, and finally turned north again when
six or seven miles off the Carr Rock. One by one the harpoon
lines had parted, and during the morning of Ist January,

when a little to the south of the Bell Rock, the last gave way,
H

98 CETACEA

and the Whale was again free, after being “fast” for nearly
twenty-two hours to a dead weight of between twenty and
thirty tons, which it was computed it had towed between
forty and fifty miles. Of course it was wounded beyond the
possibility of recovery. For the time being, however, it made
its escape, and was not seen again for a week, when some
fishermen observed the, carcase floating off Bervie, and on 8th
January towed it into Stonehaven harbour, where it was sold
for £226 to Mr Woods, Dundee, who had it embalmed, and
for the next seven months it was on exhibition in various
towns in Scotland and England. The skeleton was presented
by Mr Woods to the Dundee Museum. Seeing this specimen,
during its endeavours to effect its escape, is known to have
approached within a few miles of the Carr Rock, the species
may be given a place in the Forth fauna.

SIBBALD’S RORQUAL.

BALZNOPTERA SIBBALDI (Cray).

Sibbald’s Rorqual, or the Blue Whale—the largest creature
at present known to inhabit the globe—is another rare
casual visitant to our shores, only three examples having
been recorded during the present century. The large whale,
78 feet long, stranded at Abercorn, in the estuary of the Forth,
in September 1692, and recorded by Sibbald (“ Phalainologia
nova,” p. 33), in all probability belonged, as has been pointed
out by Sir William Turner, to this species. Three undoubted
examples, however, have since occurred in the Forth. The
first is the huge animal, 80 feet in length, whose skeleton
hangs in the Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh. It
was found floating dead at the mouth of the Firth in October
1831, and was towed ashore near North Berwick, and sold

SIBBALD’S RORQUAL 99

to Dr and Mr Knox, by whom it was dissected (see
“Proc.” Roy. Soc. Edin., 1833, vol. i., p. 14). Another, which
Professor Turner has identified from the nasal bones, pre-
served by Dr M‘Bain, was stranded on the Fife coast at
Aberdour in July 1858 (“Report of British Association,”
1871, p. 144). And lastly, there comes the famous “ Long-
niddry Whale,” which was stranded a little to the west of
Gosford Bay in East Lothian, on 3rd November 1869.
During the fortnight it lay stretched on the beach thousands
of people flocked to see it, aud doubtless many of my
readers, like myself, helped to swell the crowd. The carcase
was purchased from the Board of Trade for £120 by an
oil merchant in Kirkcaldy, who had it towed across the
Firth and flensed on the beach close to that town. Professor
Turner, who secured the skeleton for the Anatomical Museum
of the Edinburgh University, has given a very full descrip-
tion of the animal in the “Transactions” of the Royal
Society of Edinburgh (xxvi., pp. 197-251). It was a female,
measuring 78 feet 9 inches in length, and contained a
male foetus 19 feet 6 inches long. Its girth was estimated
at 45 feet, and its weight at 74 tons. It yielded 16 tons
of oil.

COMMON RORQUAL.

BALANOPTERA MUSCULUS (Z.).

In the Common Rorqual or Razorback we have another
rare straggler to the district, no specimen having been
identified, so far as I know, since 1848.1. The earlier writers

1 Van Beneden, in his ‘‘ Histoire naturelle des Cétacés des mers d’ Europe,”
1889, speaks of an example in the Firth of Forth in April 1880, but the
statement must, I fear, be one of the many inaccuracies which that work
unfortunately contains, as no such occurrence is known to Sir William
Turner. to whom I am indebted for valuable notes on this and allied species.

100 CETACEA

did not distinguish between this and the last species, and

?

in the volume on “ Whales” in the “ Naturalists’ Library,”
published in 1837, records clearly referable to each are
brought together under the name of ‘‘Great Northern
Rorqual.” Of the examples there mentioned, the following
are now generally referred to the present species, namely—
one 46 feet long, stranded in the Firth of Forth a little to the
west of Burntisland on 17th November 1690, and described
by Sibbald (“ Phalainologia,” p. 29) ; another, “precisely of
equal size,’ forced ashore very near to the same spot at
Burntisland on 10th June 1761, and recorded by Neill
(“Memoirs of Wernerian Society,” i.,212) from a MS. account
of it by Dr Walker; and a male, 43 feet long, stranded near
Alloa, in the upper part of the estuary of the Forth, on
23rd October 1808, and described by Neill (op. cit., i, 201).
The only example since recorded seems to be the female,
54 feet long, which was cast ashore near Kinkell, about
three miles east of St Andrews, on 8th January 1848, and
described by the late Mr R. Walker (“Scottish Naturalist,”
vol. i, p. 107). In connection with this occurrence, it is
worth noting that another whale, said to be of this species,
went ashore near Aberdeen on 18th December 1847. The
Razorback stranded “ near Kingask, Fife, in 1848,” of which
Sir William Turner has some of the baleen (Alston, Scottish
Mammalia, p. 17), and Walker’s Kinkell animal, are under-
stood to be one and the same.

