| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Barren Ground Caribou of Keewatin
Author: Harper, Francis, 1886-1972
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Barren Ground Caribou of Keewatin" ***
images courtesy of The Internet Archive and the Online
[Transcriber’s Note:
This e-text comes in two forms: Unicode (UTF-8) and Latin-1. Use the
one that works best on your text reader.
--If the tables use the male and female symbols (“Mars” and “Venus”),
and apostrophes and quotation marks are “curly” or angled, you have
the UTF-8 version (best). If any part of this paragraph displays as
garbage, try changing your text reader’s “character set” or “file
encoding”. If that doesn’t work, proceed to:
--In the Latin-1 version, symbols have been changed to the simple
letters M and F. Apostrophes and quotation marks will be straight
(“typewriter” form).
Except for illustrations and footnotes, all brackets are in the 1955
original. The same applies to question marks and similar editorial
punctuation.
Typographical errors are listed at the end of the e-text. To reduce
visual clutter, italic markings have been omitted from all references
in the form “1951a” (printed “1951_a_”).
_Geographical Note:_ Lake Nueltin straddles the border between Nunavut
and Manitoba. The area covered by the map is in southern Nunavut, in the
region now written Kivalliq. “Eskimo Point” is modern Arviat.
The opinions expressed in this book are not necessarily those of the
transcriber.]
[Illustration: MAP 1. The Windy River area at the northwestern
extremity of Nueltin Lake, Keewatin. (Most of the smaller features
bear merely local or unofficial names.)]
[Illustration: COVER A Caribou buck signaling with a sprawling
posture of the left hind leg. Drawing by Earl L. Poole; based upon
a motion-picture film taken August 24, 1947, near the Windy River
post.]
THE
BARREN GROUND
CARIBOU
OF KEEWATIN
By
Francis Harper
University of Kansas
Lawrence · Kansas
University of Kansas
Museum of Natural History
Editor: E. Raymond Hall
_Miscellaneous Publication No. 6, pp. 1-164, 28 figs., 1 map_
_Published October 21, 1955_
Means for publication were supplied by:
National Science Foundation
Wildlife Management Institute
American Committee for International Wildlife Protection
Printed in U.S.A.
THE ALLEN PRESS
Lawrence, Kansas
1955
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 5
MIGRATIONS 7
Southern limits of winter range 7
Spring migration in the Churchill region 11
Spring migration in the Nueltin Lake region 12
Summer interlude 18
Fall migration in the Nueltin Lake region 18
Retrograde autumnal movement 32
Fall migration in the Churchill region 38
SUMMATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION 39
ECOLOGY 41
Habitats 41
Trails 41
Influence of weather on distribution 43
Influence of food supply on distribution 44
Influence of insects on distribution 45
Effect of combined environmental factors on distribution 46
Relations to man 47
Ethnological material from caribou products 59
Relations to Black Bears 62
Relations to foxes 62
Relations to Wolves 63
Relations to birds of prey 67
Relations to miscellaneous animals 69
Relations to flies 69
Ectoparasites 73
Relations to Reindeer 74
NUMERICAL STATUS 78
GENERAL HABITS 79
Daily periods of activity and rest 79
Organization of herds 81
Disposition 83
Senses 86
Gaits 86
Tracks 87
Swimming 88
Shaking off moisture and insects 95
Signaling 96
Food 98
Scatology 99
Voice 100
Reproduction 101
Fawns 103
Growth 104
Antlers 105
Rubbing trees 108
MORPHOLOGY AND TAXONOMY 108
Pelage and molt 108
Albinism 112
Foot-glands 112
Mastology 113
Fat 113
Body measurements and weights 114
Measurements of skulls 115
Measurements of antlers 115
Measurements of testes 115
Geographical variation 116
LITERATURE CITED 120
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES TO
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ 134
INDEX 161
INTRODUCTION
No other large North American land mammal is of such primary importance
as the Barren Ground Caribou (_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_) as a source
of food and clothing for so many primitive Eskimo and Indian tribes; no
other performs such extensive and spectacular migrations; no other may
be seen in such vast herds; no other exhibits so close an approach to a
Garden-of-Eden trustfulness in the presence of man. And perhaps no other
is more worthy of being cherished and safeguarded in its natural haunts
for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations.
The original valid designation, in technical nomenclature, of the Barren
Ground Caribou of the Mackenzie-Keewatin region dates back to 1829, when
Sir John Richardson described it in the _Fauna Boreali-Americana_ as
_Cervus tarandus_ var. _arctica_. The type locality is Fort Enterprise
(about lat. 64° 30´ N., long. 113° W.), on Winter Lake, an expansion of
Snare River, Mackenzie. Since the typical subspecies appears to lack a
distinguishing common name, it would seem fitting to associate with it
the name of its worthy describer; thus, Richardson’s Barren Ground
Caribou. The author’s intimate acquaintance with the animal should have
enabled him to draw up a somewhat fuller and more adequate description
than he did. Previous travelers in the Barren Grounds, among whom Samuel
Hearne (1795) was particularly notable, had contributed accounts of the
species, without differentiating it from the Lapland Reindeer (_Rangifer
tarandus_) or without giving it a distinctive technical name.
Since Richardson’s time the mainland form of western Canada has been
discussed by many zoologists and explorers. The most comprehensive
account of its life history hitherto published is that by Seton (1929,
+3+: 95-135),[1] whose personal experience was gained in the region of
Artillery, Clinton-Colden, and Aylmer lakes. Dearth of adequate material
(particularly from the type locality or adjacent areas) makes it all but
impossible to determine whether there is any significant geographical
variation between the herds of central Mackenzie and those of Keewatin.
[Footnote 1: This statement, written long before the appearance
of Banfield’s work of 1954, no longer applies.]
The foremost objective of an expedition I made in 1947 to Nueltin Lake,
in southwestern Keewatin, was a study of the Barren Ground Caribou. The
expedition was supported by the Arctic Institute of North America, with
funds supplied by the Office of Naval Research. My headquarters were at
the little Windy River trading post, at the northwestern extremity of
Nueltin Lake (map 1). There, for a period of six months, I enjoyed the
fine hospitality of Charles Schweder and Fred Schweder, Jr. They had
lived on intimate terms with the Caribou during most of their youthful
lives, and they freely shared with me the knowledge they had thus gained
concerning the ways of life of these wonderful creatures. They secured
nearly all the specimens that went into my collection. The three other
residents of the post also deserve my gratitude for their general
helpfulness and friendliness; they were 10-year-old Mike Schweder
(brother of Charles and Fred), 15-year-old Anoteelik (an Eskimo boy),
and the latter’s sister, 5-year-old Rita.
In a previous paper (1953) I have endeavored to express to various
officials and friends my sincere appreciation of their courtesy and
generosity in furthering the work of the expedition; and I can scarcely
forbear to repeat here the names of at least a few of them: Dr. A. L.
Washburn, at that time executive director of the Arctic Institute of
North America; Mr. R. A. Gibson, deputy commissioner of the
Administration of the Northwest Territories; and Mr. G. W. Malaher,
director of the Game and Fisheries Branch, Manitoba. For the loan of a
motion-picture camera, which secured for me some extremely gratifying
scenes of the migrant hosts on the Barrens, I am greatly indebted to Mr.
William C. Morrow. Dr. Ralph S. Palmer has kindly read, and made helpful
comments upon, a preliminary draft of the present report.
Through the courtesy of the American Museum of Natural History, the
United States National Museum, and the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, I have been able to examine important comparative material in
their collections.
A grant from the National Science Foundation has enabled me to carry the
investigation through to completion.
MIGRATIONS
The Barren Ground Caribou is the outstanding migratory land mammal of
North America at the present day. (Some of the bats, though extensively
migratory, obviously belong in a category too distinct for comparison.)
We know as yet extremely little concerning the movements of individual
Caribou;[2] but it is fairly safe to assume that among those reaching
the southern limits of the winter range in central Manitoba or
northwestern Ontario, there must be many whose summer range is at least
500 or 600 miles to the northward. The latitudinal extent of such
wanderings is comparable with, or equivalent to, an annual round trip
between Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Charleston, South Carolina.
There is perhaps less information available concerning the migrations of
the wild Reindeer of the Old World than concerning the movements of the
Barren Ground Caribou of North America (_cf._ Jacobi, 1931: 191-200).
[Footnote 2: One means of gathering information on this subject
would be to capture fawns as they swim across lakes or wide rivers
on the autumn migration, then to affix numbered metal tags to
their ears and to release them in time to rejoin their mothers.
This would simply be a modification of the leg-banding method
that has proved so highly successful in the study of bird
migration. It would also be particularly useful in studies on
age and growth.]
_Southern limits of winter range_
In years long past the winter range extended at least occasionally as
far south as Fort McMurray in Alberta and Cree Lake and the upper
Mudjatick and Foster rivers in Saskatchewan, and rather regularly to
Reindeer Lake (Preble, 1908: 137); and “on rare occasions as far south
as Cumberland House on the Saskatchewan River” (Buchanan, 1920: 105). At
an early date Richardson believed (1829: 243) that “none” of these
Caribou “go to the southward of Churchill.”
There are, however, records of long ago that deal with mass occurrences
of Caribou on the lower courses of the Nelson, Hayes, and Severn rivers,
emptying on the west coast of Hudson Bay. The records are very puzzling
in several respects. Most of them do not definitely differentiate the
species involved from the Barren Ground Caribou, but some of them (by
Hearne, Richardson, and Preble) indicate that it is the Woodland
Caribou. The direction of the migrations, as reported in some instances,
is just the reverse of that taken at the present time by the Barren
Ground species during its normal movements at corresponding seasons.
Finally, it is all but impossible to reconcile the numbers reported with
such knowledge as we have of the status of the Woodland Caribou at any
other period or in any other region.
Perhaps the earliest account is by Dobbs (1744: 22):
“They [residents at Fort Bourbon-York Factory] also take great numbers
of Cariboux or Rain-Deer [sp.?]. In _March_ and _April_ they come from
the North to the South, and extend then along the River 60 Leagues; they
go again Northward in _July_ and _August_; the Roads they make in the
Snow are as well padded, and cross each other as often as the Streets in
Paris.”
In discussing the “Indian deer” or Woodland Caribou in the vicinity of
Great Slave Lake, Hearne remarks (1795: 225): “This is that species of
deer which are found so plentiful near York Fort and Severn River.”
According to Thompson (1916: 100-101), an immense herd of “Rein Deer”
[sp.?], estimated at the rather preposterous figure of 3,564,000
individuals, crossed the Hayes River 20 miles above York Factory in late
May, 1792. The direction of this migration is not indicated.
Richardson writes (“1825”: 330) of the Woodland Caribou: “In the
beginning of September, vast numbers of this kind of deer pass near York
Factory . . . on their journey towards the north-west.”
And again (1829: 250):
“They cross the Nelson and Severn Rivers in immense herds in the month
of May, pass the summer on the low, marshy shores of James’ Bay, and
return to the northward, and at the same time retire more inland in the
month of September. . . . I have been informed by several of the
residents at York Factory that the herds are sometimes so large as to
require several hours to cross the river in a crowded phalanx.”
The implication is that the herds passed _southward_ in May. It should
be borne in mind that these were apparently not personal observations of
Richardson’s; and in his belief that the Barren Ground species did not
go south of Churchill, he may have merely assumed that the animals in
the York Factory region were the Woodland species.
“Near York Factory, in 1831, this propensity [Indian destructiveness]
. . . led to the indiscriminate destruction of a countless herd of
reindeer [sp.?], while crossing the broad stream of Haye’s River, in the
height of summer. . . . The deer have never since visited that part of
the country in similar numbers.” (Simpson, 1843: 76).
Referring to the York Factory region in 1837, John McLean writes
(1932 [1849]: 195). “Not many years ago this part of the country was
periodically visited by immense herds of rein-deer; at present there is
scarcely one to be found.”
A later account of Richardson’s (1852: 290) is somewhat ambiguous as to
the species to which it refers:
“The reindeer that visit Hudson’s Bay travel southward toward James’s
Bay in spring. In the year 1833, vast numbers of them were killed by the
Cree Indians at a noted pass three or four days march above York
Factory. They were on their return northward, and were crossing Hayes
River in incredible multitudes.”
Pike writes (1917 [1892]: 50) that “within the last three years [_i.e._,
about 1888] the [Barren Ground?] caribou have appeared in their
thousands at York Factory . . . where they have not been seen for over
thirty years.”
Preble (1902: 41) quotes Dr. Alexander Milne as thinking, after 14
years’ residence at York Factory, that the small bands of “Woodland
Caribou,” found between Churchill and Cape Churchill, form the “northern
fringe of the bands which migrate to the coast in spring, the great
majority of which in their journey cross to the south of Nelson River.”
At that time, however, Preble (1902: 42), like Richardson before him,
seems to have regarded the Churchill River as the southern limit of the
Barren Ground species, and thus he may not have considered the
possibility of the animals of Cape Churchill and the Nelson and Hayes
rivers belonging to the same species.
It is difficult to draw any sure conclusions from the confusing records
just quoted. Possibly chief reliance should be placed upon the testimony
of such high authorities as Hearne, Richardson, and Preble when they
refer to the animals as Woodland Caribou. Furthermore, none of the early
writers identify them unequivocally as the Barren Ground species. It
remains fairly evident that long ago some species of Caribou in great
numbers did actually cross these rivers in a southerly direction in the
spring, pass the summer on the coastal tundra east of York Factory, and
return northward or northwestward in late summer or autumn. Whichever
species it was, it represented a segment of the population that must
have become reduced to utterly insignificant numbers, if not entirely
extirpated, some decades ago. In any event, it does not seem very likely
that we shall ever be able to reconstruct the actual movements of the
“incredible multitudes” in the York Factory region of more than a
century ago.
Since the beginning of the present century, until very recent years,
there seem to have been few or no Manitoba records of _R. a. arcticus_
from any locality so far to the southeast as York Factory. In 1947,
however, Mr. G. W. Malaher, director of the Game and Fisheries Branch in
Manitoba, informed me that during the previous couple of winters the
animals had ranged southward on a broad front to the latitude of Oxford
House, where they had not been known for 40 or 45 years. It was surmised
that the recent burning of large areas north of The Pas, resulting in
the destruction of the Caribou’s normal winter food of lichens, had
deflected the animals toward the southeast and had caused them to extend
their migration beyond its normal limit. The Split Lake band of Indians
(on the Nelson River) were said to have killed 4,000 Caribou during the
winter of 1946-47, and to have used half of them for dog feed.
Arthur H. Lamont, in charge of the meteorological office at Fort
Churchill, gave me information concerning Caribou that he had seen
during a plane flight from that point to Edmonton on March 18, 1947. At
midday he had sighted hundreds, in bands averaging 20 to 30 individuals,
on some little lakes, averaging a quarter of a mile in diameter, near
the southwestern end of Reindeer Lake. The animals were right in the
middle of the frozen lakes (evidently for a noonday rest), and some of
them were lying down. They paid no attention to the plane at a height of
6,000 feet, but were frightened when it came down to 200 feet. This was
the only area where Caribou were sighted during the entire flight.
Duncan A. McLeod, of Winnipeg, informed me that he had seen thousands
and thousands of Caribou on April 16, 1941, while he was flying from
Isle à la Crosse to Beaverlodge on Lake Athabaska. They were nearer to
Lake Athabaska than to the starting-point. They were congregated on
frozen lakes about the middle of the day.
“Their nomadic migrations during the past 10 years have brought caribou
herds during winter months to northwestern Ontario (Little Sachigo
Lake); central Manitoba (Cormorant, Cross, and Island Lakes); northern
Saskatchewan (Churchill River); northeastern Alberta (Clearwater and
Athabaska Rivers and Lake Claire)” (Banfield, 1949: 478, fig. 1).
_Spring migration in the Churchill region_
The Hudson Bay Railway is perhaps the only one in North America from
which Barren Ground Caribou of the present subspecies have been seen. On
May 21, 1947, a passenger reported three or four of the animals near
Mile 326, between Gillam and Amery. Farther north, between Herchmer and
Chesnaye, the railway passes for perhaps 30-40 miles through the western
edge of a tundra area, interspersed with small spruce timber; this is
known as the “Little Barrens.” It was a thrilling experience to see my
first Caribou here, during a period of three-quarters of an hour on the
afternoon of May 21, from Mile 453 to about Mile 475. There were eight
bands, varying in number from 2 to 60 or 70 and averaging about 20
individuals. The first and largest band was loping away from the train,
at a distance of perhaps 350 yards. A band of 9 or 10, at about 250
yards, exhibited both a trotting and a loping gait. Others, as far off
as half a mile or a mile and therefore less alarmed, seemed to content
themselves with trotting. They maintained a noticeably close formation
while fleeing from the train. Yearlings, appearing only about half the
size of the adults, were readily distinguishable. The animals were in
the midst of their spring migration and were evidently moving in a
general northerly direction over the snow-covered Barrens. The ice of
the small lakes was still solid enough for the Caribou to trot over it.
Two weeks previously a large movement had passed through this area, as I
learned from several sources. A member of the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police detachment at Churchill, for example, had traveled through the
Caribou for a distance of 15 miles without coming to the end of them; he
estimated their numbers at more than 5,000. Joe Chambers, a trapper of
Goose Creek, said the animals had been very plentiful in April, moving
generally northward. He spoke of finding a good many Caribou that Wolves
had killed, contenting themselves with eating only the tongue and the
unborn fawn.
According to a railway conductor, only 12 Caribou were seen from the
train as it passed through the Little Barrens on May 25, and none on May
28.
John Ingebrigtsen, of Churchill, reported passing a frozen lake
somewhere east of the Duck Lake Post, that was “absolutely full” of
Caribou. It was about a mile and a half long by half a mile wide, and he
estimated the number of animals at not less than 20,000. This was in the
early part of May, 1942 or 1943, when the spring migration was no doubt
under way.
During a plane flight from Eskimo Point to Baker Lake on May 22, 1947,
John M. Bourassa and Don Gallagher sighted numbers of Caribou, including
one herd of about 500. On May 28 the former saw a Caribou between
Churchill and Fort Churchill. From other sources I learned that small
numbers occasionally pass along the outskirts of Churchill during the
migrations.
Professor Hazel R. Ellis (_in litt._, April 13, 1953) reports seeing
several bands of Caribou from the train as it approached Churchill on
June 8, 1947; also a band between Churchill and Fort Churchill on June
13 and 21, 1949, and a single animal on June 28, 1949, on the west side
of the river near Churchill. On July 5, 1949, she filmed a herd of over
40 Caribou at Bird Cove on Cape Churchill.
Preble writes (1902: 41): “Between York Factory and Fort Churchill a few
small bands [of Woodland Caribou] are found throughout the year on the
‘Barrens’.” He includes reports to this effect from several sources,
including J. W. Tyrrell (1898). The latter, however, does not specify
which species of Caribou his party encountered. It might be expected
that _R. a. arcticus_, rather than _R. caribou sylvestris_, would be the
proper inhabitant of this tundra area. It is beyond question that the
animals seen in recent years on the “Little Barrens” between the
Churchill and the Nelson Rivers are the Barren Ground species.
Furthermore, Mr. G. W. Malaher, of the Manitoba Game and Fisheries
Branch, informed me that a considerable number of this species spend the
summer and have their fawns on the Barrens in this area.
_Spring migration in the Nueltin Lake region_
The general pattern of this migration, as manifested particularly about
the northwestern portion of the lake, was explained by Charles Schweder.
As a rule, practically all the local Caribou spend the winter in the
wooded country to the southward. When the northward movement starts in
the spring, the does precede the bucks; they migrate through this area
mostly in May (and apparently more commonly in the latter half of the
month), but to some extent in April or even earlier. During June the
majority of the animals passing by are bucks. According to Fred
Schweder, Jr., the spring migration here is more regular, less erratic,
than the fall migration.
When I arrived at Nueltin Lake on May 31, the spring migration was in
full swing; it continued through June in gradually lessening force, and
the last northbound band was seen on July 1. In the meantime many
interesting details of caribou behavior came to light.
While flying from Churchill to Duck Lake Post on May 31, at a height of
about 500 feet, we detected three bands on the frozen surface of Seal
River, where they were evidently taking a noonday rest. They numbered
approximately 40, 20, and 6 individuals. Within 20 minutes after
resuming our journey, from Duck Lake Post to Nueltin Lake, we saw four
more bands, numbering from two to a dozen individuals. Finally, just
before landing on Windy Bay, we noticed a band of perhaps 20 crossing
the bay a mile from its head.
Observations during the following 10 days showed that this was a very
definite crossing-place for the Caribou, as if some invisible barrier on
each side kept them to a certain line of march. Moreover, Charles
Schweder informed me that they followed this identical route year after
year. An examination of the local topography (map 1) soon revealed the
reason. The rugged south side of Windy Bay rises steeply for some 500
feet to the summit of the Windy Hills, and over a considerable distance
there are precipices and talus slopes barring the passage of such
animals as Caribou. But the mile-long South Bay, meeting Windy Bay at
right angles, affords a convenient break in the hills; and the slopes
thereabouts are gradual enough to be negotiated readily by the Caribou.