In June 1752 a large whale was stranded near Eyemouth
in Berwickshire, which was probably of this species (see
Scoresby’s “ Arctic Regions,” vol. i.); and Professor Turner
informs me he has the skull of a specimen obtained at
Bervie, Kincardineshire, in October 1889,

RUDOLPHIS RORQUAL 101

RUDOLPHIS RORQUAL.

BALANOPTERA BOREALIS Jess.

In September 1872 a whale, which Sir William Turner has
since shown to have been an example of Rudolphi’s Rorqual,
was captured at Snab, Kinneil, about a mile from Bo’ness, on
the Firth of Forth, by some men who, seeing it floundering in
shallow water, proceeded to the spot, and, having fastened a
rope round its tail, hauled it nearer the shore, and then
killed it. The “Scotsman” of 26th September contained a
notice of the occurrence. The length of the animal from the
tip of the beak to the end of the tail was about 37 feet,
and its girth about 15 feet. The carcase, after being stripped
of the blubber, was secured by Professor Turner, who, in
order to thoroughly clean the bones and free them from the
oil they contained, had them buried in the Botanic Garden
in a mixture of earth and leaves, in which they were allowed
to lie till the summer of 1881. The skeleton was then
prepared for the Anatomical Museum of the University,
where it is now preserved. Although captured in 1872, it
was not till the skeleton had been carefully examined ten
years later that Professor Turner became satisfied “that the
animal was the Cetacean named by zoologists Balenoptera
borealis or laticeps”—see his paper read to the Royal Society
of Edinburgh, 20th February 1882, and printed in the
“Journal of Anatomy and Physiology,” vol. xvi, p. 471,
in which he minutely describes the specimen. This is the
first properly authenticated example of the species taken
on the British coasts, and is an addition to Alston’s list
of Scottish Mammalia.

102 CETACEA

LESSER RORQUAL.
BALANOPTERA ROSTRATA (/ab.).

The Lesser Rorqual seems to enter the North Sea more
frequently than its congeners, and as a consequence more
examples of it have occurred in our waters. It can only
be looked upon, however, as an occasional visitant.

On 15th May 1832, one 14 feet in length was captured
in the salmon stake-nets near Largo (“ Magazine of Natural
History,” v., p. 570), and about two years later (February
1834) Dr Knox obtained a young one, 9 feet 11 inches in
length, from “near the Queensferry” (“Proc.” Roy. Soc. Edin.,
i, p. 63; and “Naturalists’ Library,” “Whales,” p. 143). The
next I have a note of was found in the sea, apparently dead,
near the Bell Rock, on 7th September 1857, and taken to
Leith; it was 14 feet 5 inches long—see “ Proceedings” of
the Royal Physical Society, i, p. 441, where it is described
by the late Dr M‘Bain. According to Alston (Scottish
Mammalia, p. 18) another was caught in the Firth of Forth
in 1858. On 8th September 1870, an example about 18 feet
long, and of which the skull and baleen are preserved
in the Anatomical Museum of the Edinburgh University,
was stranded near Burntisland;! and in September of the
following year (1871) one was taken at Dunbar (skull, etc.,
in Anatomical Museum); while in 1872 another was
caught in the herring-nets off Anstruther (Alston, Scottish
Mammalia, p. 18). In the Anatomical Museum there is
also the skull of a young male from Elie in 1879. Still more
recently one (27 feet long) which I had the satisfaction
of seeing in the flesh, was stranded at Granton Quarry on
24th January 1888 (“Scotsman,” 30th January), and in

1 On 29th July 1869, one 13 feet long was stranded near Arbroath (Scottish
Naturalist. i., p. 111).

oe i en, Se

LESSER RORQUAL 103

November following a small example was obtained near Alloa;
both, I understand, were secured by Sir William Turner,

In the autumn of 1874, when on the North Sea, not far
from the mouth of the Forth, I observed a Whale rise to the
surface several times to “ blow.” It was probably an example
of this species.

BEAKED WHALE.

HYPEROODON ROSTRATUS (Chemnitz).

We now pass to the toothed Cetaceans, and the first
species falling to be noticed is the Beaked or Bottle-nosed
Whale, which appears to be an irregular but not very
uncommon visitor to our shores in autumn. The “ Pro-
ceedings” of the Royal Physical Society for 1885-86
(vol. ix., pp. 25-47) contains a valuable paper by Sir William
Turner, F.R.S., on the occurrence of the species in the
Scottish seas, in which he gives particulars of the following
among other authenticated Scottish examples. It will be
observed that, with one exception, they are females, each
accompanied by a young calf.

1. An adult female, 284 feet long, accompanied by a young
female 9 feet long, captured at Alloa on 29th October 1845,
and identified by the late Professor John Goodsir (see paper
by Wm. Thompson in the “Annals and Magazine of Natural
History” for 1846, vol. xvii, p. 153, where it is mentioned
under Lacépéde’s name, H. Butzkopf). As pointed out
by Professor Turner, an erroneous date (1839), which
originated with the late Dr J. E. Gray, has been very
generally assigned to this specimen. Dr Gray (“Catalogue
of Seals and Whales,” 1866, p. 339) also referred to it
as an example of his Hyperoddon (Lagenocetus) latifrons,

104 CETACEA

under which name it appears in the works of Bell and
Alston; but Professor Turner, who, I understand, has the
skeleton of the animal in the Anatomical Museum, states
that the skull does not possess the broad lofty crests of
Gray’s supposed species, which is now known to be merely
the adult male of H. rostratus. Bell, I observe, further states
that the calf which accompanied this specimen was a male,
whereas Thompson says distinctly it was a female. Neither
does the skeleton of the mother appear to be in the Museum
of Science and Art, as stated by Bell and Alston, but in the
Anatomical Museum of the University.

2. A female, 26 feet long and 15 feet in girth, captured at
Grangemouth on 23rd September 1879: examined by Professor
Turner.

3. An animal said to be 144 feet long, found dead on the
shore at Blackness on 24th September 1879, and supposed to
be the young of the last mentioned.

4, Two examples, probably mother and calf, stranded at
South Queensferry in September 1883: sold to an oil merchant
in Kirkcaldy.

5. A young male, 20 feet 6 inches long (22 feet following
the curvature of the back), found on the beach between
Tyninghame links and Peffer burn, near Dunbar, on 4th
November 1885 (“ Scotsman,” 5th November): procured by
Professor Turner, and described in his paper above referred to.

In the “Scots Magazine” for 1808 (p. 37), the occurrence
of an example of “ Delphinus bidens” (Turton’s name for the
present species) was thus recorded by Patrick Neill:—‘In
the beginning of December [1807], during a strong breeze;
a Bottlenose Whale (Delphinus bidens) twenty-one feet long,
was stranded near Goulon Point, in East Lothian. The
country people instantly stripped off the blubber, leaving
the krang or carcase to those who should come after!”

eee Oe ee eee

SOWERBYS WHALE 105

SOWERBY’S WHALE.

MESOPLODON BIDENS (Sowerby).

Of this comparatively scarce species only one example is
known to have reached the shores of the south-east of Scot-
land. It was found in Dalgety Bay, near Aberdour, on the
north side of the Firth of Forth, in October 1888, by one of
the Earl of Moray’s gamekeepers. The head, skeleton, and
viscera were procured by Sir William Turner, who gave a
description of the specimen at a meeting of the Royal Physical
Society in December following (“ Proceedings,” vol. x., p. 5),
and subsequently described its stomach in the “Journal
of Anatomy and Physiology” (vol. xxii). The animal
was a male. Its extreme length in a straight line was
15 feet 1 inch, and its weight 15 cwts. The skeleton is
preserved in the Anatomical Museum of the Edinburgh
University.

As this Cetacean is probably a migratory species, visiting
the shores of Northern Europe in the fall of the year, we may
reasonably look forward to the occurrence of other examples

in our waters at no very distant date.

BELUGA or WHITE WHALE.
DELPHINAPTERUS LEUCAS (Pall.).

The Beluga can only be regarded as a casual visitant of
extreme rarity, its claim toa place in the fauna of the district
resting on the occurrence of a single (male) specimen in the

Firth of Forth so far back as 1815. It was killed early in
I

106 CETACEA

June of that year in the upper part of the estuary, near
Cambuskenneth, by salmon-fishers, who attacked it with fire-
arms and spears. Hearing of the capture, Mr Robert Bald of
Alloa promptly secured it, and had it forwarded to Professor
Jameson of Edinburgh, and in December of the following
year an account of it was communicated to the Wernerian
Natural History Society by Dr Barclay and Mr Neill. Their
paper, illustrated by two plates, on one of which is a sketch
of the animal, was printed in the Society’s “Memoirs” (vol. ii1.,
pp- 371-395). For about three months it had been observed
almost daily passing and repassing Alloa harbour, and it was
often observed at Kincardine also. It generally passed up
the estuary (in pursuit of salmon it was supposed) when the
tide was flowing, and returned with the ebb. Measured in
a straight line, its extreme length was 13 feet 4 inches. Its
stuffed skin is still preserved in the Museum of Science and
Art, Edinburgh.