So here they converge from the neighboring heights, making long,
slanting trails through the snow that are visible for miles; they pass
out of the narrow mouth of South Bay as through a funnel, then follow
the beaten path of their predecessors across the ice of Windy Bay toward
the farther shore, until they are lost to view among a cluster of
islands. It may be further remarked that their course northeastward from
the mouth of South Bay is less obstructed by islands than almost any
near-by portion of Windy Bay.
From our camp, a mile or so distant, Caribou in bands of approximately
the following numbers were observed using this crossing-place during the
early part of June: June 1--7, 10, 18, 20, and several other bands of
unrecorded size; June 2--10, 3, 7; June 3--4, 4, 10, 30, 70, and others;
June 4--3, 40?; June 5--40, 50, 75; June 6--25; June 10--8. Of course
many others must have passed while our attention was elsewhere engaged.
In most cases my records indicate the time of day when the bands were
crossing Windy Bay. The periods were mainly from 10 to 11 a.m., from
2:30 to 5 p.m., and in the evening. Perhaps the infrequency of midday
passages was due to the habit of the Caribou of resting at this period.
One of the last bands to pass during the evening of June 1 consisted of
about 20 individuals. Two big bucks were in the lead, and apparently a
few others were scattered along the line. At the very rear was a big,
extra-dark buck, immediately preceded by a yearling barely half its
size.
In crossing the bay ice, the animals traveled habitually in long files,
one after the other, and yet not altogether in single file. In watching
the endlessly interesting spectacle from camp, we could not always count
the individuals exactly, for here and there a few would get abreast of
others and be partly concealed. The general formation of each band was
that of a much strung-out procession. For the most part the animals
progressed at a moderate walking gait; there were no flies to spur them
on at this season. On one occasion the forward element of a large band
was actually running, but those in the rear were going calmly, and there
was no visible cause of alarm. At mid-morning of June 6 most of a band
of 25 were lying down to rest on the bay ice, while a few remained
standing.
Meanwhile Caribou in some numbers were advancing northward by crossing
Windy River, the ice on which did not break up generally till June 14.
On June 3, for example, as I peeped out of my tent at 4 a.m., there was
a band of about 15 making a crossing a quarter of a mile above camp.
Late in the afternoon several dozen did likewise close to the same
place. At this period I did not get farther upstream to note how many
might be passing there. On June 14, while the river ice was breaking up
but while the bay ice was holding firm, two bucks moved about on the
latter, just off the river’s mouth. They appeared to be seeking a safe
crossing. The smaller of the two almost invariably preceded, just as if
it were aware that it would be less likely to break through than its
companion. For the most part they walked rather sedately, but now and
then took up a very leisurely trot. On the following day a dozen crossed
Windy Bay at about the same place. These were the last ones seen on the
ice in June. Though the ice remained on the bay for some days longer, it
had evidently become unsafe.
Thereafter the Caribou obviously preferred the short passage of Windy
River (no more than 50 or 60 yards wide in places) to a swim of half a
mile or so across Windy Bay. So they appeared in considerable numbers on
the south bank of the river, reconnoitering for a suitable place to
cross. Many were deterred by movements or sounds in our camp on the
north bank, including the yelping invariably set up by the tethered
Husky dogs whenever they would catch sight of Caribou; the latter would
then be likely either to retreat behind the ridges or to pass upstream
along the south bank. Along the half-mile extent of this bank visible
from our camp, I noted the following making the passage of the river by
swimming: June 18, a band of half a dozen; June 20, a band of three
landing practically in our dooryard and about 14 crossing at the mouth;
June 21, six crossing at the mouth; June 24, about 10 (mostly big bucks)
landing just above the camp. On the morning of July 1 a buck swam across
the bay just off the river’s mouth, and a little later a band of about
11--the last seen on the spring migration--were trotting upstream along
the south bank.
Various groups observed during June, principally on the south side of
the bay and the river, furnished memorable spectacles. Besides resorting
to open areas on the frozen lakes and rivers for their resting periods,
the Caribou will also select some commanding hilltop for the same
purpose. On June 3 a band of 75 appeared in midday on the summit of a
rocky hill (“Caribou Knoll,” map 1) rising to a height of some 150 feet
on the far side of Windy River. While some kept on feeding, many of them
lay down on snowbanks, apparently preferring these to the plentiful
patches of bare ground, and doubtless passing the time by chewing their
cuds. The velvet of the bucks’ new antlers was plainly visible through
field-glasses. In the variety of their attitudes on this rocky height
the animals were disposed perhaps more like alpine Chamois than like the
generally conceived masses of Caribou on the low Barrens. What a subject
for a Millais!
It appears likely that the higher elevations may serve for the nocturnal
rest as well as for a noonday siesta. During the evening of June 1, for
instance, some 75 Caribou in a loose aggregation were feeding over the
summit of Josie’s Hill, beyond the junction of Windy and South bays. On
June 20 I was enjoying a wonderfully clear and golden light that was
cast on the imposing mass of this hill as the sun was setting at my back
about 9 o’clock. The glory of that scene was enhanced by picking out
with the naked eye, at a distance of a couple of miles, two separate
bands of 12 to 15 Caribou making their way upward toward the broad,
plateaulike summit. Meanwhile a lone Caribou was outlined against the
sky on one of the rocky ridges to the south. Might not these various
movements have indicated a common urge to spend the semi-darkness of the
Arctic summer night on some high, open area where a good lookout for
Wolves could be kept?
About 2 p.m. on June 15, a herd, perhaps half a hundred strong, appeared
on a ridge directly across the river from camp. The animals made a
lovely spectacle as they stood for a time, despite certain human
movements in camp. Then they moved off upstream. A couple of hours later
about 15 Caribou were feeding quietly on the south bank. On the
following morning a band of 20 were doing likewise in nearly the same
place. Among them were a patriarchal buck (apparently the leader),
several other bucks, various does (one with hard horns), and a large
proportion of yearlings. The bucks in general were lighter in
color--more buffy; the does and yearlings, a sort of smoke gray. They
seemed to be feeding to some extent on the patches of crowberry and
dwarf birch. Presently they trotted off upstream, almost but not quite
in single file, for a couple marched out of line with the others.
On June 17 a band of about 20 appeared at a distance of 125 yards on the
brow of a low hill near Stump Lake. Nearly all were big bucks, with
velvety antlers up to about 20 inches in length. Perhaps three in the
band were hornless--if not does, then young bucks that had very recently
shed their antlers. Two of the bigger bucks were in the lead. At first
the band came toward me, then went off at a tangent at a good pace,
splashed across a little stream in a spirited action, and disappeared
over the next ridge.
Out of several bands appearing on June 20 on the opposite side of the
river, one of about 14 individuals came down the slope near the mouth,
took to the water at once, and made for the north shore. A strong buck
landed first, and farthest upstream; others did nearly as well, but some
of the smaller animals were swept by the strong current down into the
bay and probably landed beyond the point. On reaching the shore, and
even some minutes afterward, several of the Caribou could be seen
shaking the water from their fur in doglike fashion.
On the morning of June 21 a dozen came to the ridge across the river,
briefly inspected the camp, and retreated. In a short time they
returned, four antlered bucks in the lead, and some hornless individuals
in the rear (almost in a separate band). Three of the bucks stood side
by side, looking long and earnestly at the camp, while the others
grazed. Finally dissatisfied with the prospect, they made off upstream.
A little before 7 p.m. on the same day six Caribou appeared on the same
ridge. For once the dogs were inattentive and silent. After promenading
back and forth along the brow, the Caribou disappeared on the far side
of the ridge; but in a few moments they were in the water at the river’s
mouth, in very close formation, three of them swimming abreast. There
were three good bucks and three smaller, hornless animals. After they
got ashore at the opposite point, there was wagging of tails and shaking
of ears, heads, and bodies, while the water flew off in a spray. Then
they leisurely proceeded along the shore and around the point.
About 7 p.m. on June 24 some 10 Caribou (mostly big bucks) swam the
river and landed immediately above our camp. The last two, I noted, were
heading almost upstream in the current that was running 6-8 miles per
hour. They swam high, with the whole line of the back 2 or 3 inches out
of the water and with the antlers tilted back to keep the snout above
the surface. On landing, the animals hastened to the top of the Camp
Ridge and ran off along it, while the chained and frustrated dogs
expressed their feelings in the usual manner.
As I was retiring to my tent on the Camp Ridge in the twilight about
11:30 p.m. on June 29, I noticed a Caribou in the opposite edge of the
river, about 125 yards away. For the most part it stood in about a foot
of water and kept watching upstream. After some minutes I moved closer,
right along the skyline; I waved a white pillow at it and shouted
several times, but still it would not leave. Eventually it did move a
few feet back from the water’s edge and there appeared to browse on some
dwarf birches.
The next day, watching from Pile o’ Rocks northwest of camp, I noticed
three Caribou passing on a northeasterly course. They walked for the
most part, but now and again trotted. They were two well-antlered bucks
and a smaller individual with shorter horns. One of the former paused to
graze in a green-sprouting sedge bog. It was perhaps such fresh summer
vegetation that had helped to produce fat an inch thick on the haunches
of an animal secured about this date.
The area near the western border of Keewatin, lying at some distance
south of Dubawnt Lake and west of the upper Kazan River, does not appear
to attract large numbers of Caribou. Just once, in May, Charles Schweder
has found them crossing a lake which he considered Dubawnt, but may have
been Kamiluk. In his trapping excursions in that area he has found
trails and other signs all along the way, indicating that the animals at
least pass through on their migrations.
_Summer interlude_
After July 1 no more Caribou were seen about the Windy River for five
weeks. From information supplied by Charles Schweder, it appears that
virtually all of the animals desert the southern portion of the Barren
Grounds at this season. Before dropping their fawns, the does pass on
for an undetermined distance to the northward of that portion of the
upper Kazan River lying immediately below Ennadai Lake. The rear guard
of the northward migration seems to be composed mainly of bucks and a
few barren does.
A general veil of mystery seems so far to have enshrouded most of the
natal places (except the islands along the Arctic mainland coast) and
the first few weeks in the life of the Caribou fawns.
_Fall migration in the Nueltin Lake region_
In former times the southward migration reached the Nueltin Lake region
in July (_cf._ Downes, 1943: 203-237), sometimes as early as the middle
of the month. Suddenly the time of arrival shifted to (early) August,
and has so remained. In Charles Schweder’s experience, the bucks nearly
every year precede the does on the southward migration; this suggests
that at least the majority of the bucks may not go so far north as the
does. In a certain year the does actually appeared first in coming
south. In normal years, according to Fred Schweder, Jr., the migration
continues till October or November, by which time the animals have
passed into the wooded country for the winter.
Charles Schweder described the general pattern of fall migration as
follows. At first two or three animals will appear, then a few more, and
after several days a big movement, lasting three or four days, will pass
through. Thereafter the numbers dwindle, though the migration continues.
Curiously enough, there is a definite retrograde movement northward into
the Barrens in September--sometimes as early as the first part of the
month. Then there is a final movement toward the south in November, at
the time of the first good snows; the largest herds of the year may then
be seen. Just how far the migration in 1947 conformed to this pattern
(outlined in early August) will be seen in the following pages.
The big August movement occurs occasionally as early as the first days
of the month, whereas it was delayed till the last week in 1947. About
the first of August, 1943, according to Fred Schweder, Jr., a thousand
Caribou swam across the mouth of Windy River in the course of an hour,
and there were other thousands during a two weeks’ period. But such a
large migration strikes this point only once in several years. In other
years it may pass southward farther to the west, as in the vicinity of
Simons’ Lake.
In the fall of 1946--the very season when the Caribou bypassed the
Eskimo camps on the upper Kazan River--there were said to have been far
more than the normal numbers in the Windy River area. Thousands passed
in one day, about October 10. The hills about Four-hill Creek then gave
Fred Schweder, Jr., the impression of “moving with Deer.” By comparison,
the numbers along the Windy River in 1947 were considered by the local
residents to have been below normal, however impressive they may have
been to a zoological visitor. On the other hand, it seemed to Charles
Schweder, during his trip down the Thlewiaza River in late August of
1947, that Caribou were still very numerous; and he reported that people
along the west coast of Hudson Bay were then getting more of the animals
than in previous years.
Only rarely do limited numbers of Caribou remain all winter in the Windy
River area. During Charles Schweder’s years of residence there (about
1936-47) the animals had done so just once--on the Windy Hills. In
1946-47 Fred Schweder, Jr., found about 300 of them remaining all winter
about the north end of Ennadai Lake. He said that the locally wintering
animals are all bucks. Katello, an elderly Eskimo of the upper Kazan
River, informed Charles Schweder that the Caribou used to remain there
all winter, but now very rarely do so.
By the end of July, after both men and dogs had subsisted for several
weeks on a diet devoid of caribou meat, an air of expectancy began to
pervade the Windy River camp. The hunters roamed the Barrens or watched
from some lookout post such as the Pile o’ Rocks (fig. 27). No Caribou
were detected during plane trips to the upper Kazan River and return on
July 31 and August 3, though their ancient, well-marked trails were
visible along the ridges. It was not until August 6 that the first buck
of the return movement was encountered. On the following day another
animal was secured. On August 10 and 11 only a few Caribou--not over 25
in a band--were seen by Charles Schweder and Fred Schweder, Jr., from
the air between the Windy and the Kazan rivers. It began to be feared
that the bulk of the migration might pass somewhere to the westward. On
August 13, however, at a distance of some miles from camp, Fred sighted
20 Caribou; all of them were does and fawns except for one buck. On
August 17 he secured a good-sized buck (specimen No. 1065; figs. 3, 4)
at Bear Slough and saw five other bucks elsewhere. Two days later
Anoteelik reported a band of 13.
On August 20 Fred reported about 300 Caribou moving in our direction
across the Barrens east of Lake Charles; they proved to be the advance
guard of a big movement. On the same afternoon I had filmed several
bucks going their separate ways on the slopes about Pile o’ Rocks and
Stony Man. They were moving along somewhat hurriedly, in a manner very
different from the placid grazing of sheep or cattle. One or two does
with fawns also appeared in the vicinity. (The passage of a Keewatin
Tundra Wolf over the same ground a short time previously had no effect,
as far as I observed, on the behavior of the animals at this time.)
A grander, though more distant, spectacle gradually unfolded off to the
eastward, beyond Little River, where several groups, numbering from 3 to
20 or 25 individuals, were feeding quietly over the open Barrens. Their
fresh dark autumn coats showed up much more conspicuously than had the
cream-buff of their winter coats in June. Presently the scene became
livelier, as the largest band, composed of does and fawns as well as
lordly bucks, started to romp northward over the Barrens. One or more of
the various kinds of insects that bring life-long misery to the Caribou
may have stampeded them. This band swept past a group of half its size
without at once involving it. A doe and a fawn remained lying down as
the others passed.
As the eye swept farther over that lonely land, still other Caribou were
disclosed singly or in groups scattered over a couple of square miles.
There was no strong herd instinct as they grazed at will. Even when on
the march, they straggled along, some as much as 20 to 30 yards apart.
As the sun sank lower, and the black flies became less active with the
dropping temperature (about 53°), a lull ensued in the movements of the
Caribou.
The big movement of the fall migration finally began to materialize on
Sunday, August 24. This and the next few days were filled with memorable
experiences. The throngs of Caribou passing at such times around the
head of Windy Bay and across the lowermost portions of Little and Windy
rivers may be accounted for, in part, by the local topography (map 1).
The upper part of Windy Bay, occupied by numerous islands of various
sizes and extending about 5 miles in an east-west direction, opposes
something of a barrier to the Caribou in their southward trek. The
easiest way to overcome this barrier is to by-pass it. So the migrant
herds approaching the north shore of the bay turn westward toward Little
River. At a point half a mile short of this stream a rather minor
proportion of the Caribou actually do essay a passage of Windy Bay. They
cross an island lying very close to the north shore, then steer for a
small rocky islet a quarter of a mile northwest of the mouth of South
Bay. Here they get a brief respite from swimming by walking through the
shallow bordering waters, then continue straight on to the rugged south
shore of Windy Bay. This course is roughly parallel to, and a quarter of
a mile west of, the one pursued northward or northeastward across the
ice in the spring migration. The Caribou were seen to follow this water
route on various days from August 24 to September 8, and again on
October 7. Like the one across the ice, it is probably a regular,
well-established, annual route.
The greater number of the migrants proceed along the north shore of the
bay to Little River and are there confronted with a choice of various
further routes. Some continue for an indefinite distance up the
northeastern bank, passing Lake Charles on their right, though other
animals, coming from the north, may be following this bank in the
opposite direction. Probably most of the Caribou arriving from the
eastward either plunge into Little River at its mouth and swim across
(figs. 9, 10, 12) or pass upstream for a bare quarter of a mile and then
wade across at a rapid (figs. 7, 8).
Without human interference, a large proportion of those that cross the
lower part of Little River would doubtless proceed more or less directly
to Windy River and cross near its mouth. But the human and canine
inhabitants of the Windy River post seem to exert a strong influence in
deflecting the Caribou northwestward along several more or less parallel
ridges that rise to a maximum height of 40 or 50 feet. These are Little
River, Middle, and Camp ridges (map 1). Many animals follow the first of
these to its northwestern end, then cross a bog and ascend the Middle
Ridge. Some cross the southeastern end of Little River Ridge, scramble
down its steep sides by strongly marked trails (fig. 2), and then move
across the Eastern Bog to the Middle Ridge. But when they reach the
summit, they can see the post directly ahead, and generally hurry off
northwestward along the ridge. Presently some may cross the Camp Slough
(fig. 13) to the Camp Ridge and then proceed either westward or
northwestward. The Caribou have a strong predilection for following the
treeless summits of the ridges wherever they are available and extend in
a more or less desirable direction. On reaching the vicinity of the Bear
Slough, where the three ridges are interrupted or peter out, the animals
doubtless turn more or less southwestward to make a passage of Windy
River at various points above its mouth. Under the conditions outlined
above, it is obvious that some of the finest opportunities for
close-range observation and photography lie at the two well-established
crossings near the mouth of Little River.
On the dark and drizzly morning of August 24 (temp. 47°-48°) I noticed a
number of Caribou, in groups of 2 to 20, traveling northwestward along
Middle and Little River ridges. This indication of general activity
enticed me to the top of the latter, whence I had a view of perhaps 8 or
10 animals scattered over the Barrens beyond Little River. Several were
lying down just beyond the summit of a ridge between the river and
Glacier Pond, so that little more than their antlers was visible. With
the idea of finding out how closely I could approach these resting
animals, I waded knee-deep across a rapid about 100 feet in width, and
worked my way up the opposite slope until I once more caught sight of
the tips of several antlers. Under cover of a rock and some dwarf
birches, I crept ahead on hands and knees, with a miniature camera at
the ready. I had arrived within 50 yards when the nearest buck got to
its feet and stood looking at me. In hopes of photographing the rest
while they were still lying down, I rose to my knees and hastily exposed
the last bit of film in the camera. Still there was no immediate
reaction on the part of the Caribou. Fortunately there was a cross wind.
The first buck was so little alarmed that it leisurely sprinkled the
ground. But presently it turned and walked off, presumably giving some
signal of voice or posture (such as an erect tail) to the rest; for they
got to their feet, not the half a dozen I expected, but half a hundred
of them! Though they trotted off toward Windy Bay, they paused within a
hundred yards and turned to stare at me. Several more relieved
themselves as the first buck had done. By this time I saw that some of
the Caribou, including a little fawn, were carrying their tails quite
erect, as an expression of suspicion or a signal of alarm. Evidently a
majority of the band were bucks, but there were some does, with
foot-long horns, and their fawns. On my way back to camp I noticed
several groups of Caribou swimming across Windy Bay; perhaps they
included the very animals I had so recently disturbed.
In the early afternoon it became evident that a further northwesterly
movement was under way along the ridges between camp and Little River.
The animals had doubtless made the passage of the river near its mouth.
I followed some of them to a bog at the upper end of Little River Ridge,
where I began to film several bucks and a lone, inquisitive, one-horned
doe. While the latter was approaching me within a hundred feet, I caught
a movement out of the corner of my eye, and all at once the bog seemed
full of Caribou. There were 75-100 of them, chiefly bucks, and not more
than 50 yards or so distant across the open bog. They presently moved
on, without haste, and ascended the Middle Ridge.
Several hours later about 50 more Caribou passed through this bog. Then
a band of 17 came along, composed chiefly of does and their fawns, with
a couple of young bucks; they did not even turn their heads in my
direction as I stood in the open 50 yards away. Eventually a herd of
about 150 (the largest I saw during the whole season) passed along the
well-worn trails on the summit of the Middle Ridge. It seemed to include
all sexes and ages, with possibly a majority of does and fawns; bringing
up the rear was a limping patriarch with huge antlers, a heavy mane, and
a lingering winter coat.