The species being an inhabitant of high northern latitudes,
and only a rare straggler to the European side of the North
Atlantic, this specimen is likely still long to remain unique
as a Forth example.

PORPOISE.

PHOCENA COMMUNIS F. Cuv.

The Porpoise is by far the best-known Cetacean we have,
occurring abundantly in the estuaries or adjoining waters
throughout the year; it is, indeed, the only species which
can be regarded as common and resident. In pursuit of its
prey it ascends both the Tay and the Forth, practically as
high as the tide flows, and it is not unfrequently captured in

PORPOISE 107

the salmon stake-nets by the shore and in herring-nets at sea.
To those who take advantage of the summer sailings on the
Forth, the line of black fins appearing and disappearing in
regular succession must be familiar. I have seldom gone an
excursion of any extent, in any part of the estuary and firth
from Alloa to the Isle of May, without observing a school of
half-a-dozen or more rolling along in characteristic manner.
In May 1887, while exploring the precipitous coast between
St Abb’s Head and Fast Castle in Berwickshire, I observed a
couple of Porpoises fishing close in shore, and by remaining
motionless for a few minutes had the pleasure of seeing them
tumbling about in a pool within ten to twenty yards from
the rock on which I stood.

The Porpoise was well known to Sibbald as an inhabitant
of both firths, and he shows, from a charter granted by
Malcolm IV. in favour of the monks of Dunfermline, that in
those days the head of the animal was esteemed a great
delicacy, and that it had also an economic value for the sake
of the oil (“ History of Fife and Kinross,” 1803 ed., pp. 116
and 295),

KILLER or GRAMPUS.

ORCA GLADIATOR (Lacép.).

This species is probably a more frequent visitor to our
waters than the few authentic records of its occurrence would
lead us to suppose. Every now and then one hears of
Grampuses being seen in the Firths, but owing to the vague
way in which the name “ Grampus” is used by the seafaring
population of the district, these statements can scarcely be
taken into account.

Sibbald, in his “ Phalainologia nova” (p. 7), records the

108 CETACEA

occurrence of several “Orc” in the Forth (at Culross and
Blackness) in May 1691, and from his description of the
animals there can be no doubt they belonged to the present
species (Van Beneden so regards them in his “ Histoire
naturelle des Cétacés des mers d’ Europe,” p. 441).

In the “Scots Magazine” for October 1814 (p. 733), Patrick
Neill gave an interesting account of a herd of “ Grampuses ”
which appeared in the estuary of the Forth in the beginning
of that month. On the 6th, fifteen of them were killed at the
mouth of the Devon, about two miles above Alloa, and of
those which then escaped two were captured near Tullibody
and two near Stirling. They were of various lengths, from
9 to 20 feet, and of both sexes. From the detailed measure-
ments given of one of the largest, we learn that the length of
the dorsal fin was 3 feet 3 inches, the length of the flippers
3 feet, and their breadth 2 feet 3 inches. From these facts,
and the statements that “the back and sides were jet black,
and shining; the belly pure white; and there was a large

?

oblong white compartment behind each eye;” also that
“there were two beautiful rows of teeth, 24 in each jaw,
making 48 in all,” there can be no doubt the animals
belonged, as Neill inferred, to the present species, and not to
the next, the Caaing Whale, as the writer of the “New
Statistical Account” of Alloa (Clackmannanshire, 1840, p. 9)
seems to have thought.

Fleming, in his “ British Animals” (1828, p. 84), states
that in the Firth of Tay, the Grampus “goes nearly as far
up as the salt-water reaches, almost every tide at flood,
during the months of July and August, in pursuit of salmon,
of which it devours immense numbers.” In all likelihood
the animals on whose movements this statement was based,
represented other species besides the present. The latest
authenticated capture of the Killer in our waters of which I

GRAMPUS 109

have a note is that recorded by the late Mr John Gibson in
the “Proceedings” of the Royal Physical Society (vol. iv.,
p. 99). The record refers to a male having the following
dimensions :—Total length along the curve of the back,
21 feet 10 inches; girth of body, 13 feet; height of dorsal
fin, 3 feet 10 inches. It was captured about a mile
west of Granton, on 18th March 1876, and “on being
dragged ashore, while still alive, it gave forth shrill
piercing cries, somewhat resembling in their sharpness a
woman’s voice.”

A few years ago, I observed in the seaward portion of
the Firth of Forth several Cetaceans, which, from the
height and shape of their dorsal fins, I took to be of the
present species.

PILOT or CAAING WHALE.

GLOBICEPHALUS MELAS (Trail).

The Pilot Whale may be regarded as an irregular spring
and autumn visitant, though comparatively few authenti-
cated instances of its occurrence have been recorded.
There can be no doubt it is constantly confounded with
the last species by the uninitiated, under the name of
“ Grampus.”

The twenty-five Cetaceans mentioned by Sibbald as stranded
at Cramond Island, in the Firth of Forth, in 1690 (“ Phalaino-
logia,” p. 10), are referred by Professor Van Beneden to this
species (see his recent “ Histoire naturelle des Cétacés des
mers d'Europe,” p. 508). The writer of the “ New Statistical
Account” of the parish of Alloa considered that the “school”
of small whales which occurred in the upper part of the

110 CETACEA

estuary in October 1814 were referable to the present species,
but, as I have already shown (p. 108), Neill’s description of
them, published in the “Scots Magazine” at the time, makes
it perfectly clear that they belonged to the last species.
From a statement in Don’s list of Forfarshire animals
(Headrick’s “Agriculture” of Angus, App., p. 39), it would
appear that true “Ca’ing” Whales were stranded up the
Firth of Tay prior to 1813.

The “Zoologist” for 1856 (p. 5095) contains a description by
Dr J. Hardy of a male G. melas, measuring 20 feet in length
and 11 feet in greatest girth, which came ashore among the
rocks of Greenheugh, a short way to the west of St Helen’s
church, Oldcambus, Berwickshire, on 29th March of that
year. At the same time another—much smaller—also came
ashore a few miles farther west in the vicinity of Thornton-
loch, in East Lothian. In April 1867 a herd, supposed to
consist of about two hundred animals, was observed in the
Firth of Forth for about a fortnight. On the 19th the Volun-
teer Artillery at Portobello practised at them without success.
The following day they were attacked by fishing crews and
others from Prestonpans, Newhaven, and other villages, and
no fewer than twenty-three of them slain, amidst scenes of
intense and savage excitement. The bulk of the slaughter
took place in the bay on the east side of Granton harbour.
Three more were captured on the 22nd, and one or two others
were cast dead on shore by the tide. These particulars are
mainly taken from an account of the occurrence communi-
cated by the late Mr E. R. Alston to the “ Zoologist ” (1867,
p- 801). One of the animals (a female, 15 feet 2 inches in
length), of which Mr Alston gives a description, was taken
to Glasgow by a party of Newhaven fishermen and exhibited
as a “Grampus,” shoals of which, they said, were often seen
about the Bass Rock, but it was very rarely they entered

PILOT WHALE nila

the Firth. Several of the animals captured on this occasion
were secured for scientific purposes, with the result that
our knowledge of the organisation of the species was greatly
increased (see, for instance, Sir William Turner’s paper in
the “Journal of Anatomy and Physiology,” vol. ii, and
Dr Murie’s treatise in the “Transactions” of the Zoological
Society of London, vol. viii.). The skeletons of two of the
animals are preserved in Edinburgh—one in the Museum
of Science and Art, the other in the Anatomical Museum
of the University.

The “ Proceedings” of the Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club,
vol. vil, p. 509, contains a record by Dr Hardy of an example
14 feet long, which came ashore in October 1875 at Burn-
mouth, near Berwick; and on 3rd August last (1891) two
small whales, which—as reported in the “Scotsman ”—were
stranded at St Margaret’s Hope, near North Queensferry,
also belonged to this species, as I am informed by Mr James
Simpson, assistant to Sir William Turner.

WHITE-BEAKED DOLPHIN.
LAGENORHYNCHUS ALBIROSTRIS Gray.

Up to the date of the publication of Alston’s list of
Scottish Mammalia, no authentic instance of the occurrence
of the White-beaked Dolphin in the Scottish seas was known.
Since then several have been taken on different parts of our
coasts, both east and west. Although it has not, as yet, been
identified in the waters of the Forth, the fact that it has
been captured off the mouth of the Tay on the one hand, and
off the Tweed on the other, renders it highly probable that a
few occasionally visit the seaward portion of the Forth also,

142 CETACEA

and we may safely predict that its authentication for that
area is only a matter of time.

On 7th September 1880 a young male was captured near
the Bell Rock, and presented to the Kelvingrove Museum,
Glasgow. This individual, which measured 5 feet 8 inches,
was fully described by Mr J. M. Campbell at a meeting of
the Glasgow Natural History Society on 30th November
1880, and in the “Scottish Naturalist” for January 1881
(p. 1).

In July 1881, an example was caught off Berwick, and
in August 1883 another specimen—a young female—was
also taken off Berwick and secured for the Kelso Museum,
where its stuffed skin is preserved. The skulls of these
two animals were handed over by the late Mr Andrew
Brotherston to Sir William Turner, to whose “Notes”
on the species, published in the “ Proceedings” of the Royal
Physical Society for 1888-89 (vol. x., p. 14), I would refer
those who desire further information regarding the occurrence
of this Cetacean in Scottish waters. The only examples I
have myself seen in the flesh were an adult female and a
young male, which were taken together off Stonehaven,
Kincardineshire, in July 1888, and placed on view in the
shop of Mr Anderson, fishmonger, Edinburgh. Both were
purchased for the Anatomical Museum of the University
by Professor Turner, who has given a minute description
of them in his paper above referred to. The mother
measured 8 feet 6 inches in length, and the calf 3 feet
11 inches.