During the remainder of the afternoon several other groups appeared in
that general area. About 15 individuals descended Little River Ridge
(fig. 2) to the Eastern Bog, but retraced their course after coming
close to several of us; they were mostly does, with four fawns and a few
bucks. Another band, of all ages and sexes and numbering perhaps a
hundred individuals, crossed at the rapid on Little River. The
temperatures that had prevailed during this day’s marked migratory
movements varied from about 45° to 50°. They were low enough to keep the
black flies completely in abeyance, and the mosquito season was
virtually over. Although I noticed none of the parasitic flies, possibly
enough of them were present to keep the Caribou moving actively against
a moderate to brisk northerly wind. Now and again a big buck could be
seen fairly jumping out of its skin with the vigor of vibrating its
sides to shake off the tormentors.
On August 25 (the second day of the big movement) I watched and filmed
the pageant of Caribou migration from the southwestern bank of Little
River. The turfy slopes of the Barrens, carpeted with low ericaceous
shrubs, mosses, and reindeer lichens, and dotted here and there with
little thickets of dwarf birch, spruce, and tamarack, stretched
invitingly before me. Temperatures ranging from 40° to 51°, with a brisk
northwest breeze sweeping down the river, happily suppressed most of the
black flies.
The Caribou came along at intervals from the eastward, in bands up to 75
strong, either to make the passage of the river or to continue upstream
along the opposite ridge. A small number might make the crossing in one
or two files, but one of the larger bands might spread out widely in the
shallow rapid. One of the photographs (fig. 7) shows approximately 75
Caribou going divergent ways at this rapid: about 20 passing upstream
along the ridge on the far side, including some pausing to feed on the
low vegetation; 8 or 9 moving down the slope of the ridge to the water’s
edge; about 10 bucks, 16 does, and 6 fawns making the passage of the
river; and about 13 arriving on the near shore and pausing to feed. The
adults were able to step across in the swift water, while the fawns swam
part of the way. The bucks were apparently in the minority again on this
day.
One group of some 40 does and fawns, after swimming the river near its
mouth, came hurrying along the ridge in close array directly toward my
station, and did not take alarm until they had arrived within 100 feet.
Then they turned tail and, each with its flag erect, beat a hasty
retreat. The maneuver made a scene of considerable charm and interest.
While I was filming a dozen Caribou in the Eastern Bog from the Middle
Ridge, a stray fawn came up and halted for some seconds within a rod of
me. The bewildered look in its big eyes was comical though pathetic. In
presently dashing on, it passed within a dozen feet.
Late in the afternoon Fred Schweder, Jr., reported about a thousand
Caribou, in various bands up to 100 strong, crossing Little River here
and there a mile or so above its mouth. They were traveling southwest.
August 26 was marked by mist squalls, a maximum temperature of
45°, and a slackening in the numbers of passing Caribou. Late in
the morning a band of more than 30 bucks, does, and fawns
crossed the rapid on Little River. In the early afternoon
scattering individuals and a band of 15 or 20 did likewise.
Presently another band of about 22 animals came (fig. 8); it
consisted chiefly of does and fawns, but there were several
medium-sized bucks bringing up the rear. They crossed the rapid
in a somewhat V-shaped formation, open at the front. The
vanguard reached a rocky strip 25 yards in front of my camera
and began to feed contentedly on the low vegetation. However,
a couple of does still in the water eyed me intently and
presumably communicated their misgivings to the others, for all
turned and went back through the river without panic or haste,
although they trotted on reaching the farther shore. Later there
were about 25 Caribou crossing the bay, and nearly as many on
Little River Ridge.
The weather on August 27, while mostly sunny, included
occasional snow or sleet flurries; the northerly wind was brisk
to strong; and the temperature, ranging from 37° to 50°,
prevented the appearance of black flies. By 10:20 a.m. a band of
about 10 does and fawns crossed the rapid on Little River. Two
hours later 12-15 animals followed the same course, and
presently 75-100 passed upstream on the far side, with a good
deal of grunting. About 2:35 p.m. nearly a hundred Caribou,
perhaps alarmed by a passing plane, dashed north out of the
Eastern Bog. By 4:45 p.m. 20 or more bucks, does, and fawns swam
across Little River at its mouth; several of the biggest bucks,
with enormous antlers, led the advance into the water. An hour
later, on the eastern side of the river, half a dozen of the
animals were lying down, but with heads erect, and facing down
wind. At this period of the day several more bands of moderate
size swam over to the west side of the river. A goodly number of
the animals fed within 25 yards of me for a considerable time.
The following day was nearly cloudless; wind moderate, westerly;
temperature, 37.5° to 66°--high enough to bring out the black
flies (but extremely few mosquitoes) after several days of
virtual freedom from these scourges. Between 11:30 a.m. and 3
p.m. at least 500 Caribou, coming from the east, must have
passed the mouth of Little River, some swimming across at that
point (figs. 9, 12), and others proceeding various distances
upstream before undertaking the passage. A few of the larger
bands numbered approximately 30, 40, and 75 individuals. Some
consisted largely of does and fawns, some of big bucks. One of
the larger bands approached the river on the run, plunged in
recklessly, and landed on the western shore some 30 feet
directly in front of my battery of cameras. Most of the animals
on this and similar occasions were remarkably indifferent to me
as I operated the cameras in full view of them. Some among them
would approach within a rod or less and stare me in the face
without alarm (figs. 11, 14).
August 29 was a cloudy, nearly calm day, with temperatures
ranging from 49.5° to 73°--conditions more propitious for black
flies than for their victims. There was comparatively little
local movement among the Caribou--in the morning two or three
swimming across the bay and a band of 20 (6 old bucks, the rest
does and fawns) swimming south across the mouth of Windy River;
in mid-afternoon a band of 10 running along the ridge on the
eastern side of Little River; and about 100 reported during the
day in the vicinity of Windy Bay by Fred Schweder, Jr. The “big
movement” had passed its peak.
The next day was largely sunny, with a light easterly or
southeasterly wind and temperatures of 50° to 68°. There were
comparatively few black flies and fewer mosquitoes. During a
five-hour vigil near the mouth of Little River I noticed only
about 50 Caribou, most of them passing westward by ones, twos,
and intermediate numbers up to 17 (does and fawns) in a band.
Mike Schweder reported a total of about 200 animals seen within
a few miles of camp.
The morning of August 31 was dismal and overcast, with a heavy
shower; in the afternoon the sky cleared; wind brisk, south to
west; temperature, 47° to 74.5°. Several Caribou passed along
the eastern side of Little River, and Fred Schweder, Jr.,
reported about 300 some miles north of camp, moving in a
southwesterly direction.
Clouds and rain ushered in the morning of September 1; the
afternoon was sunny; wind light to strong, west to northwest;
temperature, 48° to 60°. The next day was partly cloudy, with a
mist squall or two; wind light to brisk, northwesterly;
temperature, 38° to 51.5°. No Caribou were reported on either
day.
September 3 was largely cloudy, with some mist squalls; wind
light to moderate, northerly to easterly; temperature, 40° to
51°. There were enough black flies to be slightly troublesome.
Two bucks, two does, and a fawn were noted at Bear Slough.
September 4 was partly cloudy, with drizzling rain; wind light,
east to south and southwest; temperature, 43° to 58°. I saw
about 22 Caribou (largely does and fawns), in several different
groups, at Bear Slough and vicinity, and Fred Schweder, Jr.,
reported about 200 in the same area. Two were noted swimming to
the south side of Windy Bay.
September 5 was marked by a driving, day-long rainstorm; wind
brisk, easterly; temperature, 43° to 50°. A band of about 20
Caribou (mostly does and fawns, with several middle-aged bucks),
besides one or two single animals, were encountered at Bear
Slough.
September 6 was a cloudy, raw day, with several snow flurries;
wind brisk, northerly; temperature, 33° to 35°. Not a fly was
abroad. Two Caribou moved northwest along Little River Ridge;
a band of about 75 (mainly does and fawns, but with a fair
number of big bucks) passed in the same direction along the
Middle Ridge; and about 25 others grazed along the eastern side
of Little River. Later about 15-20 more were seen about the
mouth of Little River and on a near-by island, and eight swam
across Windy Bay to the south side. Fred reported seeing about
300 during the day north and west of camp; they were moving in a
northerly direction.
It was cloudy nearly all day on September 7; wind moderate,
northerly; temperature, 33° to 40°. No black flies were in
evidence. A dozen or more Caribou took to the water from an
island in Windy Bay and made for the north shore. A band of
about 25 passed along Little River Ridge toward the river’s
mouth.
September 8 was mostly cloudy; wind moderate to strong,
southeasterly; temperature, 37° to 42°. Fred reported a band of
about 100 Caribou crossing the mouth of Little River toward the
west. A dozen or more swam southward over Windy Bay at the usual
crossing-place. Anoteelik brought in 13 tongues from that many
freshly killed Caribou; he had secured them with a .22 rifle.
A driving gale from the east, with rain and sleet, continued
through the day on September 9; temperature, 36° to 37°. A
solitary buck inspected our camp from the south side of Windy
River, then retreated.
An overcast sky, with some drizzle and sleet, prevailed on
September 10; wind light, east to northeast; temperature, 35.5°
to 42.5°. No flies present for some days past. Fred reported
about 20 Caribou moving westward in the vicinity of Little
River.
On September 11 clouds and mist squalls in the morning gave way
to sunshine in the afternoon; wind light, easterly; temperature,
37° to 45.5°. Caribou were noted as follows: five on the east
side of Little River; two does and a fawn on an island in Windy
Bay; a doe and a fawn swimming northward across this bay; half a
dozen on Josie’s Hill. During a flight from Churchill to Nueltin
Lake on this day, Charles Schweder detected no Caribou at all,
and concluded that the bulk of the migrating herds had by this
time passed to the southward of his course. During the latter
part of August, while descending the Thlewiaza River from
Nueltin Lake to Hudson Bay, he had seen thousands of the
animals--as many as 5,000 in a single day, although no more than
500 in a single herd.
Sun, clouds, and rain marked September 12; wind moderate to
light, south to west; temperature, 48° to 60°. Only two Caribou
were reported.
September 13 was cloudy, with intermittent mist squalls and a
little sun; wind light to brisk, northerly; temperature, 34° to
about 44°. Two bands of Caribou (of four and five animals)
appeared near the mouth of Windy River.
It was generally cloudy, with a snow squall, on September 14;
wind brisk to light, northerly; temperature, 33° to 41°. A doe
and a fawn, proceeding northward, and four or five other Caribou
appeared on the near-by ridges.
The weather was clear on the 15th, with a moderate to brisk
north wind and temperatures of 29° to 48°; ice at edge of the
river. Fred reported about 100 Caribou (none of them bucks)
north of camp, and Anoteelik secured 13 east of Little River.
On the morning of the 16th intermittent snow flurries left a
thin cover on the ground, but it was practically dissipated by
the afternoon sun; wind brisk, northerly; temperature, 30° to
39°. Fred reported three old does without fawns, and no bucks.
September 17 was mostly cloudy, with a little sun; wind light,
northwest and west; temperature, 30° to 43°. A single Caribou
was seen on the south side of Windy River.
Clear skies prevailed on September 18; wind brisk, westerly;
temperature, 35° to 53.5°; ice at edge of the river. A solitary
black fly appeared. No Caribou reported.
September 19 was another clear day; wind moderate to brisk,
west-southwest; temperature, 42° to 60°. Anoteelik, camping on
the Barrens about 2 miles to the north of camp for the past
couple of days, reports having killed 20 Caribou (only one of
them a buck).
Light rain, soon changing to sleet, and then frequent snow
squalls, provided the principal weather elements on September
20; wind light to strong, west to north; temperature, 27° to
43.5°. The ground became partly covered with snow. A big buck,
followed several hours later by a doe and a fawn, swam across to
the north side of Windy River at its mouth. Ten more Caribou
were taken by Anoteelik. Charles considered that the retrograde
movement to the north was definitely under way. There had been
indications of it on various days from September 6 on.
Except for a few snow flurries, it was largely sunny on the
21st; wind brisk to moderate, north to northwest; temperature,
26° to 34°. About a quarter of an inch of snow remained in
sheltered places. A doe and a fawn appeared near camp.
There was considerable snowfall on the 22nd; wind light to
moderate, westerly; temperature, 30° to 33°; ice in edge of the
river. A large buck left tracks in the snow along the Windy
River.
September 23 was partly cloudy; wind brisk, north-northwest;
temperature, 21° to 32°; about a quarter of an inch of snow on
the ground, and a tundra pond mostly frozen over. Several small
groups of Caribou (a doe and a fawn; three does and two fawns;
and three others) appeared on the near-by ridges.
September 24 was mostly cloudy; wind moderate to brisk,
northerly; temperature, 26° to 41°; nearly an inch of fresh snow
on the ground. About 15 does and fawns were resting or feeding
quietly on the east side of Little River, and tracks of about
half a dozen were noted on Camp Ridge. Charles Schweder reported
about 50 Caribou, in three slightly separated bands, appearing
during the evening on the south side of Windy River about 2
miles above its mouth, as if contemplating a crossing. He
thought they may have been alarmed by Wolves.
September 25 was a cloudy day; wind moderate to light, northerly
to westerly; temperature, 31° to 36°; open ground largely bare
by afternoon; ice forming on Windy Bay. Some Caribou tracks were
noted on the north side of Windy River.
There were clouds, a sprinkle or two of rain, and a little
sunshine on the 26th; wind brisk to moderate, southwest to west;
temperature, 36° to 47.5°; ground becoming practically bare.
Three Caribou were seen beyond Little River, and a doe and a
fawn on the south side of Windy River.
The 27th was mostly cloudy, with a thick snow flurry; wind
brisk, northwest; temperature, 33° to 40°. Two tundra ponds,
previously frozen, were mostly open. Three bucks, a doe, and a
fawn were noted on the south side of Windy River.
September 28 was mostly cloudy; wind brisk to light,
north-northwest; temperature, 28.5° to 40°; a little snow on the
ground disappearing. Seven large bucks (six in one band, moving
northward) passed over Camp Ridge, and a dozen other Caribou
(including does) were seen beyond Little River.
The 29th was chiefly sunny; wind very light to brisk, west to
southwest; temperature, 29° to 48°; ground bare. A band of about
15 Caribou appeared on the north side of Windy River at its
mouth. They included four large and two smaller bucks, the
remainder being does and fawns. They were apparently traveling
south.
The 30th was cloudy, with a sprinkle of rain; wind light,
westerly; temperature, 39° to 48°; ground bare. A few black
flies were brought out by the mild weather. During an
all-morning trip to Point Lake, Charles saw no Caribou, but in
the afternoon he reported about 200 on the eastern side of
Little River. There were also half a dozen bucks on the south
side of Windy River.
October 1 was a rare, fine, sunshiny day in the Barrens; wind
moderate to brisk, south to southwest; temperature, 37° to 61°;
ground bare; tundra ponds mostly ice-covered. A blowfly crawled
over a caribou carcass, and possibly a few black flies were
abroad. Two bucks passed from the shoal water of Duck Bay over
Little River Ridge. Charles reported about 40 Caribou moving
north a mile or two north of camp, and I saw a single buck
likewise engaged. During the preceding week or so Fred had seen
a good many of the animals between the upper Kazan River and
Nueltin Lake; they were moving south and west.
The 2nd was another clear day; wind moderate, southwest;
temperature, 41° to 65°; ground bare. About five does and fawns
were seen at dusk in the spruce tract near Four-hill Creek.
The next day was drizzly and foggy throughout; wind light,
southwest to southeast; temperature, 41° to 43.5°. No Caribou
sighted. Eskimos arriving in camp reported them scarce along the
way from the upper Kazan River.
October 4 was a dismal, dark day, with steady light rain
throughout; wind very light, easterly; temperature, 36° to
42.5°. Fred reported 20 Caribou north of camp.
Snow fell throughout the 5th; wind light, north-northwest;
temperature, 31° to 35°. No Caribou sighted.
With 6 inches of snow on the ground in the morning, there was
some additional precipitation during the overcast day of
October 6; wind moderate to brisk, northeast; temperature, 31°
to 33°; waters clear of ice. No Caribou sighted.
October 7 was a generally cloudy day; wind moderate to very
light, northerly; temperature, 24° to 29°; watercourses largely
open. In the morning Charles reported a couple of hundred
Caribou swimming southward across Windy Bay; he considered this
a part of the final southward movement into the timbered
country--apparently initiated by the recent snowstorm. Later he
saw an approximately equal number 2 miles north of camp, moving
toward the bay; and Fred encountered about 50 on the north side
of the bay.
Late on the 8th clouds gave way to sunshine; nearly calm to a
gentle breeze from west and southwest; temperature, 26.5° to
33.5°; 6 inches of snow on ground. I obtained a distant view of
about 100 Caribou resting near Glacier Pond. Perhaps less than a
quarter of them were old bucks; the remainder, younger bucks,
does, and fawns.
October 9 was largely sunny, with light rain in the evening;
wind light to moderate, southwest to south; temperature, 29° to
38°; ground with a 6-inch snow covering. No Caribou sighted.
Some snow fell on the 10th, though the day was partly sunny;
wind very light, south to west; temperature, 33° to 36°. No
Caribou sighted.
Clouds prevailed on the 11th; wind no more than very light,
westerly; temperature, 33° to 38°; about 4 inches of snow on
ground. Charles reported about a thousand Caribou scattered over
a long hill several miles to the northwest; they were not
traveling.
October 12 was marked by clouds, mist, and rain; wind light to
moderate, southwesterly; temperature, 32° to 40°. No Caribou
sighted.
There was a little sun on the 13th; wind light to moderate, west
to east; temperature, 37° to 45.5°; ground largely bare and
tundra ponds open. In the afternoon we set out for Simons’ Lake,
and camped about 4 miles up the Windy River. No Caribou sighted.
On the 14th we reached the upper end of Simons’ Lake, for a
several days’ stay at a deserted trading-post. There were snow
flurries and a little rain; wind brisk, westerly; temperature,
35° to 36°; ground mostly bare. A band of about 15 Caribou,
a solitary buck, and many tracks and droppings were seen along
the way.
October 15 was partly cloudy; wind very light to light, west to
northwest and east; temperature, 21° to 36°. Four Caribou
sighted.
October 16 was a stormy, cloudy day; wind brisk, easterly;
temperature, 30.5° to 34°. About a dozen Caribou were noted in
the vicinity of Simons’ Lake.
A strong easterly gale during the night, with heavy rain, was
followed during the day of the 17th by steady rain, with
moderate to light easterly or southeasterly wind; temperature,
35° to 38°. A single Caribou seen.
October 18 was partly cloudy; wind brisk to light, westerly;
temperature, 31° to 41°; waters open; some small patches of snow
in sight. Four Caribou (at least two of them bucks) passed by.
The 19th was partly cloudy; nearly calm to moderate wind, west
and northwest; temperature, 30° to 40°. About five or six bucks
(three of them together) appeared, perhaps moving south.
The weather on the 20th was raw, dismal, and gusty; wind brisk,
northwest; temperature, 27° to about 35°; some ice on Simons’
Lake; a little fresh snow on higher hills. No Caribou sighted.
October 21 was somewhat foggy; nearly calm; temperature, 25° to
32°; Simons’ Lake partly frozen; ground generally bare. A lone
fawn was seen as we started on the return trip to the Windy
River post.
The 22nd was largely sunny; wind very light to brisk,
southwesterly; temperature, about 30° to 46°. A medium-sized
buck was seen near the mouth of Windy River.
The 23rd was largely cloudy; wind brisk, southwest; temperature,
35° to 39°; ground practically all bare; bay and river open.
A buck started to cross to the north side of Windy River, but
went back.
For the better part of a week, till October 29, I found no
further fresh indications of Caribou in our vicinity. In the
meantime the weather was largely cloudy, with some rain and snow
(4-5 inches of the latter on the 27th); winds very light to
moderate, swinging from east to south and west; temperature, 27°
to 50°; waters generally open.
October 29 was largely cloudy; a gentle wind, south to east;
temperature, 29° to 35°; 4-5 inches of snow on ground; thin ice
on a tundra pond. The fresh track of a buck (fig. 20) was found
near camp.
On the 30th gentle rain changed to snow; calm to a moderate
wind, northeast to north; temperature, 30° to 33°. Tracks showed
the passing of about a dozen Caribou, including half a dozen
that swam westward across the mouth of Little River, breaking
through a rim of ice at the edge.
Clouds prevailed on the 31st; wind moderate to brisk, northerly;
temperature, 17° to 25.5°; 5-6 inches of snow on ground, with
drifts up to a foot deep; river and lake open. Fred reported
three Caribou.
November 1 marked the long-delayed “freeze-up.” Windy Bay and
the edges of Windy River were frozen, while pieces of ice
floated down the river. The day was cloudy, with continual snow
flurries after noon; wind light to brisk, southeast;
temperature, 21° to 31°; about 6 inches of snow on ground.
The 2nd was cloudy, with some rain and sleet; wind moderate to
brisk, southeast to west; temperature, 29° to 34°. No Caribou
sighted for two days.
On the 3rd it was cloudy all day; wind light, northwest;
temperature, 16° to 20°. A herd of about 50 Caribou (largely
does, with a few fawns and well-antlered bucks) hurried down the
side of Little River Ridge onto the ice of Duck Bay, with the
apparent intention of crossing to the south side of Windy Bay;
but they were intercepted by a hunter and retreated
northwestward along the ridge. Fred secured three
southward-traveling bucks at a distance from camp.
No Caribou were sighted on the three following days (November 4
to 6), which were more or less cloudy, with some snow; wind
light to brisk, southerly to northerly; temperature, 13° to
24.5°; ice 3 inches thick on Windy Bay; about 6 inches of snow
on ground.
There was snow during the night of November 6 and the morning of
the 7th, resulting in drifts up to a yard deep; wind brisk,
northerly; temperature, -3° to 13°. Fred reported “lots” of
Caribou some 10 miles to the north, moving south.
The next three days (November 8 to 10) varied from cloudy (with
a snow flurry) to sunny; wind moderate to strong, northwest and
north; temperature, -10.5° to 1°; 6-8 inches of snow (much
drifted); Windy River gradually becoming ice-covered. No Caribou
sighted.
November 11 was partly sunny; wind moderate to brisk, northerly;
temperature, 3° to 6.5°; about 8 inches of snow on the average.
Mike Schweder reported five does moving south across the mouth
of Windy River on the ice.
Thereafter, until my departure on December 4, no more Caribou
were actually seen in the vicinity of the headquarters on Windy
River. There were, however, tracks of single animals on November
15 and 16. Moreover, during the period from about November 7 to
15, while traveling northward to the upper Kazan River, Charles
Schweder saw thousands of Caribou, in herds up to 300, moving
southward. He surmised that their course took them somewhere
between Ennadai and Nueltin lakes. Fred also reported many to
the northward on the 7th, as already noted. This was perhaps the
last large migratory movement of the year in our general area.
Thereafter virtually all of the animals were presumably in the
timbered area to the southward. None was sighted from the plane
during the flight to Churchill on December 4.
On November 7 the temperature had taken a sharp downward turn,
dropping below zero for the first time that season; and it did
not again rise above 6.5° till November 12. This cold spell,
combined with a snow blizzard from the north on the 6th and 7th,
coincided at least in part with the large migratory movement
noted above, and it may have been the stimulus for it.
The general weather conditions that obtained from November 12 on
may be summarized as follows. It was at least predominantly
cloudy on all but four or five days. There was snowfall on six
days, and drifting snow in the air on several other days. The
winds were predominantly north, northwest, and west; less
commonly, east and southeast. They were a little more frequently
light than moderate or brisk. The extremes of temperature during
this period were 22.5° and -23°; the average daily mean,
approximately 1°. There was an average of probably at least 8
inches of snow on the ground, with deeper drifts. The river was
not wholly frozen over at least up to the end of November.
_Retrograde autumnal movement_
It would doubtless be difficult to find, among other animals, any exact
parallel to this curious feature of caribou migration. According to
Charles Schweder, it takes place in the Nueltin Lake region in
September--sometimes as early as the first of the month. Herds up to 200
strong may then be seen moving northward, but generally the numbers are
smaller--say 10 to 30 in a band. Some of the more notable autumnal
movements toward the north, as reported by Charles, were the following:
at Simons’ Lake in 1936 and again in 1938, when herds of fat bucks were
streaming past for a month and a half; likewise at Josie’s Bay in 1940;
and through the Windy Hills and across Windy River in 1943. Fred
Schweder, Jr., said that most of the animals, in returning northward at
this season, cross Windy River 4 miles above its mouth or Windy Bay 4
miles from its head; comparatively few pass the mouths of Windy and
Little rivers. He remarked further that it is mostly bucks, with few
does and fawns, that make the passage on Windy Bay.
More or less evidence of such a movement toward the north in 1947 has
been presented in preceding pages, in the notes for September 6, 7, 11,
14, 20, 24, and 28, October 1, and even October 23. The numbers observed
so involved on each of these days varied from a solitary buck or a doe
with a fawn to about 300 of the animals. On some of these days, however,
other Caribou were observed making their way toward the south. It is
thus obvious that there was no universal impulse among the Caribou of a
given area to move simultaneously in a certain direction.
The general weather conditions on the nine above-mentioned days may be
summarized as follows. Every day but one was largely or wholly cloudy;
snow falling on three days, but ground bare on other days; wind
predominantly from the north; extreme temperatures, 26° and 61°; mean
daily average, 37.5°. Whether or not there is significance in the
matter, it appears that on those days within the period extending from
September 6 to October 1, when the Caribou were not definitely observed
moving northward, the winds were less likely to be northerly.
Furthermore, within this period there was never enough snow to interfere
appreciably with the animals’ feeding on the ground lichens of the
Barrens.
[Illustration: FIG. 1. Half a dozen caribou trails along the
Middle Ridge, looking SE. Ground plants: _Ledum decumbens_,
_Empetrum nigrum_, _Arctostaphylos alpina_, _Loiseleuria
procumbens_, and various lichens, including _Cladonia_. A
miniature “glacier” in the distance. June 24, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 2. Caribou trails on the 50-foot-high Little
River Ridge. _Picea mariana_, _Betula glandulosa_, and _Empetrum
nigrum_. June 19, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 3. A Caribou buck (specimen No. 1065) being
skinned by Fred, Mike, and Rita at the Bear Slough. August 17,
1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 4. Skull, antlers, skin, and hind quarter of
the same Caribou being transported to camp along the Camp Ridge.
August 17, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 5. Anoteelik and Mike preparing to bring in a
load of caribou meat with dogs and travois. Windy River post,
August 19, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 6. Anoteelik and Mike pegging out caribou
hides to dry on a gravelly ridge near the mouth of Windy River.
August 23, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 7. About 75 Caribou (bucks, does, and fawns)
at a rapid on Little River. August 25, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 8. About 22 Caribou crossing Little River at a
rapid. Chiefly does and fawns, with several bucks bringing up the
rear. August 26, 1947.]
By October 6 there were 6 inches of snow on the ground, and on the
following day 200 Caribou swimming southward across Windy Bay may have
marked the beginning of the final movement into the timbered country. It
appears possible that a considerable fall of snow may have a definite
influence in inducing the Caribou to retreat from the Barrens.
On a trip from Windy River north to the Kazan River region in September,
1946, Charles Schweder found, during the first 45 miles, that the
Caribou were moving north; at the Kazan they were moving south, although
some were merely loitering. Northwest of the Kazan, the animals were
taking a westward course. During the latter part of his return trip to
Windy River, 11 or 12 days later, they had reversed the previous
direction and were traveling south.
For such a distinct and regular feature in the life cycle of the species
as the retrograde autumnal movement there must be some biological
explanation. Several possible factors appear reasonably clear. Perhaps
we may consider the Barren Grounds the true and preferred home of
_Rangifer arcticus_, from which a proportion of the population is driven
during part of the year under stress of insect attacks or shortage of
food. When the animals begin to enter the woods in August, there is no
shortage of food; thus an insect-induced frenzy may possibly be regarded
as a potent force driving them southward. In September a state of
comparative peace descends upon the caribou world: the current crop of
adult insects has subsided; the larvae of warble and nostril flies have
not attained the formidable size of the following spring and perhaps are
not yet causing any severe discomfort; little or no snow covers up the
food supply; the lakes and rivers, still unfrozen, offer a ready way of
escape from pursuing Wolves; moderate or even balmy weather gives nature
a pleasant mood. In short, both man and beast may well look upon early
autumn as the very finest time of year both on the Barrens and in the
adjacent wooded country.
Under these circumstances a definite retrograde movement out of the
wooded country in September on the part of many Caribou must indicate
their preference for the Barrens at this season. In any event, the
movement begins just after the insect menace has subsided to a
negligible stage. Possibly another inducement for retreating from the
wooded country in the early fall is the dearth of open areas in which
the animals may spend their resting periods, in comparative safety from
Wolves. It is only after the freeze-up that the surfaces of the lakes
and rivers supply this desideratum. This condition lasts from November
to June--precisely that part of the year in which the Caribou are
present in the wooded country in the greatest numbers.
But by November what are the conditions on the Barrens? The weather has
become severe; snow has covered up a large part of the ground lichens;
tree lichens are not to be had. And so at this season, with the coming
of the first heavy snows, there is a final movement out of the Barrens
into the shelter of the woods, leaving only a minority of the animals to
face a bleak and bitter winter in the open country. The biggest herds of
the year may then be seen passing southward. A few bucks are said to
remain during most winters in the Windy River area.
Far to the westward, toward Great Slave and Great Bear lakes, the
retrograde movements are somewhat different and more complicated
(Clarke, 1940: 96).
“Mr. Carl Buchholz, of Churchill, describes the caribou migration at the
60th parallel, north of Churchill, as a southward migration in August,
northward in September, and then south in the autumn” (Clarke, 1940:
97). (See also the next paragraph.)
_Fall migration in the Churchill region_
The following notes for 1947 were kindly furnished me by Angus MacIver.
He reported large numbers of Caribou moving southward across Caribou
Creek (25 miles south of Churchill) about November 10, a day after the
local freeze-up. He would then see thousands in a day. Prior to that
time (perhaps in September?) there had been two “runs” to the northward
and northwestward; these presumably represented the normal retrograde
migration in the fall. The herds engaged in these two northerly
movements must have previously passed southward farther inland. He
reported also that the rutting season this year had commenced a little
later than the usual October 15.
_References on migration._--Dobbs, 1774: 20, 22; Hearne, 1795:
39, 40, 56, 66, 74, 85-87, 286, 299; Franklin, 1823: 241-242;
Sabine, in Franklin, 1823: 667; Richardson, “1825”: 328-329, and
1829: 242-243; Godman, 1831, +2+: 283-284; John Ross, 1835a:
328, 330, 337, 376, 390, 529-530, 628; J. C. Ross, in John Ross,
1835b: xvii; Richardson, in Back, 1836: 498; Simpson, 1843:
76, 196, 233, 277, 301, 320-321, 328, 386; Rae, 1850: 93;
Richardson, 1852: 290, 296; Rae, 1852a: 79; J. Anderson, 1857:
326, 328; Murray, 1858: 203; Richardson, 1861: 274, 275; B. R.
Ross, 1861: 438-439; Osborn, 1865: 223-224, 226; Kumlien, 1879:
54; R. Bell, 1881: 15C; Caton, 1881: 108; Gilder, 1881: 196-197;
Nourse, 1884: 235, 356; Schwatka, 1885: 77-79, 83; Boas, 1888:
502; Collinson, 1889: 244, 290; Pike, 1917 (1892): 48-49, 50,
89-91, 101, 174, 204, 209, 220; J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128-130;
Dowling, 1893: 103, 107; J. B. Tyrrell, 1894: 442, 1896: 13, 63,
and 1897: 10, 19, 21, 49-50, 76, 124, 140, 142, 165; Russell,
1895: 48, and 1898: 88, 226; Whitney, 1896: 157, 238, 241;
Lydekker, 1898: 48; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 77-78, 80;
Jones, 1899: 368, 374; Hanbury, 1900: 66-67, 69, 71; A. J.
Stone, 1900: 50, 53; W. J. McLean, 1901: 5, 6; Elliot, 1902:
259, 260, 274-275; Preble, 1902: 42; J. W. Tyrrell, 1924 (1902):
26, 31; Hanbury, 1904: 10, 30, 32, 34, 58, 93, 108, 120, 121,
139; Hornaday, 1904: 137; Stone and Cram, 1904: 52; MacFarlane,
1905: 683-685; J. A. Allen, 1908a: 490; Amundsen, 1908, +1+:
97, 102-106, 200, 247, 326-329; Preble, 1908: 137-139; Cameron,
1912: 127; Wheeler, 1912: 199-200; R. M. Anderson, 1913a: 6,
and 1913b: 502; Stefánsson, 1913a: 94-96, 99, 100, 103, 106,
1913b: 203-204, 224-225, 263-265, 269, 294, 348-350, and 1914:
39, 41, 54; Chambers, 1914: 93; Hornaday, 1914, +2+: 101-104;
Wheeler, 1914: 58; Harper, 1915: 160; Camsell, 1916: 21;
Thompson, 1916: 99-101; Kindle, 1917: 107-108; Camsell and
Malcolm, 1919: 46; Whittaker, 1919: 166-167; Buchanan, 1920:
105-108, 128-129; Hewitt, 1921: 60-63; Stefánsson, 1921: 401;
Jenness, 1922: 15, 17, 25-26, 125; Blanchet, 1925: 32-34, and
1926b: 46-48; Mallet, 1926: 79; Preble, 1926: 137-138;
Rasmussen, 1927: 54, 214-217, 246; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 51,
56, 101, 106; Seton, 1929, +3+: 122, 125-128; Blanchet, 1930:
49-52; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 58, 192-196; Hoare, 1930: 13,
14, 16, 21, 22, 27, 31, 33, 36-38; Kitto, 1930: 87; Mallet,
1930: 20-23, 27; Jacobi, 1931: 80-84, 192-210; Harper, 1932: 30,
31; Munn, 1932: 58; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 79, 81; Weyer,
1932: 40; Birket-Smith, 1933: 91-94, 112, 118; Ingstad, 1933:
34, 134-135, 156-159, 161, 163, 225, 229-231, 280, 291, 293,
296, 324; Weeks, 1933: 65; R. M. Anderson, 1934a: 81, 1937:
103, and 1938: 400; Hornby, 1934: 105-107; Birket-Smith, 1936:
91; Hamilton, 1939: 244-247, 359; Murie, 1939: 244; Clarke,
1940: 8-9, 11, 85-100; G. M. Allen, 1942: 298-299; Soper, 1942:
143; Downes, 1943: 215, 221, 224, 249, 250, 253-256, 260;
Manning, 1943a: 52, and 1943b: 103; Porsild, 1943: 389; Soper,
1944: 248-249; Wright, 1944: 186, 190; Gavin, 1945: 227-228;
R. M. Anderson, 1947: 178, and 1948: 15; Manning, 1948: 26-28;
Rand, 1948a: 212, and 1948b: 149; Banfield, 1949: 478, 481;
Harper, 1949: 226-230, 239-240; Banfield, 1951a: 6, 9-12, 28,
and 1951b: 120; Anonymous, 1952: 267; Barnett, 1954: 96, 103.
SUMMATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
The localities from which hitherto unpublished notes on _Rangifer
arcticus arcticus_ are presented in this paper include the following.
Keewatin: Nueltin, Windy, “Highway” (at source of Putahow River), and
Ennadai lakes; Little Dubawnt, Kazan, Red, Windy, Little, and Thlewiaza
rivers; between Eskimo Point and Baker Lake. Manitoba: Nueltin (southern
part), Nejanilini, Reindeer, and Split lakes; Seal River; Churchill;
Cape Churchill; “Little Barrens” south of Churchill; between Churchill
and Knife Lake; Caribou Creek, 25 miles south of Churchill.
Saskatchewan: small lakes southwest of Reindeer Lake; lakes south of
Lake Athabaska. Details as to occurrence and status in these localities
are supplied on other pages.
The Caribou have been so thoroughly distributed over the approximately
300,000 square miles of the mainland Barren Grounds between Hudson Bay
and the Mackenzie Valley that it is fairly safe to say that there is
scarcely one square mile in this vast territory that has not been trod
by the animals during the past century. See maps by Preble (1908: pl.
19), Seton (1929, +3+: 60), Clarke (1940: figs. 3, 4), Banfield (1949:
479), and Anonymous (1952: 267).
The appended annotated bibliography supplies, in abstract form,
most of the hitherto published information on the geographical
distribution of _Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. In its preparation
I have included records of Caribou from the Arctic islands north
to Lancaster Sound, Barrow Strait, Viscount Melville Sound, and
McClure Strait--all approximately in latitude 74° N. This has
been done as a matter of having a convenient, well-defined
regional boundary, not with any conviction that _arcticus_ has
ranged so far to the north in the more westerly islands,
especially in recent years, when it is said to have become
restricted to the southern fringe of the islands (Clarke, 1940:
98; R. M. Anderson, 1947: 178; Banfield, 1949: fig. 1). The
islands north of latitude 74° are doubtless the exclusive domain
of _Rangifer pearyi_. It is possible that this species may also
occur to some extent on Banks, Victoria, Prince of Wales, and
Somerset islands. The typical _R. a. arcticus_, as currently
recognized, ranges eastward to Baffin, Salisbury, Coats, and
Southampton islands and to the western shore of Hudson Bay. (The
animals of the last three islands may be distinct insular
forms.) The southern limits of the winter range in northwestern
Ontario, central Manitoba, northern Saskatchewan, and
northeastern Alberta have been discussed in preceding pages. On
the west the range extends to the Mackenzie Delta (formerly),
Great Bear and Great Slave lakes, Wood Buffalo Park, and Lake
Claire. The timbered country (Hudsonian and Canadian Zones) is
practically entirely deserted by the Barren Ground Caribou in
mid-summer. At this season, in Keewatin at least, the animals
tend to draw away also from the southernmost portions of the
Barren Grounds.
_References._--Since practically every paper in the entire
bibliography presents some data on geographical distribution,
only a few, containing more than an average amount of new or
summarized information on the subject, have been selected for
inclusion in the following list of references: Hearne, 1795;
Franklin, 1823; Lyon, 1824; Franklin and Richardson, 1828;
Simpson, 1843; Pike, 1917 (1892); Russell, 1898; Preble, 1902;
Hanbury, 1904; Amundsen, 1908; Preble, 1908; R. M. Anderson, in
Stefánsson, 1913b; Stefánsson, 1913a, 1913b, and 1921; Hewitt,
1921; Jenness, 1922; Rasmussen, 1927; Seton, 1929, +3+;
Blanchet, 1930; Critchell-Bullock, 1930; Hoare, 1930; Jacobi,
1931; Clarke, 1940; Manning, 1943a; Wright, 1944; R. M.
Anderson, 1947; Manning, 1948; Banfield, 1949 and 1951a.
_Distributional maps._--Grant, 1903: map following p. 196;
Preble, 1908: pl. 19; Dugmore, 1913: 138; Hewitt, 1921: 57;
Seton, 1929, +3+: 60, map 2; Jacobi, 1931: 77, fig. 17; R. M.
Anderson, 1934b: 4062, fig. 6; Murie, 1939: 241; Clarke, 1940:
figs. 3, 4; Banfield, 1949: 479, fig. 1, and 1951a: figs.
4-10; Anonymous, 1952: 267.
ECOLOGY
_Habitats_
Within their natural range the Caribou apparently resort to practically
every type of terrestrial and aquatic habitat (other than cliffs and
precipices). On the Barren Grounds proper they frequent the open summits
and slopes of the ridges, the dwarf birch thickets, the sedge bogs, and
the peat bogs. Their trails traverse all the upland spruce and tamarack
tracts, the wooded muskegs, and the willow thickets along the rivers. In
the summer and fall they swim the rivers and the narrower lakes, and
during the winter and spring they cross these on the ice. They do not
avoid rapids; in fact, they seek the shallower ones as fords, and they
swim the deeper ones (_cf._ Clarke, 1940: 88). They also cross the
tundra ponds on the ice, but probably walk around these smaller bodies
of water, as a rule, when they are not frozen. While they may prefer to
approach the river crossings over open slopes, they do not hesitate to
maintain trails through the dense thickets of willow on the banks.
The winter habitat of the major part of the Barren Ground Caribou
population comprises the Hudsonian and upper Canadian Zones. This
forested habitat is characterized by sparser and smaller timber in the
Hudsonian Zone and by denser and taller timber in the Canadian Zone.
Important among the features of this winter habitat are the frozen
surfaces of the lakes and rivers, where the Caribou are wont to
congregate for their daily periods of rest (_cf._ Mallet, 1926: 79;
Ingstad, 1933: 86).
_Trails_
The favorite migratory highways are the long, sinuous ridges that
stretch across the Barren Grounds in a sufficiently approximate
north-south direction to serve the needs of the Caribou. Here their
age-old trails are particularly in evidence and may even be detected
from the air. A single small ridge may bear half a dozen or more such
trails (fig. 1), roughly parallel but anastomosing at frequent
intervals. They probably change but little from generation to
generation. They provide the smoothest courses available, avoiding rocks
and shrubs and traversing intervening bogs at the most suitable points.
The summits of the ridges constitute vantage points from which the
animals may keep a wide lookout for Wolves and human enemies, and on
which they may obtain the maximum benefit from fly-deterring breezes.
Man himself is glad to utilize these trails, whether on the Barrens or
in the timber tracts, wherever they lead in a direction he desires. They
are kept open by the hurrying feet of hundreds or thousands of Caribou
every year.
Along a well-used trail extending through low Barrens near Duck Bay,
I found a certain grass (_Agrostis scabra_) growing. I did not recognize
or collect it elsewhere during the season. Is this perhaps like certain
other species, such as _Juncus tenuis_ (_fide_ Dr. Edgar T. Wherry) and
_Eleocharis baldwinii_, in curiously thriving on beaten paths?