It will be noted that this species has been observed
on our coasts only during the months of July, August, and

September.

COMMON DOLPHIN ENS

COMMON DOLPHIN.

DELPHINUS DELPHIS L.

The Dolphin, being more of a southern species than most
of the other. Cetaceans here mentioned, is probably only an
occasional visitant to our shores.

The “Dolphin,” as distinguished from the Porpoise, was
specifically mentioned by Sibbald as occurring in the Firths of
Forth and Tay in the seventeenth century, and their relative
sizes were correctly indicated. His words are as follows :—

Of these [Delphinide] in both these firths there are two
sorts. The bigger beareth the name of Dolphin, and our
fishers call them Meer-swines. The lesser is called Phoczena,
a Porpess” (“History of Fife and Kinross,” new ed., 1803,
p- 115). In his “Phalainologia nova” (p. 6) he also
mentions the “ Delphinus,” as distinguished from the “ Orca”
and “ Phocena,’ and gives an excellent figure of it, so
that there is reason to believe some at least of his
Dolphins were the true one. Attention may also be drawn
to the fact that Don includes the species in his list of
Forfarshire animals (Headrick’s “Agriculture” of Angus,
App., p. 39).

In the Museum of Science and Art, Edinburgh, there is
exhibited a stuffed specimen of the Dolphin, labelled “Firth
of Forth,” but I have not been able to learn more of its
history. It is understood to have been preserved at least
thirty to thirty-five years ago.

From these somewhat unsatisfactory records, we pass to
the following recent and authentic occurrence of Delphinus
delphis in the Firth of Forth. In February 1887, a boating
party observed a school of six or eight small Cetaceans

swimming about in pairs in a bay on the Dalmeny estate
K

114 CETACEA

between South Queensferry and Hound’s Point, and suc-
ceeded in shooting one, which proved to be a female
of this species, measuring in a straight line 5 feet
5 inches. It was procured by Sir William Turner for
the museum of the University, and is fully described by
him in the “Proceedings” of the Royal Physical Society
(vol. ix., p. 346).

BOTTLE-NOSED DOLPHIN.

TurRsIops TuURSIO (/ab.).

The following museum specimens furnish the only records
JT can find of the occurrence of this species within our
bounds, namely:—Two specimens—a stuffed skin and a
skeleton, perhaps taken from the same animal—in the
Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art, labelled “ Firth
of Forth”; the skeleton of another, also from the Forth,
which, according to Bell and Alston, formed part of the
University collection formerly kept in the Surgeons’ Hall;
and three skeletons and a skull, all likewise from the
Firth of Forth, in the zoological department of the British
Museum.

Mr Eagle Clarke informs me that an entry in “The
University Museum Register” shows that the specimen
stuffed in the Museum of Science and Art was cast ashore
at Portobello in the “year 1833-1854”; and it would
appear, from Flowers List of Cetacea in the British
Museum (p. 27), that the skeletons and skull in the
national collection were purchased in 1866. The skull
figured in the supplement to Gray’s Catalogue (p. 73) is
one of these specimens.

BOTTLE-NOSED DOLPHIN 115

The Bottle-nosed Dolphin, though apparently only an
irregular visitant to our waters, is probably less rare than
has generally been supposed, and I think I may venture to
predict that the capture and identification of fresh examples
is only a question of time.

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED.

Borcre, Hector. Description of Scotland—contained in
Holinshed’s “ Scottish Chronicle,’ 1577, and mod. edit.

SIBBALD, Sir Rost. “Scotia Illustrata, sive Prodromus
historiz naturalis,’ 1684.

“ Phalainologia nova, sive observationes de rarioribus

quibusdam Baleenis in Scotie littus nuper ejectis,” 1692.

“ History of Fife and Kinross,’ 1710; and ed. 1803.

PENNECUIK, Dr ALEX. “ Description of Tweeddale,’ 1715;
also new ed., 1815, containing list of animals, evidently
by Patrick Neill.

WaALkeEr, Rev. Jonn. “Mammalia Scotica,” probably written
between 1764 and 1774—contained in vol. of ‘Essays
on Natural History and Rural Economy,” 1808.

PENNANT, THOS. Sketch of Caledonian Zoology—prefixed to
“ Lightfoot’s Flora Scotica,” 2nd ed., 1792.

“ British Zoology,” ed. 1812.

(Old) “ Statistical Account of Scotland”—Sir John Sinclair’s
—1791-1799.

“Scots Magazine” for years 1807 to 1817—containing
monthly Memoranda in Natural History, by Patrick
Neill.

“ Wernerian Society’s Memoirs,” 1808-1837,

118 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED

Royal Society of Edinburgh, “ Transactions ” and “ Proceed-
ings” of, various years—containing papers by Dr Knox,
Sir William Turner, and others.

NEILL, Patrick. List of the Animals of Habbie’s Howe

(Newhall, Carlops), published in the 1808 edition of
Allan Ramsay’s “ Gentle Shepherd.”

GranAM, Rev. P. “Sketches descriptive of Picturesque
Scenery on the Southern Confines of Perthshire,’ eds.
1810 and 1812.

Don, G. List of Forfarshire Animals, published in the
Appendix to “ Headrick’s General View of the Agricul-
ture of the County of Angus,” 1813.

De Saussure, L. A. NECKER. “ Voyage en Ecosse,” 1821.
FLeminG, Rey. Joun. “ History of British Animals,” 1828.

“Annals and Magazine of Natural History” (originally
“ Magazine of Natural History ”), 1828 e¢ seq.

“ Natural History Society of Northumberland, Durham, and
Newcastle-on-Tyne,” vol. 1., 1829.

“ Berwickshire Naturalists’ Club, History of,” 1851 et seg.

Srark’s “Picture of Edinburgh,” 6th ed. 1854; contains
articles (understood to have been contributed by P.
Neill) on the Objects of Natural History in the imme-
diate neighbourhood of Edinburgh, and on the city
markets.

tHIND’s “ Excursions illustrative of the Geology and Natural
History of the Environs of Edinburgh,” 2nd ed., 1836—

contains list of Mammalia.

Hamitton, Ropr. “ Natural History of the Ordinary Cetacea
or Whales,” 1837—a vol. of the Naturalist’s Library.

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED 119

MacGiniivray, Wu. “ History of British Quadrupeds,” 1838
—one of the vols. of the Naturalist’s Library.

“ New Statistical Account of Scotland,” 1834-1845.
“ Zoologist,” 1843 et seq.
OwEN, Sir Ricup. “ British Fossil Mammals and Birds,” 1846.

Fyre, W. W. “Summer Life on Land and Water at South
Queensferry,” 1851.

Royal Physical Society, “ Proceedings” of, 1854 et seq.

CLERMONT, LorpD. “Guide to the Quadrupeds and Reptiles of
Europe,” 1859.

INNES, Cosmo. “Scotland in the Middle Ages,” 1860; and
“Sketches of Early Scotch History,” 1861.

CHAMBERS, Wm. “ History of Peeblesshire,” 1864.

“Journal of Anatomy and Physiology,” 1867 e¢ seg.—papers
by Sir William Turner and Professor Struthers.

“ British Association Reports,” various years.
“ Zoological Record,” 1864 et seq.

Natural History Society of Glasgow, “ Proceedings” of, 1868
et seq.

Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, “Proceedings” of,
vol. viii. (1868-70) e¢ seq.

Gray, J. E. “Catalogue of Seals and Whales in the British
Museum,” 2nd ed., 1866 ; and Supplement, 1871.

Stuart, JouN. “ Records of the Priory of the Isle of May,”
1868.

“Scottish Naturalist,” 1871 e¢ seg.

MitnE-Homg, D. “The Estuary of the Forth and adjoining
districts viewed geologically,” 1871.

120 LIST OF PUBLICATIONS CONSULTED
CoLQuHOUN, J. “ Lecture on the Feree Nature of the British
Islands,” 1873.

Beit, Tuomas. “ History of British Quadrupeds, including
the Cetacea,’ 1874.

Zoological Society of London, “Transactions” of, vol. viii.,
1874.

ALSTON, E. R. Article on Mammalia, in “ Notes on the Fauna
and Flora of the West of Scotland,” 1876.

“Fauna of Scotland—Mammalia,” 1880.

Dosson, G. E. “Catalogue of the Chiroptera in the
Collection of the British Museum,” 1878.

HartinG, J. E. “ British Animals Extinct within Historic
Times,” 1880.

Fiowrer, W. H. “List of the Specimens of Cetacea in the
Zoological Department of the British Museum,” 1885.

Edinburgh Geological Society, “Transactions” of, vol. for
1886—contains paper on Reindeer and other bones
from the Pentland Hills, by James Simpson.

VAN BENEDEN, P. J. “ Histoire naturelle des Cétacés des
mers d’Europe,” 1889.

Woopwarp and SHERBORN. ‘Catalogue of British Fossil
Vertebrata,” 1890.

FLowER and LYDEKKER’s “ Introduction to the Study of
Mammals,” 1891.

PoLitock’s “ Dictionary of the Forth,’ 1891—contains an
article on the Mammalia by W. Eagle Clarke.