When the Caribou arrive at some lake or river, they generally follow the
shores for a greater or lesser distance, seeking either a way around or
a suitable crossing-place. The trails thus formed are generally on the
nearest ridges rather than on the immediate shores. Their direction, as
they conform to the winding shores, may diverge very widely from the
desired migratory course.
In many parts of the Barren Grounds there must be as many as 10 linear
miles of caribou trails to every square mile of territory. Even if there
were only one mile of such trails to each square mile, the total, on the
Barrens of Keewatin and Mackenzie alone, would equal or exceed all the
railway mileage in the United States.
In contrast to the narrow ridges, the broader hilltops in the Barrens
offer such freedom of movement to the Caribou that trails are much less
likely to be formed in such places, even when they are frequented by
large numbers of the animals. Thus I found the broad summit of Josie’s
Hill practically without well-defined trails, despite the regularity
with which many migrant bands resort thither. In feeding or traveling
over such an area, there is no occasion for restricting themselves to a
narrow course. In crossing from one ridge to another through an
intervening bog, the animals may leave numerous scattered and temporary
trails in the dense sedge growth to mark their passage (fig. 13). On the
uniform surface of such a bog, as on the broad hilltops, there is no
need to confine their steps to any particular course.
It might be supposed that the Barren Ground Caribou would have some
reluctance in entering thickly wooded tracts, where Wolves naturally
have a much better chance of a close approach than on the open Barrens.
As already stated, however, their trails may be found more or less
throughout the spruce and tamarack growth in the Windy River area. One
of these tracts, covering probably several square miles on the west side
of Four-hill Creek, is fairly crisscrossed with trails. At deep dusk on
October 2, while several of us were skinning a Black Bear in this thick
timber, about five does and fawns trotted up quite close to us. Perhaps
they were on their way to the open Barrens to pass the night. While
wintering in the forested Hudsonian Zone, the animals may spend their
nights as well as their diurnal resting periods on the frozen lakes and
rivers.
Fred Schweder, Jr., says that Caribou are somewhat fearful of sand hills
or eskers, and that he has never seen one lying down in such a place; he
believes this is because the Wolves frequent the eskers in summertime.
On the other hand, Mr. G. W. Malaher spoke of a long esker that extends
down the west side of Nueltin Lake and far to the southward; this, he
said, forms a migration highway for the Caribou.
_References on habitats and trails._--J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 129,
and 1895: 445; W. J. McLean, 1901: 6; Blanchet, 1925: 33, and
1926a: 73, 96-97; Mallet, 1926: 79, 80; Seton, 1929, +3+:
100-102, 122, 127-128; Jacobi, 1931: 186-187; Ingstad, 1933: 86;
Murie, 1939: 246; Manning, 1948: 26-28; Rand, 1948a: 212;
Harper, 1949: 226, 228; Banfield, 1951a: 3.
_Influence of weather on distribution_
In the section on _Migrations_ the meteorological conditions in 1947
have been reported for any possible bearing they may have had on the
daily movements of the Caribou, particularly during the fall migration.
The temperature has an important effect on the activity of the insect
pests (see _Influence of insects on distribution_) and thus, to a
certain extent during summer and fall, on the behavior and probably the
distribution of the Caribou.
Low winter temperatures on the Barren Grounds do not appear to be a
factor of prime importance in the seasonal distribution of _R. a.
arcticus_. “Some individuals and small herds remain in the northern part
of the range at all seasons” (R. M. Anderson, 1947: 178). Peary’s
Caribou (_R. pearyi_) inhabits the more northerly Arctic islands
throughout the year, without engaging in such extensive migrations as
its relative to the south.
The forceful winds that blow over the Barren Grounds so much of the time
are of distinct benefit to the Caribou during the summer in abating the
very serious scourge of flies. If other things were equal (as they are
not), this factor alone would make the Barrens a more favorable summer
habitat than the forested country. (See _Retrograde autumnal movement_.)
Air movements of similar strength during the winter must, through the
wind-chill factor (_cf._ Siple and Passel, 1945), make life so much the
harder for any living being; on the other hand, they tend to sweep the
ridges bare of snow, thereby making readily available the Caribou’s
principal winter food of reindeer lichens (_Cladonia_ spp.)
_References._--Armstrong, 1857: 479; Critchell-Bullock, 1930:
192, 194-196; Hoare, 1930: 33; Jacobi, 1931: 193, 195; Clarke,
1940: 96, 99; Banfield, 1951a: 27-29.
_Influence of food supply on distribution_
The strong winter winds on the Barrens affect the Caribou in still
another way. While they pack the snow so firmly that man may dispense
with snowshoes, this condition naturally increases the difficulty that
the Caribou experience in pawing through the snow to reach the lichens
that are covered by it. The limited grazing capacity of such areas as
are laid bare by the wind may force a reduction in the wintering
population. Although the snow in the timbered regions to the south
covers virtually the whole surface of the land, it is evidently less
compact and so offers more favorable feeding conditions than the areas
of hard-packed snow on the Barrens. (Charles Schweder states that Willow
Ptarmigan will fly out of the Barrens to spend the night in tracts of
timber, where the snow is softer and thus more suitable for the
nocturnal burrows of these birds.)
Another apparent inducement for resorting to the tracts of timber in
winter is the abundance there of tree lichens, such as _Alectoria_ and
_Usnea_ (_cf._ Richardson, 1829: 243; J. B. Tyrrell, 1894: 441; Dix,
1951: 287), upon which the Caribou may feed without regard to snow
conditions. (See also _Retrograde autumnal movement_.)
Reindeer lichens (_Cladonia_ spp.) and doubtless other lichens are of
such slow growth that forest fires may deprive the Caribou of this
indispensable food for a period of years. According to Mr. G. W.
Malaher, the recent burning of a large area north of The Pas may have
deflected the animals toward the southeast, causing them to extend their
migration to an abnormal distance in that direction. For a similar
reason in years past, according to Pike (1917 [1892]: 50), they avoided
“great stretches of the country” near the Mackenzie River, and also on
the south side of Great Slave Lake. A quarter of a century after Pike’s
time, Dogribs reported that Caribou had not come to the lower Taltson
River for several years, “because the timber had been burned off”
(Harper, 1932: 30). Some years ago, extensive fires in Manitoba were
said to have been deliberately set by prospectors with the aim of
exposing the underlying rock.
Charles Schweder believes that the Caribou show a certain predilection
for rocky places, owing to the more luxuriant growth of lichens there.
_References._--Richardson, “1825”: 328-329; Bompas, 1888: 24;
Pike, 1917 (1892): 50; Wheeler, 1914: 60; Blanchet, 1930: 52;
Jacobi, 1931: 192, 194, 195; Harper, 1932: 30; Ingstad, 1933:
34, 161, 163; Hornby, 1934: 105; R. M. Anderson, 1938: 400;
Clarke, 1940: 100, 106-107; G. M. Allen, 1942: 299; Downes,
1943: 261; Porsild, 1943: 389; Wright, 1944: 186; R. M.
Anderson, 1948: 15; Banfield, 1951a: 5, 11, 27-29.
_Influence of insects on distribution_
It is quite possible that the blood-sucking mosquitoes (_Aedes_) and
black flies (_Simulium_) and the parasitic warble flies (_Oedemagena_)
and nostril flies (_Cephenemyia_) have a definite and important
influence on the extent and dates of caribou migration.
As far as I am able to judge from my own experience, mosquitoes are more
or less equally numerous and ferocious in the Canadian, the Hudsonian,
and the Arctic Zones of the Northwest. Naturally the season begins
earlier in the more southerly localities. In two seasons (1914, 1920) at
the western end of Lake Athabaska they began to be troublesome about the
middle of June, whereas at Nueltin Lake this stage was reached about the
first of July. In the Athabaska and Great Slave lakes region (Canadian
and Hudsonian Zones) I have never had occasion to regard black flies as
serious in respect to either numbers or ferocity; but there is universal
agreement that conditions are vastly different and worse on the Barren
Grounds. At Nueltin Lake the _Simulium_ hordes become troublesome at
approximately the same time as the mosquitoes. Toward the end of August
there is a merciful diminution in the numbers of both mosquitoes and
black flies on the Barrens, and after the first of September they may be
practically disregarded, except on an occasional day of unseasonable
warmth.
It may be remarked in passing that one of the insect terrors of the
Athabaska region, the so-called “bulldog” (a species of Tabanidae), did
not come to my attention as a pest at Nueltin Lake though I collected
two species of _Tabanus_. Malloch (1919), in reporting on the Diptera of
the Canadian Arctic Expedition of 1913-18, does not include a single
species of Tabanidae. On the other hand, Twinn (1950: 18) states that 17
species have been found at Churchill; he refers to tabanids as “very
abundant in forested regions of the North.” The “bulldog” may be
presumed to contribute to the summer misery of the Woodland Caribou and
the Moose as well as of man.
The season during which the adult warble flies and nostril flies harass
the Caribou probably lasts only a few weeks in July and August. While
the adults evidently cause no pain, they no doubt arouse an instinctive
dread in the prospective hosts of their larvae. While I have no
information as to whether they follow the hosts into the wooded country,
it would appear quite likely that they do so if we are to credit
statements by Franklin (1823: 242), Richardson (1829: 251), and B. R.
Ross (1861: 438) that these pests infest the Woodland Caribou as well as
the Barren Ground species. Furthermore, _Cephenemyia_ has been reported
in Pennsylvania as a parasite of the White-tailed Deer (_Odocoileus_)
(Stewart, 1930?). The scarcity of available study material may be judged
from the fact that the Canadian Arctic Expedition of 1913-18 secured
only three adults of _Oedemagena_ and none of _Cephenemyia_ (Malloch,
1919: 55-56).
From the foregoing it may be seen that the wooded country represents a
virtually fly-free haven for the Barren Ground Caribou during nearly ten
months of the year. Is it any wonder, then, that they hasten throughout
August toward or into the shelter of the woods, to gain freedom from the
winged scourges of the Barrens? (See also _Retrograde autumnal
movement_.)
In the spring migration of 1947 the last of the Caribou passed the Windy
River area on July 1, just before the mosquitoes and black flies had
become seriously troublesome. It might be surmised that the animals keep
marching northward in advance of the appearance of these flies, as long
as that is feasible; and that when fairly overwhelmed by the winged
hordes, they desist from further progress in that direction. The fawns
are born at such a time (in late May or June) as to pass their first few
tender weeks before becoming subject to serious insect attacks.
(See also _Retrograde autumnal movement_; _Relations to flies_.)
_References._--Richardson, “1825”: 328-329; Hoare, 1930: 33,
37-38; Jacobi, 1931: 193-195; Soper, 1936: 429; Hamilton, 1939:
247, 301; Clarke, 1940: 95-96; Porsild, 1943: 389; Banfield,
1951a: 27-29.
_Effect of combined environmental factors on distribution_
The sum total of environmental factors apparently makes the Barren
Grounds a distinctly more favorable summer habitat for the present
species than the wooded country, since the latter region is virtually
entirely deserted at that season. In general, the wooded country must be
a more favorable winter habitat, since the bulk of the animals evidently
resort to it at that time; yet its advantages are by no means clear-cut
or overwhelming, since a very considerable proportion of the Caribou
elect to spend the winter on the Barrens (Hanbury, 1904: 93, 120, 139;
Hoare, 1930: 22; Clarke, 1940: 8-9, 11, fig. 4; Anonymous, 1952: 267).
_Relations to man_
The Caribou dominates the thoughts, the speech, and the general human
activities of the Barren Grounds. As the chief food resource of that
region and the adjacent timbered country, it plays a highly important
role in the economy of both primitive and civilized man. As long as
those regions were occupied only by native Eskimos and Indians,
employing such primitive weapons as bows and spears, the species was in
no danger. Its vast numbers were maintained steadily from generation to
generation, and were perhaps limited only by the grazing or browsing
capacity of their range.
With the advent of civilized man and the placing of firearms in the
hands of the natives, the situation has deteriorated at a rate that
becomes accelerated with the passage of time. If it had not been for the
encroachment of civilization and the introduction of its instruments of
destruction, the natives would have been assured of a proper meat supply
for an indefinite period. Here and there some of them would miss a
caribou migration and starve to death; yet the animals have been so
generally available that many of the natives even today lack the
foresight to put up an adequate supply of fish as an alternative winter
food.
Almost everywhere the annual slaughter is both excessive and wasteful.
Few inhabitants of the North, whether native or white, stay their hands
while Caribou are present and ammunition is available. There is undue
reliance on a continuation of past abundance, and an indifference to the
welfare or rights of posterity. The whole culture of the inland Eskimos
and the northern Indians (the Caribou-eater Chipewyans in particular) is
so thoroughly based upon Caribou that the decimation of these animals
would mean a fundamental modification or virtual extermination of their
culture.
The average trapper of the Barren Grounds apparently aims at killing
annually at least 100 Caribou. Only a small portion is required to feed
himself and his family. The rest is designed for use as fox bait and dog
feed. In September he goes over his trap-line, perhaps 100 miles long,
and endeavors to kill Caribou at convenient intervals throughout its
length. (In October, 1944, a single trapper killed 90 during two days of
a big movement.) The animals are left where they fall. Presently spells
of warm weather may render the meat unsuitable for any one with more
fastidious tastes than a hardy man of the Barrens. In any event, the
beasts of the field evidently get the lion’s share, even when the
trapper endeavors to cover the carcasses with rocks or spruces. Bears,
Wolves, Foxes, Weasels, Wolverines, Lemmings, Rough-legged Hawks,
Ravens, and Canada Jays help themselves to the free feast. Bears in
particular are likely to consume the whole carcass; in the autumns of
1944 and 1947 they thus disposed of about 70 and 40 caribou bodies,
respectively, within a few miles of the Windy River post. If the season
turns out to be a particularly poor one for Arctic Foxes, the trapper
may abandon his trap-line for that winter, and dozens or scores of
Caribou will have been sacrificed in vain.
Fish, which are available in abundance nearly everywhere, would serve
well enough for both fox bait and dog feed. But the average trapper
prefers to secure Caribou--a less laborious matter than putting up a
winter’s supply of fish; at the same time he may admit that fish are
easier to handle in feeding and are preferable from that point of view.
Charles Schweder has rarely found Caribou along his trap-line between
the upper Kazan River and Dubawnt Lake. By using fish (out of the Little
Dubawnt River) for fox bait, he avoids the necessity of making an early
fall trip over that long distance to secure Caribou for his winter
operations. A trapper from northern Manitoba informed me that the local
Indians were complying with a recent government regulation that each
owner must put up a certain number of fish for the consumption of his
dogs--but, they were still feeding them with Caribou. The Split Lake
band of Indians on the Nelson River, Manitoba, were reported to have
killed 4,000 of the animals during the winter of 1946-47; the greater
part of these were utilized ingloriously as dog feed.
The hunting of such an extraordinarily unwary animal as the Barren
Ground Caribou calls for extremely little skill. Scarcely anything more
is required of the hunter (at least in southwestern Keewatin) than to
place himself on their line of march and to await their arrival. No
concealment is necessary, but quick movements are to be avoided, and the
direction of the wind should be such that it will not carry the dread
human scent to the animals. Even in perfectly open terrain one may
generally walk slowly up to within shooting distance of resting Caribou.
But if they are on the march and have already gone past, the hunter may
not succeed in getting close to them. Pursuing them on the run is likely
to send them off in a panic. (There is some evidence that on the Arctic
Coast and in the Barren Grounds of Mackenzie, where hunters are probably
more numerous than in southwestern Keewatin, the Caribou are usually
much more wary--_cf._ Amundsen, 1908, +1+: 103; Stefánsson, 1913b:
278; Blanchet, 1925: 34; Ingstad, 1933: 88.) In the section on
_Disposition_ the destruction of about a quarter of a herd of 100 or
more by a single hunter is described. On September 9 an Eskimo boy
killed 13. On November 3 eight out of a herd of 50 were secured by
another hunter in a few minutes’ time. During the autumn migration of
1947 one of the Eskimos on the upper Kazan had killed 85 before the end
of September. This band of Eskimos is said to have once slaughtered 500
animals, half of them in the river, where they did not even bother to
pull them out; they had killed for the sheer delight of killing rather
than for utilization. It is customary for them to spear more animals
than they shoot. A trader’s family in the Nueltin Lake region used to
kill 500 Caribou per year for their own use and for their 23 dogs. In
one instance a number of Caribou were shot from across a river; several
hours elapsed before a canoe became available, and by that time the
bodies were frozen so stiff that no attempt was made to use them. It was
reported that tractor crews operating between Reindeer Lake and Flin
Flon brought out many hind quarters to sell illegally at the latter
point, leaving other parts of the bodies along the way. In the winter of
1944-45 Nueltin Lake was said to have been covered with the bodies of
Caribou that the Chipewyans had shot for “fun” and had neglected to
utilize. It was also reported that in May, 1947, there were many
neglected bodies in the vicinity of Duck Lake, the local Chipewyans
having killed the animals during the previous fall; meanwhile the spring
migration had commenced and was furnishing all the fresh meat required.
In the Windy River area nearly all the Caribou were secured with rifles.
A few, however, were speared by the Eskimo boy as they swam across Windy
Bay. The spears used here are manufactured articles of iron, fitted to a
wooden shaft.
Katello, a Kazan River Eskimo, informed Charles Schweder that his people
used to construct snow-covered pits for the Caribou to fall into. The
present generation is considered too lazy to undertake such a task.
Although information is lacking in the present case, urine may have been
employed to entice the Caribou into these pits, as reported by Hanbury
(1904: 114-115, 123, fig.).
A general deterioration of antler size in the Barren Ground Caribou
seems to constitute a case parallel with that of the European Red Deer
(_Cervus elaphus elaphus_). The reason is evidently the same in each
case--the long-continued selection by hunters of old males with the best
“heads.” Only the motive differs decidedly in each case: the European
hunter looks upon the antlers themselves as the main prize; the Eskimo
and the Indian are indifferent to these ornaments, but realize that the
bucks with great antlers provide the most meat and _fat_. The bucks are
said to become much fatter than the does. The Eskimos are especially
keen on getting the big bucks. According to Charles Schweder, the old
antlers left at the river crossings from bygone days are superior in
size to those of the present day. He himself has never secured a set of
antlers equal to one (fig. 25) lying on the shore of Simons’ Lake; it
may have been there for 20 or 30 years prior to 1947.
From about mid-September to nearly mid-October the flesh is counted upon
as being in especially fine condition. In August, 1947, the animals had
scarcely any fat, but by the middle of September the roasts were
delicious. On October 8 the fresh strips of back fat from several bucks
weighed about 5 to 10 lbs. each. A good many of these strips were put in
a storehouse at Windy River for winter use. Charles Schweder remarked on
having seen such a piece of fat 3 inches thick. At the rutting season,
which commences about mid-October, the bucks become very poor and thin.
They neglect their feeding and do not have full stomachs, as earlier in
the season. Their fat becomes tinted with red, and the flesh becomes so
musky that even the dogs and the Wolves disdain it. (See also the
section on _Fat_.)
In some cases, when a local Caribou is being dressed, a part of the
stomach is utilized as a receptacle into which the blood is dipped from
the body cavity with the hands, in Eskimo style. The blood goes into the
making of soup. The tripe also is relished. Once I found the children of
our camp boiling up a section of the aorta as a delicacy. The ribs are
commonly impaled on a stick thrust into the ground and roasted in front
of an open fire. Leg bones may be cracked to render the raw marrow
accessible; if they are cooked, the marrow may be blown out of the open
ends with the mouth. The Padleimiut consume much of the meat in the raw
state, and frequently wash it down with hot tea.
Much needless wounding and suffering of the Caribou, as well as waste of
valuable resources, result from extensive use of such a small-calibred
rifle as the .22. It may seem remarkable that such a large animal should
succumb at all to such a slight weapon; but it does happen, usually
after a number of shots. For example, an Eskimo boy secured 13 Caribou
in a single day with a .22. On the other hand, many of the animals must
get away from the hunter, only to die, after much suffering, at a
considerable distance, where they are not likely to be recovered and
utilized. The absolute outlawing of the use of the .22 on such large
game would seem to be in order.
Once Charles Schweder shot a doe whose jaw had been broken by a bullet.
A piece of the bone had “grown into the tongue” but the jaw was healed.
At the Windy River post, in the latter part of summer, portions of the
caribou bodies are placed in the river not merely for refrigeration, but
for protection from blowflies. Such meat is used mainly for the dogs.
The Eskimos are said not to engage in this practice. Consequently, some
of the caribou bodies lying about their camps become masses of maggots.
On the last day of September I observed how Charles Schweder prepared a
fresh caribou body in the field and endeavored to protect it from beasts
and birds. First he cut off the head with his hunting-knife; then the
hind legs, which were severed very readily at the hip joint. Next he
opened the body cavity and pulled out the viscera, setting aside a mass
of fat (apparently the omentum). The hind legs were placed beneath the
body, and the head was thrust into the opening of the abdominal cavity,
as an obstacle to such scavengers as Herring Gulls, Rough-legged Hawks,
Canada Jays, Ravens, and Foxes (_cf._ Downes, 1943: 227, 228). The skin
was left on the body, and the whole was covered with small spruce tops.