Arrangement followed,
Arvicola agrestis,
3 amphibins,

sp ater,
5 glareolus, .
Badger, .

Bait for Micro- Mammals,
Balznoptera borealis,

$5 laticeps,
53 musculus,
op rostrata,

Pr sibbaldi,

Bat, Common,

», Daubenton’s or Water
», Long-eared,

,, Natterer’s,

», Whiskered,
Bear,

Seaver,
Beluga,
Boar, Wild,
Brock,

Caaing Whale,
Cachelot, :
Canis vulpes, .
Capreolus caprea,
Carnivora, F
Cat, Wild,
Cattle, Wild White,
Cervus dama,

», elaphus, é :

——
PAGE
15 Cetacea,
65 | Chiroptera,
64 | Conies,
65 | Crossopus Fedienss
70 Cyclone Mouse-trap,
Cystophora cristata,
42
16 Deer, Fallow, .
13, 101 »» Red,
101 1» Roe,
99 De fphinanytenas te
102 | Delphinus bidens, .
98 Ae delphis,
19 | Dolphin, Bottle-nosed,
20 Fe Common,
5 aly 7 White-beaked, .
13, 22 Dormouse,
23
ll Elk, : ;
11 Erinaceus europeus,
105 Ermine, .
11
42 Felis catus,
Fox,
109 Foumart,
1,
37 Globicephalus melas,
92 Grampus,
13, 34 De griseus,
34
12 | Halichcerus grypus,
90 Hare, Common,
87 », Mountain,

EAN Dy eX.

Hedgehog,

Hyperoodon ree:
a Butzkopf,
na latifrons,

Insectivora,

Killer,

Lagenocetus latifrons,
Lagenorhynchus albirostris,
Lepus cuniculus,

», timidus,

5, variabilis,
Longniddry Whale,
Lutra vulgaris,

Mammoth,
Marten, Pine, .
Megaptera boops,

5 longimana,
Meles taxus,
Mesoplodon bidens, .
Mole, :
Monodon monoceros,
Mouse, Harvest,

», House,
», Long-tailed or Wood.
Mus alexandrinus,

5, decumanus,

», minutus, .

;, musculus,

>, Yrattus,

;, sylvaticus, :
Muscardinus avellanarius,
Mustela erminea,

5 martes,
», putorius,
», Vulgaris,

Narwhal,
Nomenclature followed,

Orea gladiator,
Otter,
Ox, Great ene Horne’:

INDEX
PAGE PAGE
25 | Phoca greelandica, 13, 56
103 », vitulina, ; : 57
103 Phoceena communis, 106
103 | Physeter macrocephalus, . 12
Pilot Whale, 109
13, 25 Pipistrelle, 19
Plecotus auritus, yf
5 Polecat, 49
mi Porpoise, 106
saa Publications eonenltedt 117
ae a Rabbit, 84
80 Rat, Black, 74
8] », Brown or Norway, Ue
99 Razorback, 99
40 Reindeer, 5 Cl
Rodentia, 13, 60
ane Rorqual, Common, 99
es 5 Lesser, 102
i a Rudolphi’s, 101
a: Pa Sibbald’s, . 98
42
105 | Sciurus vulgaris, 60
3] Seal, Common, : 5 Bil
12 », Greenland or ee 13, 56
78 », Grey, 55
76 », Hooded or Bladder nose, 59
77 Shrew, Common, 26
75 », Lesser, 20, 2
73 », Water, od
z8 Sorex minutus, 27, (2
76 » pygmeus, 27, 72
74 | Se temitenre 29, 30
. 97 | » vulgaris, 26
13, 63 Squirrel, . . = . 60
53 Statistical Account (Old), Ex-
Aq tracts from, . 10, 11
49 | Stoat, : 53
52
Talpa europea, 31
12 | Tay Whale, ; 96
15 | Trap for Micro-Mammals, 16
Tursiops tursio, . : 114
107
40 | Ungulata, 13, 87
12 Urus, 12

INDEX
PAGE
Vespertilio daubentoni, . >» 20) Whale; Blue;
“5 mystacinus, . 13, 23 », Caaing,
re nattereri, F Ss 22 »» Hump-backed,
Vesperugo pipistrellus, . 5 OY oe edlotie
Vole, Bank, . : : 6 fe »» Sowerby’s,
pee lel dees 9. : : 7 65 ye perm;
ae Water. : ; 5 ae! 5, White,
$5 », black variety, . 65 | White Cattle, .
Z Wild Cat,
Weasel, . : . : 52 | Wolf,

Whale, Beaked or Bottle-nosed, 103

Printed by M‘FARLANE & EnskineE, Edinburgh.

nga

hae ee

vinuia

may F ea
The main n fauna of the Edinburgh dis