An interesting device in the hunting of Caribou consists of “stone men”
(Harper, 1949: 231, fig.). They are made of rocks, piled one upon
another in such a manner as to faintly suggest a human figure. “Moss”
(either moss or lichens) is added to some of them to enhance the
human appearance. A considerable number may be seen in the Windy River
area, where they are generally placed along the summits of the ridges.
Construction was probably begun many years ago by natives, and has been
continued by the present residents. When Caribou, in fleeing from a
hunter, catch sight of these “stone men,” they are likely to pause in
suspicion of the figures, and to be deflected from their chosen course.
This may give the hunter a chance to come within range of the animals.
The Kazan River Eskimos are said to use converging lines of such rock
piles to direct migrating Caribou to certain river-crossings, where the
hunters lie in wait for them. Occasionally a single pile is erected
merely to mark the spot where a caribou body is left until the hunter
can return with a dogteam to fetch the meat.
[Transcriber’s Note: “... stone men”: Inuksuit (sing. inuksuk).]
On first securing one of the animals, the hunter makes a practice of
cutting out the tongue and carrying it to camp in a pocket or a
game-bag. On a subsequent trip, if there is sufficient snow on the
ground, the meat is generally transported by dog sleigh or toboggan
(_cf._ Harper, 1949: 231, fig.). Occasionally a hunter will carry it on
his shoulder (fig. 4) or in a pack.
In all the Canadian North, as far as I am aware, the Windy River post is
virtually the only place where summer transportation is accomplished by
dog-drawn travois (fig. 5). This device, consisting of two trailing
poles, with a small platform midway, is recognizable immediately by
readers of Parkman’s _Oregon Trail_ (1849), where its use by Indians of
our Western Plains is mentioned again and again. The travois was
introduced into this region by the late Charles Planchek?, a Czech?
trapper of somewhat sinister repute, whose headquarters were at Putahow
Lake. He was the “Eskimo Charlie” of Downes (1943: 160-161, pl.). In
years gone by he took a travois with him on a visit to the Windy River
area, and it was thereupon copied and subsequently used regularly by the
Schweder family. Their Eskimo friends of the upper Kazan will
occasionally borrow one, but I am not aware that they have made any
travois of their own. During the summer the two younger boys of the
Windy River post made a practice of hauling in caribou meat from the
surrounding Barrens by means of travois.
In the latter part of summer some small pieces of caribou meat were
occasionally laid on a stone for drying, in front of the door at the
post. Other pieces were said to have been hung up in the air for the
same purpose, without fire or smoke, out in the field where the animals
were killed. Apparently blowflies did not pay much attention to this
meat. No considerable quantity seemed to be preserved locally in this
way. Three Caribou-eater Chipewyans from the south end of Nueltin Lake,
who visited our camp in late October, were carrying dried meat with them
as travel rations and eating it without cooking.
The larvae of the warble fly (_Oedemagena tarandi_), found beneath the
skin of the Caribou, are relished by the Eskimos, being eaten apparently
while alive and raw. The Eskimo boy of our camp continued this practice
after his little sister had given it up. Hearne (1795: 197) reported the
Indians as eating the warbles in his day.
[Illustration: FIG. 9. A band of Caribou swimming across Little
River at its mouth and landing on the western shore. Toward the
left, a doe standing broadside and enveloped in a cloud of spray
being shaken off. August 28, 1947. (From a 16-mm. motion
picture.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 10. Two Caribou bucks standing in the edge of
Little River at its mouth after swimming across. August 28, 1947.
(From a 16-mm. motion picture.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 11. A one-horned doe, a hornless doe, a fawn,
and a two-horned doe among a band of Caribou approaching the
camera within a rod after swimming across Little River. August 28,
1947. (From a 16-mm. motion picture.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 12. A band of Caribou (chiefly big bucks)
swimming across Little River at its mouth. August 28, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 13. Camp Slough, with trails showing the
recent passage of Caribou through the sedge growth (predominantly
_Carex chordorrhiza_). Black spruce in the foreground and
distance. August 29, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 14. A Caribou _Elysium_: a hornless doe
approaching within 15 feet of the photographer at the mouth of
Little River. August 30, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 15. Anoteelik in caribou-skin clothing,
holding a caribou spear. A buck on the skyline. Mouth of Windy
River, September 7, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 16. Katello, a Padleimiut Eskimo from the
upper Kazan River, in a coat (_attigi_) and boots (_komik_) of
caribou skin. Windy River, Oct. 6, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 17. Charles Schweder with the fresh,
warble-infested hide of a Caribou buck (specimen No. 1033). Windy
River, June 3, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 18. Hide of a Caribou doe, about four years
old, with about 130 small warbles or warble scars (concentrated on
the rump). Windy River, September 15, 1947.]
Only a small proportion of the hides of the locally killed Caribou are
preserved. A hide that would fetch only a dollar at Reindeer Lake would
not be worth transporting more than 250 miles from Nueltin Lake. Hearne
long ago (1795: 84) remarked on the remoteness of the hunting grounds
from the trading posts as a barrier to trade in the skins; and this
condition prevails to a large extent to the present day. Thus only such
hides as are required for domestic use are kept. Tanning, while done by
the Eskimos of the upper Kazan, is not undertaken by the residents on
Windy River. Here the task of drying the hides is left mainly to the
children of the camp. Most of them are pegged out on the summit of a
gravelly ridge, wooden pegs being driven with a rock through slits in
the edges of the skin (fig. 6). Now and then one is nailed to the outer
wall of a log cabin (fig. 18).
One of the main uses of the hides is for winter clothing. The Windy
River residents have their garments made by Eskimo women of the upper
Kazan, whose tanning process leaves the fur intact. Early autumn hides,
with new, comparatively short fur, are the ones in demand. The season
for securing such hides is said to extend to mid-September. At that
season the larvae of the warble fly have not developed far enough to
have injured the hide appreciably. The long winter fur is much less
suitable for clothing. In moderately cold weather a single coat
(_attigi_), with the fur inside (fig. 16), is worn by the Eskimos. This
coat, when made for a man, extends very little farther downward at the
rear than at the front; but a woman’s coat is considerably longer at the
rear. The bottom is generally provided with a fringe consisting of small
strips of caribou skin, perhaps 4 inches long and 1/16 inch wide. In
mid-winter another coat, with the fur outside (fig. 15), is slipped on
over the other. Both are provided with hoods. Trousers, with the fur
outside, are cut rather short at the bottom; some such material as rope
is passed around the waist, without belt loops, to hold the trousers up.
Boots (_komik_) of tanned caribou skin (fig. 16), reaching nearly to the
knees, with the fur inside, make exceptionally warm footgear in winter.
An extra piece is sewed on the sole, with the fur outside, but the hairs
soon wear off. The seams are sewed with sinew. Another sort of boot, for
summer use, is made of untanned skin, without the fur, and is more or
less waterproof. Mittens (_pahloot_) have the fur outside; the thumb
piece, of a length suitable for a short Eskimo thumb, does not properly
fit a white man.
In the autumn of 1947 the migrating Caribou did not reach the territory
of the Chipewyans about the south end of Nueltin Lake till about
November 1--by which time the fur had grown so long that it was not
suitable for clothing. When I inquired of Charles Schweder how these
natives managed under such circumstances, he replied that nowadays they
use very little skin clothing--just manufactured clothing. Certainly the
latter type was being worn by three men of this tribe that visited the
Windy River post in late October. In this connection it is interesting
to note that in November Charles brought to Windy River a bundle of fawn
skins that he had secured from an Eskimo on the upper Kazan. Presently
he traded them to a Cree halfbreed from the Putahow River, who was to
have them made into a coat for himself. In years gone by the
above-mentioned Chipewyans must have found some means of securing
caribou skins for themselves in August or September; they could have
accomplished this by moving to the northern part of Nueltin Lake,
provided the animals had not reached the southern part at the proper
season.
From Charles Schweder I learned that the Hudson’s Bay Company acquires
caribou skins (apparently tanned) from the Duck Lake Chipewyans at about
a dollar apiece, puts them up in bales of perhaps 10 to 20 skins, and
ships them by steamer from Churchill to Baffin Island or thereabouts,
for use by the Eskimos. He had seen about 25 or 30 such bales being
loaded on a steamer in September, 1947. This trade evidently results
from the present scarcity of Caribou on Baffin Island (_cf._ Manning,
1943a: 47-50; Soper, 1944: 247-250; Banfield, 1949: 481). Moccasins of
caribou skin, made by the Duck Lake Chipewyans, were on sale at
Churchill.
The three Caribou-eater Chipewyans from the south end of Nueltin Lake
brought mittens, gloves, and moccasins of caribou skin to trade at Windy
River. Similar gloves were brought by a Cree halfbreed from the Putahow
River.
At the Windy River post furred caribou skins served in upholstering the
seat, back, and arms of a couple of home-made chairs. They were used
also as mattresses or blankets, in the making of sleeping bags, and even
as insulating material on the outside of the cabin (Harper, 1949: 226,
228, figs.). The Schweder boys also maintain tents of caribou skin at
various points on their long trap-lines; they are much warmer than
canvas tents, and require no outlay of cash. The skins are nailed on
poles arranged in tepee form; the height of such a tent is about 10
feet, and the diameter 9 or 10 feet. There is a home-made stove inside,
with the smoke-pipe projecting outside about halfway to the top of the
tent.
The Eskimos of the Kazan River have large summer tents of caribou skin,
and smaller ones of canvas. The former are the ones in which the drum
dances are held. These Eskimos never make their winter houses wholly of
snow, according to Charles Schweder, but use caribou skins for the roof.
In illustration of the primary importance of the Caribou to both
primitive and civilized man in the Arctic and the sub-Arctic, the
numerous cases of partial or complete starvation in the absence of
Caribou may be cited. The chronicles of northern explorers are replete
with them. A notable case is that of John Hornby and his two companions
on the Thelon River in the winter of 1926-27 (Hoare, 1930: 25;
Christian, 1937). In the autumn of 1946 only a small fraction of the
normal caribou migration passed by the Eskimo camps on the upper Kazan
River. These happy-go-lucky, utterly improvident people did not take
steps to secure an alternative winter’s supply of fish, and by the
following spring eight out of the band of 27 persons had succumbed
directly or indirectly to starvation. (It is suspected that several were
accounted for by anthropophagy.) Women, children, and dogs were the
victims; no adult male succumbed. The casualties would doubtless have
been more numerous if Charles Schweder had not reported the plight of
the band when he made a trip to Reindeer Lake in March. Thereupon the
government shipped emergency rations by plane as far as Nueltin Lake,
and Charles transported them from that point by sleigh to the Kazan.
Meanwhile he rescued two of the orphan children, took them to the Windy
River post, and in a few more months formally adopted them.
_Ethnological material from caribou products_
In addition to the utilization of caribou products for the primary
purposes of food, clothing, and shelter, as discussed in preceding
pages, certain other uses of an ethnological nature may be mentioned
here.
Charles Schweder spoke of the former Eskimo use of splint bones from the
legs of Caribou as needles, after a hole had been drilled or burned
through the larger end. They are about the same length as a large
darning needle. These people commonly use the back sinew as thread or as
wrapping on tools, drums, and the like. I saw a piece of back sinew
being dried for future use at the Windy River post.
Either lard or caribou fat serves as fuel for an “Eskimo candle”; the
wick is a bit of rag or moss. The heat of the flame melts the fat where
it is spread out in some small receptacle like a can cover. When our
other means of illumination gave out at the Windy River post, I worked
or wrote notes for many hours by the light of one of these candles. It
gives approximately as much illumination as an ordinary tallow candle.
One disadvantage of using caribou fat for this purpose is the
considerable amount of smoke that it produces.
The Eskimos make odd use of an antler as a brake for a sleigh, to
prevent the harnessed dogs from running after any Caribou they may
sight; on other occasions it retards the sleigh in descending a hill.
Such an antler, that I found at the Windy River post, is notched near
the base; a rope or thong, 2 or 3 feet in length, is fastened at one end
to this notch, and at the other to the side of the sleigh. To apply the
brake, the driver simply presses down the points of the antler into the
snow or ice.
The drums used in the ceremonial dances of the Kazan River Eskimos are
made of a piece of caribou skin stretched tightly over a circular frame
of spruce and fastened in place with caribou sinew. They are about 3
feet in diameter.
In an Eskimo fish spear from the upper Kazan River an iron barb on one
of the prongs is supported by a small piece of caribou antler and
fastened with back sinew. The two large lateral prongs, of metal, are
tied to the wooden shaft of the spear with braided sinew.
Two snow-knives have handles of antler, about 10 and 11 inches in
length. One of the handles has been planed down, and is wrapped with
sinew.
The handle of another implement, used in cleaning out grains of wood
from a hole being drilled in wood, is also a piece of antler.
A woman’s knife, or _ooloo_, has a section of antler for a handle.
Strands of beads, used either for an ear pendant or for ornaments at the
peak of a hood, have a caribou incisor fastened at the tip. The opposite
end of the pendant is provided with a thin strip of caribou hide for
fastening to a perforated ear lobe.
The willow stems of pipes are wrapped with back sinew.
Antler and sinew went into the making (by Anoteelik) of a “ring and pin”
game.
_References on relations to Eskimos and Indians._--Isham, 1949
(1743): 152-154; Dobbs, 1744: 19; Hearne, 1795: 35, 78, 80-84,
96, 119, 195-197, 297, 316-319, 321-325; Franklin, 1823:
243-244; Lyon, 1824: 119, 123, 130, 144, 198, 229, 238, 241,
282, 311-317, 324, 327, 336; Parry, 1824: 289, 380, 403,
494-497, 505, 508, 512, 537; Richardson, “1825”: 330, 331;
Franklin and Richardson, 1828: 200, 275; Richardson, 1829:
242-244, 245-249; John Ross, 1835a: 243-244, 252, 352, 512,
537; J. C. Ross, in John Ross, 1835b: xvii; Richardson, in
Back, 1836: 499; Simpson, 1843: 76, 208, 312, 347, 355; J.
McLean, 1932 (1849): 195, 359; Richardson, 1852: 290; J.
Anderson, 1856: 24, and 1857: 321; Armstrong, 1857: 149, 154,
155, 166, 194; M’Clintock, 1860?: 212; Richardson, 1861: 274;
B. R. Ross, 1861: 439-440; Kennicott, in Anonymous, 1869: 170;
Kumlien, 1879: 19, 23-25, 36-37, 54; Caton, 1881: 366-371;
Gilder, 1881: 11, 23, 25, 26, 28, 43, 50, 59, 61, 64, 67, 71,
137-146, 154, 245-255; Nourse, 1884: 220, 232; Schwatka, 1885:
59-86; Boas, 1888: 419, 429, 461-462, 501-503, 508-509, 522,
555-560; Bompas, 1888: 61, 100; Collinson, 1889: 277;
MacFarlane, 1890: 32-34, 38; Pike, 1917 (1892): 51-56, 59-60,
82, 209; J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128-130; Dowling, 1893: 107; J. B.
Tyrrell, 1894: 445, 1895: 440-444, and 1897: 122, 126-127,
131-132, 151, 166-167; Russell, 1895: 49-51, and 1898: 91, 134,
168-172, 176, 178, 187-189, 227-229; Whitney, 1896: 161, 175,
176, 213, 237, 240, 242, 262; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 80-81,
123-141, 241; Jones, 1899: 342, 429; Hanbury, 1900: 64, 65;
J. M. Bell, 1901a: 16, and 1901b: 252, 255, 258; Boas, 1901:
52, 54, 81, 102, 107, and 1907: 465, 493, 501; W. J. McLean,
1901: 5; Elliot, 1902: 276-279; J. W. Tyrrell, 1924 (1902): 28,
37; Hanbury, 1904: 41, 43, 67, 70, 72, 75, 82, 114-115, 120,
121, 123, 137, 143; MacFarlane, 1905: 680-683; Amundsen, 1908,
+1+: 120, 201, 237, 326-329, and +2+: 110; Preble, 1908: 137;
Seton, 1911: 259-262; Cameron, 1912: 127, 309; Wheeler, 1912:
199-200; R. M. Anderson, 1913a: 5, 6, 8, and 1913b: 502-505;
Stefánsson, 1913a: 105, and 1913b: 203, 215, 221, 281, 337-338,
and 1914: 48, 56-59, 97, 137, 139-141, 147-148, 150, 296, 353;
Hornaday, 1914, +2+: 97, 100; Wheeler, 1914: 52, 56, 58; Nelson,
1916: 460-461; Thompson, 1916: 19, 99; J. B. Tyrrell, in
Thompson, 1916: 16; Buchanan, 1920: 113-151; R. M. Anderson,
in Stefánsson, 1921: 743, 750; Hewitt, 1921: 58, 59, 64-66;
Stefánsson, 1921: 401-402; Jenness, 1922: 47, 48, 61, 78-81, 97,
100-103, 124, 127-142, 148-151, 182-189, 244, 248, 249;
Blanchet, 1925: 34, 1926a: 98, and 1926b: 47; Preble, 1926: 121;
Craig, 1927: 22; Henderson, 1927: 40; Rasmussen, 1927: 5, 23,
59-60, 65, 67, 68, 73-76, 103-106, 145, 166-167, 245, 246;
Anthony, 1928: 532; Kindle, 1928: 72-73; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1):
9, 47, 52-53, 56, 57, 86, 89, 90, 94, 96, 98, 101, 102, 104,
106-112, 133-144, 171, 186, 191, 196, 199-223, 232, 239-251,
262, 263, 268-271; Seton, 1929, +3+: 111-122, 133-134; Blanchet,
1930: 50-51, 53; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 193, and 1931: 32-33;
Kitto, 1930: 87-88, 90; Mallet, 1930: 13, 32, 85, 87, 89, 90,
92, 95, 102, 116, 131-140; Jacobi, 1931: 156, 157, 159; Harper,
1932: 30, 31; Jenness, 1932: 47, 48, 51, 58, 59, 75, 406-408,
411, 412, 414, 415; Munn, 1932: 191-192, 210, 214, 255, 271,
278; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 80-83, 86-87; Weyer, 1932: 38,
39; Birket-Smith, 1933: 100; Ingstad, 1933: 118, 122, 135, 139,
162-163, 167, 186-187, 247, 253-254, 257-259; R. M. Anderson,
1934a: 81, and 1937: 103; Godsell, 1934: 273-276, and 1937: 288;
Hornby, 1934: 105; Birket-Smith, 1936: 90, 91, 110, 111,
115-116; Hamilton, 1939: 246, 352, 359; Clarke, 1940: 5-9, 84,
110, 112; G. M. Allen, 1942: 297; Manning, 1942: 29, 1943a: 47,
50, and 1943b: 103; Downes, 1943: 215, 227-228, 261-262; Soper,
1944: 248-250; Wright, 1944: 185, 187, 188, 193; Rand, 1948b:
149; Yule, 1948: 288; Banfield, 1949: 477, 478, 481, and 1951a:
1, 11, 14-15, 42-50; Harper, 1949: 226, 230, 231; Hoffman, 1949:
12; Polunin, 1949: 230; Scott, 1951: 127; Anonymous, 1952: 264.
_References on relations to civilized man._--Kennicott, in
Anonymous, 1869: 166; Schwatka, 1885: 59-86; A. J. Stone, 1900:
57; Grant, 1903: 186; Cameron, 1912: 309; R. M. Anderson,
1913a: 5, 6; 1913b: 504, and 1938: 400; Stefánsson, 1913b: 27;
Hornaday, 1914, +2+: 100; Wheeler, 1914: 56; Hewitt, 1921:
11-12, 59; Critchell-Bullock, 1931: 33; Godsell, 1937: 288;
G. M. Allen, 1942: 298-299; Manning, 1942: 28; [U.S.] War
Department, 1944: 77; Harper, 1949: 239; Banfield, 1951a: 1,
14-15.
_Relations to Black Bears_
It is hardly to be expected that Black Bears (_Ursus americanus_ subsp.)
commit any depredations on adult, able-bodied Caribou unless under very
exceptional circumstances. Since they do not normally venture to an
appreciable distance into the Barren Grounds, their contacts with
Caribou are mainly in the forested zone. For an untold period in the
past there has been a very interesting tripartite relationship between
Bears, Caribou, and Caribou-eater Chipewyans about the south end of
Nueltin Lake. For information concerning it I am indebted to Charles
Schweder. The Indians of that area have been in the habit of killing
large numbers of Caribou, especially on the spring and fall migrations,
and leaving many of the bodies, or parts of the bodies, out in the
“bush.” The Bears have become accustomed to taking advantage of the
situation, especially, perhaps, in the matter of fattening up for
hibernation. This probably resulted in a certain concentration of the
animals thereabouts. But of late years the local native population has
seriously declined by reason of fatal illness and removal to other
parts. Consequently, as Charles Schweder expressed it, there are no
longer enough people there to feed the Bears! Three of the Chipewyans
reported in late October, 1947, that they had lost a good many of their
Caribou to the Bears during that season.
This recent change in the food situation about the south end of Nueltin
Lake has apparently resulted in, or at least coincided with, an influx
of Bears in the Windy River area, where they were unknown until 1944.
During the next four years seven Bears were killed locally. The animals
are said to have consumed about 70 Caribou bodies in the fall of 1944,
and about 40 in the fall of 1947 within a few miles of the Windy River
post; thus they became a somewhat serious factor in the human economy of
the area. The Caribou is evidently the chief loser in this curious
relationship, but even the Bear, which may be regarded as the chief
beneficiary, suffers from man’s retaliatory efforts.
_Relations to foxes_
The demand for Arctic Fox furs on the part of the fashionable women of
the world sends the trapper on his winter rounds over the bleak and
bitter Barren Grounds, where he depends upon his autumn kill of Caribou
for sustenance for himself and his dogs as well as for fox bait. It is
thus quite obvious where a large share of the responsibility for the
dwindling numbers of the Caribou lies.
Both Arctic and Red Foxes (_Alopex lagopus innuitus_ and _Vulpes fulva_
subsp.) are among the scavengers that help to consume caribou bodies
that are left unguarded in the wilds. According to Charles Schweder,
foxes of both species seem to follow the Wolves, presumably in the hope
of securing the leavings of their kills.
Charles also gave me an account of a remarkable sort of play between a
Red Fox and a small buck Caribou. He had witnessed it in September,
1943, about 18 miles north of Windy River, from a distance of half a
mile. The Fox would approach the Caribou closely; the latter would then
walk up to the Fox, which would retreat, not allowing the Caribou to
come close enough to touch it. Neither animal was afraid of the other.
They kept up this performance for about 5 minutes. The Fox then went
among some bushes, where the Caribou tried to follow it. The larger
animal was still there, feeding, when Charles passed on out of sight. He
regarded the whole performance as a matter of playfulness. His recital
put me in mind at once of a slightly similar play between a Newfoundland
Caribou and a Red Fox, as recorded by Millais (1907: 302-303).
Stefánsson (1921: 623-624) describes a game of tag between an Arctic Fox
and several yearlings of _Rangifer pearyi_ on Melville Island.
_References._--Blanchet, 1925: 34; Birket-Smith, 1929(1): 101;
Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 143; Munn, 1932: 278; Ingstad, 1933:
90, 157-159; Freuchen, 1935: 128; Banfield, 1951a: 36.
_Relations to Wolves_
Aside from man, the principal predatory enemy of the Barren Ground
Caribou is undoubtedly the Wolf. A comparison of a distributional map of
Caribou by Banfield (1949: 479, fig. 1) with a distributional map of
Wolves by Goldman (1944: 414, fig. 14) indicates that the latter species
is a considerably more plastic animal. No less than six subspecies of
Wolves seem to occur in parts of the currently recognized range of a
single subspecies of Caribou (_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_), as follows:
_Canis lupus arctos_, Prince of Wales and Somerset islands; _Canis lupus
manningi_, Baffin Island; _Canis lupus bernardi_, Victoria Island;
_Canis lupus hudsonicus_, Keewatin, eastern Mackenzie, northern
Manitoba, and northeastern Saskatchewan; _Canis lupus mackenzii_,
northern Mackenzie; _Canis lupus occidentalis_, southern Mackenzie and
northern Alberta and Saskatchewan.
The Keewatin Tundra Wolf (_C. l. hudsonicus_) is presumably the only one
that concerns us here. However, its extension into the forested zone of
northern Manitoba and northeastern Saskatchewan, as indicated on
Goldman’s map, is still problematical. Goldman’s text (1944: 428-429) is
quite indefinite on this point. There are such distinct differences
between the general fauna of the Arctic Zone and that of the Hudsonian
Zone that the Wolf of the latter zone may well prove to be
differentiable from _hudsonicus_, whose type locality is at Schultz Lake
in west central Keewatin. It is an interesting question whether any
Wolves of the Barren Grounds follow the Caribou southward into the
timbered country in the fall; likewise, whether any individual Wolves of
the latter region accompany the Caribou on their spring migration out
into the Barrens. Little light on the subject seems available at
present. There is no doubt, however, that a good many Wolves remain
during the winter on parts of the Barren Grounds that have been deserted
by the Caribou at that season. Furthermore, at the time of the spring
migration, mature Wolves of the forest zone would be restricted to their
home territory by the necessity of caring for their young ones.
A Wolf is by no means able to capture a Caribou at will. During the
season of open water the latter may effect a ready escape by plunging
into the nearest river or lake and crossing to the other side. There is
reason to believe that islands provide a good sanctuary during the
summer (Seton, 1929, +3+: 108-109; Gavin, 1945: 228). In the winter the
Caribou must depend primarily on its fleetness of foot. Even the fawns
are reputed to be able to outdistance Wolves in a chase that is not too
prolonged. An adult, if brought to bay after a long chase, is probably
able to stand off a single Wolf indefinitely. Its powerful hoofs are its
principal means of defense. Even if the antlers are brought into play,
they are effective only during the limited period when they are
fullgrown, hard, and free of velvet. When two or more Wolves manage to
bring a Caribou to bay, the outcome is probably almost invariably in
their favor. Charles Schweder has never known a Caribou to kill one of
these predators in defending itself. In several cases reported by Fred
Schweder, Jr., the last stand was made on the ice of lakes. The Caribou
itself may choose such a place, as if aware that it may be more
sure-footed on the ice than its enemy.
After listening to wolf tales by residents of the frontier settlements
rather than by real men of the “bush,” one might almost expect to see a
couple of these bloodthirsty animals harrying the rear of every band of
Caribou and keeping up a relentless pursuit. However, during a sojourn
of six months on one of the best Caribou ranges in Keewatin, where
trapping has very little effect on Wolves, I saw just one of these
animals alive, heard the howling on several occasions, and noted a
single Caribou that had probably been killed by them. It is far from a
common experience for the resident trappers to witness actual pursuit by
Wolves or even to find their kills. The following instances, related by
Fred Schweder, Jr., comprised his only direct observations on Wolves in
pursuit of Caribou up to and including 1947, when he was eighteen years
old.
During the northward migration in May, 1945, a silent black Wolf pursued
a band of 100 Caribou over the ice of Windy Bay. At one time it came
within 100 feet, but thereafter they forged ahead. After half a mile the
band split up, and the Wolf desisted. In October, 1946, Fred noticed a
Caribou fighting off two Wolves on the ice of Nueltin Lake near its
outlet. It used both horns and hoofs against its attackers. While one
Wolf was in front, the other would try to get in the rear of the Caribou
and hamstring it. This went on for two hours until darkness hid the
scene. The next morning the Caribou was dead and half eaten. On October
16, 1947, a white Wolf was seen in pursuit of four fast-moving Caribou
near Simons’ Lake. It was about half a mile in their rear, and presently
halted, probably by reason of catching sight of Fred.
November 7, 1947, was a blizzardy day; the air was full of drifting
snow. Under these conditions a gray Wolf chased a buck and a doe right
into the dooryard of one of Fred’s trapping camps 10 miles north of
Windy River. It was only about 30 feet behind them. When the buck broke
through the ice of a little creek, the Wolf went right past it in
pursuit of the doe. The latter nearly ran into Fred’s toboggan, and he
shot it at a distance of 20 feet. The Wolf came within 40 feet, but by
the time it was recognized as not just another Caribou, it was 100 feet
away. Fred then shot but merely wounded it, the sight being off his
rifle. Meanwhile the buck escaped, but 3 miles away Fred met with it
again and secured it. He recognized it as the same animal because at
both encounters it was limping from a previous wound and was hornless as
well.
In late November Fred found two fullgrown bucks and a doe on the ice of
Windy Lake, where they had been killed by Wolves. The bucks were
antlered and had probably met their end several weeks previously. Yet
their flesh was so musky and unpalatable, in consequence of the rutting
season, that it had not been devoured. A long trail of blood and hair
led to the spot where the doe had fallen, apparently a couple of weeks
previously; it was still only half eaten.
In Fred’s opinion, Caribou are apprehensive of sandy eskers as the haunt
of Wolves, and do not linger there.
On October 15 Charles Schweder pointed out the body of a Caribou in a
little pond in the delta area at the head of Simons’ Lake. He considered
it killed by Wolves some weeks previously; its antlers were in the
velvet, and it had been eaten only about the head and hind quarters as
it lay in the water.
Joe Chambers, a trapper of Goose Creek (south of Churchill), stated that
Wolves select the fattest Caribou, and that during the winter of 1946-47
they had been devouring only such choice parts as the tongue and the
unborn young.
Caribou bodies are the primary bait for Wolves and Foxes on the Barren
Grounds. Two traps are commonly placed at each carcass.
Up to a couple of centuries ago, when the baneful effect of civilized
man began to be felt, the Caribou throve and multiplied to a point where
they probably strained the grazing capacity of the Barren Grounds.
Neither primitive man nor the Wolf had any serious effect on the size or
condition of the herds. The Caribou were numbered by millions, and they
doubtless owed their vigor and their success as a species in no small
measure to their friendly enemy, the Wolf. Through long ages the latter
had tended to eliminate the weaklings, the sickly, and the less alert
individuals, leaving the fitter animals to propagate their kind. Here
was a fine example of natural selection operating to the advantage of
the Caribou. Thus the Wolf may be safely considered a benefactor of the
species as a whole--a regulator and protector of its vitality.
There are only two regions of the world where Caribou (or Reindeer) have
not long shared their territory with the Wolf--Spitsbergen and the Queen
Charlotte Islands. And what sort of situation do we find there? Instead
of thriving in the absence of such a natural predator, the animals of
both regions are the runts of the whole Caribou-Reindeer tribe, and
those of the Queen Charlottes have become virtually or wholly extinct
(_cf._ Banfield, 1949: 481-482). Furthermore, the Newfoundland Caribou
suffered a very serious decline after the Newfoundland Wolf became
extinct at about the beginning of the present century. The lesson is
obvious: it is folly for man to imagine that he can benefit the Caribou
by eliminating the Wolves.
It is virtually axiomatic that no predatory species (other than modern
man) exterminates its own food supply. Long ago nature must have
established a fairly definite ratio between the populations of the Wolf
and the Caribou. Although a certain fluctuation of that ratio could be
expected from time to time, each fluctuation would be followed by a
return to more or less normal conditions. The trend of evolution has
doubtless been toward perfecting the Wolf in its ability to capture the
Caribou, but at the same time toward perfecting the Caribou in its
ability to escape the Wolf. Unequal progress of this sort on the part of
the two species would presumably have been rather disastrous to the one
or the other. But it is nature’s way to have preserved a proper balance
between the abilities of the two species, and thus between their
populations. This balance (a rather delicate one) has probably been
upset to some extent by the advent of civilized man with his devices to
the Barren Grounds.
The Caribou “exemplify the survival of the fittest; none but the perfect
are allowed to live and breed, hence their perfection. We believe that
the wolf is in no small degree responsible for this high standard,
and that were he killed off the species as a whole would suffer.”
(Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 161.)
“It is doubtful if the efforts of white or native hunters are of any
importance whatever in the control of wolves in the caribou country, or
could, under present circumstances ever be of any importance.” (Clarke,
1940: 109).
_References._--Franklin, 1823: 242, 327, 344, 486, 487; John
Ross, 1835a: 402, 530, 534, 564; Back, 1836: 128-129; Simpson,
1843: 232; Armstrong, 1857: 395, 480-481, 488, 525; Osborn,
1865: 227-228, 231, 232; Kumlien, 1879: 53, 54; Gilder, 1881:
61; Bompas, 1888: 60; Collinson, 1889: 244; Pike, 1917 (1892):
56-58; Whitney, 1896: 239; Jones, 1899: 374-375; Preble, 1902:
41, and 1908: 214; Hanbury, 1904: 89; MacFarlane, 1905: 692-693;
Amundsen, 1908, +1+: 102; Seton, 1911: 225-226; R. M. Anderson,
1913b: 516; Stefánsson, 1913a: 93, and 1921: 248-249, 475-476;
Blanchet, 1925: 34; Mallet, 1926: 79; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1):
51; Seton, 1929, +1+: 344-346, and +3+: 108-109; Blanchet, 1930:
54-55; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 159-162; Hoare, 1930: 22; Kitto,
1930: 89; Jacobi, 1931: 240-241; Harper, 1932: 31; Sutton and
Hamilton, 1932: 33, 35, 36, 81, 82, 84, 85; Ingstad, 1933:
157-159, 165-166, 207, 302-304, 306-307; Hornby, 1934: 106, 108;
Freuchen, 1935: 93, 120-122; Murie, 1939: 245; Clarke, 1940:
107-109; Manning, 1942: 29, and 1943a: 55; Downes, 1943: 262;
Young, 1944: 236-238, 243; Yule, 1948: 288; Harper, 1949:
230-231, 239; Banfield, 1951a: 37-41; Anonymous, 1952: 263-265.
_Relations to birds of prey_
These relations are not so much of the living Caribou as of their bodies
after death. The principal avian scavengers in the Windy River area seem
to be the Rough-legged Hawk (_Buteo lagopus sancti-johannis_), the
Herring Gull (_Larus argentatus smithsonianus_), the Canada Jay
(_Perisoreus canadensis canadensis_), and the Raven (_Corvus corax
principalis_). These birds are evidently attracted to the vicinity of
camps and trap-lines by reason of the numbers of caribou bodies lying
about. On their first arrival in late May or early June, before the
lakes have opened up and while food in general is scarce, Herring Gulls
seem particularly prone to assemble where Caribou have been recently
killed. For example, up to June 3 only a handful of these birds had been
seen about Windy River. On that day several Caribou were killed, and on
June 4 about 100 Herring Gulls had gathered at the scene. Their
scavenger activities make it especially necessary to protect the caribou
bodies in the way described in the section on _Relations to man_. In a
few days one of the bodies (apparently not so protected) had been almost
entirely consumed. The Herring Gulls operate locally only from May to
September, being absent during the rest of the year. A few Ring-billed
Gulls (_Larus delawarensis_) appeared meanwhile and attacked a caribou
carcass.
The Rough-legged Hawk is far less numerous than the Herring Gull and so
is a much less serious scavenger. Now and then, however, it may be noted
feeding on a caribou carcass. Even the Long-tailed Jaeger (_Stercorarius
longicaudus_) is reported in such a role. The Canada Jay and the Raven
are permanent residents and are undoubtedly helped through the
inhospitable winter by man-killed Caribou. On the other hand, a good
many Ravens fall victims to the fox traps placed about the bodies.
Charles Schweder has frequently seen Ravens following Wolves, as if in
expectation of a kill. Buchanan remarks (1920: 248) concerning the
Reindeer Lake region, that the Ravens “appear to remain in the vicinity
of the Caribou herds all th[r]ough winter.” In the Windy River area the
Canada Jay became noticeably more numerous in August, after the Caribou
had returned from the north. The Ravens and the Rough-legs exhibited a
similar increase in September and October.
The depredations of these carnivorous birds result to the detriment of
the living Caribou in that they virtually force the hunters and trappers
to kill a larger number of the animals than would otherwise be
necessary.
_References._--Hanbury, 1904: 135; Stefánsson, 1913a: 93;
Seton, 1929, +3+: 108; Ingstad, 1933: 157-159; Downes, 1943:
228; Banfield, 1951a: 36, 42; Harper, 1953: 28, 60, 62-64, 72,
74, 76.
_Relations to miscellaneous animals_
The Schweder boys spoke of Arctic Hares (_Lepus arcticus andersoni_)
being in the habit of eating the stomach contents of Caribou after the
animals have been dressed in the field. This represents merely harmless
utilization of a normally waste product, although it serves some of the
natives as _nerrooks_ or “Eskimo salad” (_cf._ Richardson, 1829: 245).
Wolverines, Mink, Weasels, and Lemmings help to consume unprotected
caribou bodies. (In the Old World the Wolverine is regarded as a serious
enemy of live Reindeer [Jacobi, 1931: 243; Harper, 1945: 473].)
_References._--Pike, 1917 (1892): 56-58; Seton, 1911: 252, 1929,
+2+: 413, 424, 443, and 1929, +3+: 108; Harper, 1932: 23;
Ingstad, 1933: 157-159; Freuchen, 1935: 93, 99; Hoffman, 1949:
12; Banfield, 1951a: 36, 41; Harper, 1953: 40, 41.
_Relations to flies_
Flies of various kinds perhaps cause more wide-spread, year-round misery
to the Caribou than all other pests and enemies combined. It is safe to
say that not a single individual in the whole population escapes their
attacks, and some even succumb to mosquitoes (Gavin, 1945: 228). The
various biting and parasitic flies have already been discussed to some
extent in the section on _Influence of insects on distribution_.
Harassment by these pests is believed to be the leading cause of the
haste with which the Caribou are frequently seen passing over the
Barrens in summer. Downes (1943: 204) has commented on the habit of
Chipewyan hunters in the Nueltin Lake region of examining the legs of
Caribou for swellings caused by mosquito bites. In a buck secured on
August 17 the legs exhibited numerous little bumps of this sort;
furthermore, black flies covered the buck’s body, while scarcely
troubling those of us who were preparing the specimen. Fortunately the
suffering from mosquitoes and black flies on the Barrens is largely
limited to the months of July and August.
Even at this season the Caribou are granted occasional relief from the
blood-sucking flies. The characteristic strong winds of that region help
greatly in keeping the insects in abeyance. Furthermore, both mosquitoes
and black flies become more or less inactive whenever the temperature
drops to the neighborhood of 45° (_cf._ Weber, 1950: 196), and this
happens fairly frequently even in mid-summer. Finally, the black flies
retire during the hours of darkness; and short as these hours are, the
relief they bring is very noteworthy. These conditions offer something
of a contrast to those surrounding the Woodland Caribou. It is difficult
to see how that animal can secure a moment’s respite from mosquito
attacks, by day or night, through most of the summer. In its forested
habitat there is not sufficient lowering of the temperature nor
sufficient penetration of strong winds. Hard as the life of the Barren
Ground Caribou may be, it seems to have a few advantages not available
to the Woodland Caribou; and possibly it is these that have enabled it
to attain a vastly greater population than the other species.
Of 52 mosquito specimens brought back from the Windy River area, 39 were
_Aedes nearcticus_ Dyar, 2 were probably _Aedes fitchii_ (F. and Y.),
and the remaining 11 were of the same genus but not in condition for
specific determination (_cf._ Dyar, 1919; Weber, 1950: 196). _Ae.
nearcticus_ is holarctic in distribution; in North America it occurs
chiefly on the Barren Grounds, but is known from as far south as
Montana. _Ae. fitchii_ ranges through the northern United States and
Canada, north to the limit of trees. Of 26 black flies, all were
_Simulium venustum_ Say, which occurs in northern Europe, Alaska, and
Labrador, south to the Adirondacks, Illinois, Iowa, Georgia, and
Alabama. (Names and ranges supplied by Dr. Alan Stone, of the United
States Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine.) These mosquitoes and
black flies were presumably the species attacking the Caribou in the
Nueltin Lake region.
The effects of the two parasitic flies are felt nearly throughout the
year. The adult warble fly (_Oedemagena tarandi_) is seen in the Windy
River area in August, when the Caribou are on their southward march. On
August 22 Fred Schweder, Jr., secured three of them on freshly killed
Caribou and another that alighted on himself--all on an island in Windy
Bay. His name for them is “deer fly.” He reported seeing about 50 of
them on this day (more than ever before), although he sighted only 10
Caribou. As he remarked, these fuzzy flies look much like bumblebees.
Three days later, along Little River, something buzzed past me while a
band of Caribou were near. It was probably this species, although it
suggested a hummingbird almost as much as a bumblebee. On several
subsequent August days, while numbers of Caribou were passing very close
to me, I detected no more of the warble flies. In general, they might
well have escaped my notice owing to my preoccupation with photography;
but on August 30, when I looked for them on one of the nearest animals,
I saw none. Evidently they are not sufficiently numerous (like
horse-flies on cattle) to be constantly in attendance on each Caribou.
In fact, a comparative scarcity (or at least difficulty of capture) may
be surmised from the fact that the Canadian Arctic Expedition 1913-18
brought back only three adult females--one from Teller, Alaska, and two
from Bernard Harbour, Dolphin and Union Strait (Malloch, 1919: 55).
Weber (1950) collected no Oestridae in Arctic Alaska.
Apparently there has been scarcely any published study of the egg-laying
or other habits of the adult _Oedemagena_ in relation to _Rangifer
arcticus arcticus_, other than a few recent notes by Banfield (1951a:
31-32, fig. 17); but its behavior in relation to the Lapland Reindeer
seems to be fairly well known, and it is summarized by Jacobi (1931:
245-246). In the case of the Reindeer, the fly’s eggs are laid (during
the summer) generally on the legs, belly, and tail region of the victim;
the larvae, on hatching, bore through the skin, travel widely through
the body, and finally (in the autumn) reach the place for further
development--beneath the skin of the back on both sides of the vertebral
column. Each one makes a breathing-hole through the skin, and uses this
as an exit when leaving the host in the following June. Only the younger
animals, from one to about four or five years old, are heavily infested;
those still older are spared, possibly having learned to guard
themselves better against the fly. Curiously enough, the fawns are said
to escape this parasitism entirely.
My own observations on the larvae were restricted to a few Caribou
specimens in June and in the autumn. As with the Reindeer, the Caribou
fawns in their first autumn showed no visible infestation, as I noted in
looking over some fresh hides on September 10, and as was noted again in
a fawn of September 26. Fred Schweder, Jr., made the remark that larvae
would be evident in the fawns by the following spring; this may indicate
that the larvae have not, in the autumn, completed their journey to
their final position on the Caribou’s back. I learned of no immunity on
the part of old adults.
Fullgrown larvae still remained in bucks secured on June 3 (fig. 17) and
18. According to Charles Schweder, they drop out in June. In the buck of
June 3 there were perhaps several dozen warbles, each surrounded by a
mass of repulsive tissue; in another buck of June 18, there were
apparently more than 75. “It may be assumed,” says Johansen (1921: 24),
“that the pupae lie on the ground for about a month before the flies
appear.” He found (1921: 29) the adult flies abroad at Dolphin and Union
Strait by July 14.
In a buck of August 17 the new warbles (or perhaps merely warble scars
from the previous June--_cf._ Banfield, 1951a: 32) on the inside of
the skin were not very numerous. Some were medium-sized, but most were
so small that it was not deemed necessary to scrape them off; they had
comparatively little fatty tissue about them and were merely allowed to
dry up. The number of warbles (or warble scars) found in autumn
specimens varied considerably, up to a maximum of roughly 200. They were
situated mostly along the mid-dorsum, and more on the lower back or rump
than farther forward. The number appeared to be approximately 130 in the
skin of an adult doe that was nailed to the log wall of a cabin for
drying on September 15 (fig. 18). A doe of September 21 seemed to have
less than the usual number of warbles.
The nostril fly (_Cephenemyia_) is another serious dipterous parasite of
the Caribou. The life history of the European _C. nasalis_ (L.) (or
_C. trompe_ [L.]) and its effect on Reindeer are discussed by Bergman
(1917), Natvig (1918), and Jacobi (1931: 245) as follows.
This fly attacks the host from June to September, depositing its
viviparous larvae in the nostrils. The Reindeer attempts to fend off the
fly, striking at it with its hoofs and keeping its nostrils closed as
far as possible. Once deposited, the lively larvae crawl into the inner
nasal passages and as far as the larynx, where they fasten themselves
and live on the mucus. A Reindeer may harbor as many as 130 of these
parasites. They range from 6 to 26 mm. in length. Their particular
growth begins at the end of March, and they are ready for pupation up to
May. The host assists their exit by continual sneezing and snuffling. In
the last stages they are a great affliction for the host, and they
sometimes cause its death. Pupation takes place in or on the ground,
under some sort of cover, and it lasts for 15-19 days. The flies have
been found emerging from July 12 to 31.
The corresponding parasite of the Barren Ground Caribou is a similar or
perhaps identical species, with a parallel life history. Its chief
activity as an adult doubtless occurs in July and August. A number of
the mature larvae were found in the throat of the buck of June 3; two of
them that were preserved measure approximately 7 mm. in diameter and 27
and 30 mm. in length. A large mass of such sizable parasites in the
throat might easily become a serious obstacle to comfortable living or
even to survival on the part of the host. Presumably the larvae drop to
the ground at about the same period as those of _Oedemagena_. Fred
Schweder, Jr., remarked concerning the buck of August 17 that these
larvae are never found at that season, and Charles Schweder made the
same remark concerning a doe specimen of September 21. It would appear
either that they remain so small as to escape detection at this time or
that they do not reach the throat on their short journey from the
nostrils until some later period of the year. Johansen (1921: 24)
records larvae only 2-3 mm. long in the nasal passage at the end of May.
Since the bulk of the Caribou population has passed well to the
northward of the Nueltin Lake region by the time the larvae of
_Oedemagena_ and _Cephenemyia_ drop out of the bodies of their hosts to
pupate briefly on or in the ground (say in the latter part of June), one
is tempted to speculate on the possibility that the adult flies found
here in August may have followed their prospective victims for many
miles in their southward migration. However, Porsild remarks (1943: 386)
that they “apparently do not travel very far.”
Certain kinds of behavior exhibited by the Caribou in attempting to fend
off the parasitic flies are discussed in the section on _Shaking off
moisture and insects_.
The adults of _Oedemagena tarandi_ (L.) were determined by Mr. C. W.
Sabrosky, of the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine; and the
larvae of _Oedemagena_ and _Cephenemyia_ by Dr. W. W. Wirth, of the same
bureau. The larvae of the latter genus are regarded as probably _C.
trompe_ (L.); they were new to the collection of the United States
National Museum.
_References._--Hearne, 1795: 197; Franklin, 1823: 241;
Richardson, “1825”: 328-330, and 1829: 242; Godman, 1831, +2+:
284; Murray, 1858: 210; B. R. Ross, 1861: 438; Pike, 1917
(1892): 58-59; J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128, and 1894: 442; Whitney,
1896: 239; Russell, 1898: 228-229; Jones, 1899: 411; Hanbury,
1900: 67, and 1904: 32, 137, 194; Preble, 1902: 41; R. M.
Anderson, 1913b: 504; Stefánsson, 1913b: 204, 212-213, 333;
Douglas, 1914: 191-192; Malloch, 1919: 55-56; Hewitt, 1921: 67;
Johansen, 1921: 22-24, 29, 35, 37; Stefánsson, 1921: 247;
Blanchet, 1925: 32, and 1926b: 47; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 56,
133; Seton, 1929, +3+: 109-111; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 193;
Hoare, 1930: 33, 37-38; Kitto, 1930: 89; Jacobi, 1931: 244-245;
Munn, 1932: 58; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 84-86; Birket-Smith,
1933: 90, 92; Ingstad, 1933: 48, 135; Hornby, 1934: 105; Soper,
1936: 429; Henriksen, 1937: 25, 26; Hamilton, 1939: 247, 301;
Murie, 1939: 245; Clarke, 1940: 70, 95; Downes, 1943: 226, 255;
Manning, 1943a: 53; Porsild, 1943: 386; Gavin, 1945: 228;
Harper, 1949: 228; Banfield, 1951a: 31-33; Barnett, 1954: 104.
_Ectoparasites_
It was in vain that I searched a number of fresh specimens for lice,
mites, fleas, or ticks. The Schweder boys spoke of never having noticed
any such parasites. Seton (1929) mentions none, and Jacobi (1931: 243)
records only a louse (_Linognathus tarandi_) from the Reindeer. “Lice
are not known from caribou according to Ferris (in conversation)”
(Weber, 1950: 154).
_Relations to Reindeer_
Recent discussions of the possibility or advisability of introducing
domesticated Reindeer to replace, or to augment the diminishing supply
of, native American Caribou in various new localities prompt a brief
review of the subject.
It may be remarked at the outset that acclimatization attempts in the
Old World have generally been abortive. Wild Reindeer introduced from
Finmark into Iceland in the eighteenth century flourished for a time,
but by 1917 they were almost exterminated. A number of different
introductions into Great Britain, Denmark, Germany, Austria,
Switzerland, and Italy came to naught. On the other hand, the
introduction of Lapland Reindeer on the subantarctic island of South
Georgia in 1908 seems to have turned out successfully. (Jacobi, 1931:
158-165; Harper, 1945: 473-474.) A saving feature in each of the
above-mentioned cases was the absence of any native Reindeer whose
racial purity might have been destroyed by the newcomers.
Decrease of local American stocks of Caribou, and consequent suffering
of native populations who had in past generations depended upon these
animals for a major portion of their food supply, have led to
introduction of foreign Reindeer in several regions of North America,
from Newfoundland and Labrador in the east to Alaska in the west. The
persons responsible were doubtless inspired by high humanitarian
motives; but it is doubtful if they could have thoroughly considered or
foreseen the serious biological consequences of their efforts.
In Alaska, importation of domesticated Siberian Reindeer began in 1892.
By the 1930’s the herds had increased to an estimated total of 600,000.
For various reasons, however, the industry has so far declined that by
1949 the total number of Alaskan Reindeer had become reduced to about
28,000 head. Disinclination of Eskimos for reindeer-herding and mixture
of their stock with wild Caribou were important reasons for this
decline. (Lantis, 1950.) From the biologist’s point of view, the most
unfortunate result was the large-scale interbreeding with the native
Grant’s Caribou (_Rangifer arcticus granti_) and the progressive
extermination of that fine animal in a pure form by dilution with
inferior alien blood. Among Alaskan Reindeer, “constant inbreeding has
led to a noticeable reduction in the prolificness of the females, and
degeneration is to be observed in many herds” (Hewitt, 1921: 323).
In 1908 Dr. Wilfred T. Grenfell brought 300 Lapland Reindeer to
Newfoundland. After some years they were transferred to the north shore
of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and finally to the island of Anticosti.
(Hewitt, 1921: 324-328; Seton, 1929, +3+: 92.) In 1911, 50 of these
Reindeer were shipped from Newfoundland to the Slave River region. Most
of them escaped (probably to contaminate the local stock of Caribou),
and by 1916 the last survivor of this band in captivity had succumbed
(Hewitt, 1921: 329-330).
“A large part of the reindeer in Alaska are south of the Arctic Circle
on the comparatively mild shores of Bering Sea, where there are several
months of open tidewater navigation; vegetation is more luxuriant [than
in Arctic Canada] and conditions easier in general. There the reindeer
were introduced into a country where the wild caribou had been virtually
exterminated, and a large native population were anxious to take up a
new mode of support. The percentage of profits has appeared unduly large
in Alaska because statisticians have been unable to take into account
the value of the services of a large body of devoted missionaries,
government teachers, and other unselfish persons who put their best
efforts into years of unpaid extra work to make the reindeer successful
and beneficial to their charges.
“Canada has a large area of Arctic and sub-arctic lands beyond the reach
of possible cultivation, still occupied by large numbers of wild caribou
and remnants of musk-oxen, with native inhabitants who derive a living
from them and add to the national wealth by fur production. These
Indians and Eskimos are still far from being either able or willing to
enter upon a pastoral stage of existence, and moreover, they are now
enjoying an era of prosperity from the fur industry which may be
temporary, but which they will not relinquish for the slower and less
profitable prospects of the herder.” (R. M. Anderson, 1924: 330-331.)
In 1921 some Norwegian Reindeer were landed at Amadjuak, Baffin Island
(Seton, 1929, +3+: 92). The lack of further reference to the Baffin
Island animals by such subsequent investigators as Manning and Soper
would seem to indicate that the reindeer have not survived, unless
through mixture with the native Caribou. An attempt in 1922 at
acclimatization in Michigan “ended in total failure” (Seton, 1929, +3+:
93).
“The Barren Grounds . . . still feed enormous herds of caribou. . . .
The greatest danger to this industry [reindeer-raising] is just these
wild herds, which would be very apt to absorb the tame animals. This
problem may perhaps become a fatal one to the Eskimos, for there might
very easily come a most difficult transitional period, when the caribou
would be too few in numbers to form a definite basis for the existence
of the people, but on the other hand numerous enough to make reindeer
breeding difficult.” (Birket-Smith, 1933: 121.)
In northwestern Alaska “large numbers of reindeer are constantly
escaping the herders and joining the wild caribou. It seems that it will
be but a short time until there will be no pure bred caribou along that
part of the coast. . . . As the reindeer are protected, and the caribou
are killed at every opportunity, the former will doubtless prove the
dominant animal and in time overcome the caribou, with hybridization the
inevitable result.” (Bailey and Hendee, 1926: 22.)
“The caribou’s greatest menace is not the wolf, nor the hunter, but
man’s economic developments, principally the raising of reindeer.
Wherever reindeer herds are introduced, caribou must of course
disappear, for both cannot occupy the same range. The disappearance of
the caribou along the Bering Sea and Arctic coasts, while regrettable,
was unavoidable in view of the development of reindeer herding in this
section, which is ideal for the purpose. . . .
“The mingling of reindeer with the main caribou herds should be avoided.
Reindeer herds maintained in close contact with migrating caribou suffer
frequent losses through strays. Already the domestic reindeer are
mingling with the caribou herd of Mount McKinley National Park. . . .
[Hybridization] would be regrettable in interior Alaska, which has
produced a splendid type of wild caribou, coming near at least to being
the largest on the continent.” (Murie, 1935: 7.)
Murie’s extensive experience with these animals in Alaska has led him to
remark further (1939: 245):
“The greatest hazard to the Caribou is the possible occupation of the
range by man’s agricultural activities. . . . The most serious danger is
introduction of domesticated Reindeer on wild Caribou range, for the
wild herds must be removed in order to make possible the safe herding of
the domestic animals. . . . There is not room for both of these animals
on the same or closely adjacent ranges.”
Porsild points out (1943: 386, 389) that sparsely covered grazing areas
are suitable for Caribou but not for Reindeer; and that the former
disappear before expanding Reindeer culture.
“Perhaps the worst threat of all to the caribou has been the
introduction of reindeer culture along the arctic coast. This has
resulted in interbreeding between the wild caribou and their inferior
domesticated relatives. When and if this mixture extends to all the
herds of the Barren Grounds, the caribou may be written off the record
as a pure species; the animal will have become extinct through dilution,
as the biologists express it.” (Harper, 1949: 239.)
The American Society of Mammalogists, at its annual meeting in 1950,
passed the following resolution (_Jour. Mammalogy_ +31+ (4): 483, 1950):
“That the American Society of Mammalogists urges that the Canadian
Government not undertake the introduction of reindeer into Ungava.
Before any introduction even is seriously considered, those persons
involved in any planning are urged to make a thorough study beforehand
of the problems of integrating lichen ecology, reindeer biology, and
native culture--serious problems that have not been solved to date on
any workable scale on the North American continent. It would be
particularly deplorable if an introduction, to aid the natives, led to
early successes and high hopes, then eventual failure.”
Porsild, who knows the Reindeer thoroughly at first hand, has made
(1951: 53) the following observation:
“Thus far these experiments [at introduction into America] have met with
only partial or indifferent success, because reindeer nomadism is
incompatible with present trends of cultural development and because the
North American Arctic is too thinly populated to provide a ready market
for reindeer products.”
Referring to the region of the Brooks Range in northern Alaska, Rausch
says (1951: 190):
“The mixture of inferior reindeer bloodlines with the native caribou is
serious. This has already occurred to a considerable degree, and it is
hoped that proper control will be exercised if the reindeer industry is
revived in Alaska. Ear-notched animals have been killed in the Anaktuvuk
Pass country, and white reindeer have been seen running with the
caribou. The number of unrecognized reindeer passing through could be
great.”
At present the Barren Ground Caribou is apparently the third most
abundant member of the deer family on our continent, being exceeded by
the White-tailed Deer and the Mule Deer (_cf._ Jackson, 1944: 7-8). No
other member of this family could be expected to be so eminently and
thoroughly adapted to its Arctic environment or to thrive so well on the
very ground where nature has been molding and perfecting its characters
for thousands of years. No naturally occurring relative--Moose, Deer, or
Woodland Caribou--undertakes to compete with it on its own particular
range. It requires practically nothing for the maintenance--and
increase--of its present numbers, other than an enlightened policy of
conservation. (As indicated on a previous page, the feminine wearers of
Arctic Fox furs must bear a heavy share of responsibility for the
decline of the Barren Ground Caribou in recent decades.) Our highest
authorities have pointed out the impracticability of Caribou and
Reindeer occupying the same range.
Would it not be the part of wisdom to exclude the inferior domesticated
alien, with its difficult and generally unsuccessful culture in North
America, and thereby to give the wonderful wild Caribou of the Barrens
its best chance for survival?
_References._--Chambers, 1914: 350-351; Hornaday, 1914, +2+:
105-108; Hewitt, 1921: 323, 329-330; R. M. Anderson, 1924: 330;
Kindle, 1928: 74; Seton, 1929, +3+: 92-93; Blanchet, 1930:
53-54; Birket-Smith, 1933: 121; Godsell, 1934: 276; Murie,
1935: 7, 1939: 245-246, and 1941: 435; Porsild, 1943: 386, 389;
Rousseau, 1948: 96; Harper, 1949: 239; Polunin, 1949: 24;
Lantis, 1950; Hustich, 1951; Porsild, 1951: 53; Rausch, 1951:
190; Scheffer, 1951.
NUMERICAL STATUS
There seems to be a general impression, among those who have known the
Barren Ground Caribou at first hand for a considerable period, that the
population has been reduced by something like a half during the past
generation. “Recent preliminary aerial survey has indicated that their
numbers, although less than the previous estimates of 3,000,000 (R. M.
Anderson, 1938; Clarke, 1940), which were based upon the carrying
capacity of the Arctic tundra, are probably comparable to their
primitive numbers in the central portions of the range” (Banfield, 1949:
478). A definite reduction is indicated along the Arctic coast and on
the Arctic islands (R. M. Anderson, 1937: 103, and 1938: 400; Banfield,
1949: 478, 481, and 1951a: 13-14). While large numbers still remain in
southwestern Keewatin, there are no reports of any such mass occurrence
as was witnessed by the Tyrrell brothers on the upper Dubawnt River on
July 29, 1893; that throng was estimated at 100,000 to 200,000 animals
(J. B. Tyrrell, 1897: 165).
During the big movement of the last week of August, 1947, I may have
seen as many as 500 Caribou on one or two days, in herds numbering up to
150 individuals. A striking proportion of those observed seemed to occur
in bands of roughly 25 animals. On August 25 Fred Schweder, Jr.,
reported about a thousand crossing Little River, in bands of as many as
100 individuals. On October 11 Charles Schweder observed a thousand
Caribou resting on a hill 3 miles long in the vicinity of Four-hill
Creek. In November he found thousands, in herds up to 300 strong, moving
south from the upper Kazan River. These figures may give a faintly
approximate idea of the numbers occurring in the general region of
Nueltin Lake in a year considered less good than an average one. On the
other hand, toward the coast of Hudson Bay, there were reports of a
greater number of autumn migrants than in ordinary years.
In October, about 1944, tracks indicated that 2,000 or 3,000 animals had
crossed Windy River in the vicinity of Four-hill Creek in the night
(_fide_ Charles Schweder). About October 10, 1946 (a year of unusual
abundance), Fred Schweder, Jr., witnessed the passage of thousands in
one day in this vicinity; he got the impression of “the hills moving
with Deer.” (Yet this was the season when the Caribou passed mainly to
one side of the upper Kazan River, so that nearly one-third of the local
band of Eskimos starved to death.) In the first part of May, about 1942
or 1943, John Ingebrigtsen came to a nameless lake, about half a mile by
a mile and a half in extent, somewhere east of Duck Lake, Manitoba. It
appeared “absolutely full of Caribou,” and he estimated their number at
not less than 20,000. This would mean a density of no more than about 50
per acre.
_References._--Jones, 1899: 368, 374; J. B. Tyrrell, 1894: 442,
and 1897: 10, 49-50, 165; Whitney, 1896: 240; Seton, 1911: 220,
258-260; R. M. Anderson, 1913b: 502; Hornaday, 1914, +2+:
225-226; Nelson, 1916: 460; Thompson, 1916: 100-101; Kindle,
1917: 108-109; Buchanan, 1920: 130-131; Hewitt, 1921: 56, 64-66;
Stefánsson, 1921: 255; R. M. Anderson, 1924: 329; Blanchet,
1926b: 48, and 1930: 52; Kindle, 1928: 72-73; Seton, 1929,
+3+: 131-134; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 159-160; R. M. Anderson,
in Hoare, 1930: 52-53; Kitto, 1930: 87; Jacobi, 1931: 201-202;
Munn, 1932: 58; Birket-Smith, 1933: 89; Ingstad, 1933: 160;
R. M. Anderson, 1938: 400; Clarke, 1940: 65, 84-91, 101-104;
Downes, 1943: 258-260; Wright, 1944: 185-188, 191, 193; Yule,
1948: 287-288; Banfield, 1949: 478, 481, and 1951a: 9, 13-14;
Harper, 1949: 231, 239; Anonymous, 1952: 261; Barnett, 1954: 96.
GENERAL HABITS
_Daily periods of activity and rest_
According to Charles Schweder, the Caribou do not move about much at
night; that seems to be their principal time for sleep. They exhibit a
definite tendency to pause and rest also toward the middle of the day.
Several instances have already been given of the animals resting at such
a time on frozen lakes and rivers: lakes southwest of Reindeer Lake,
March 18; lakes south of Lake Athabaska, April 16; Seal River, May 31;
Windy Bay, June 6 (mid-morning). Open hilltops are evidently sought
likewise for both nocturnal and mid-day rests: knoll by Windy River,
June 3; Josie’s Hill, June 20; ridge by Little River, August 24 (about 9
a.m.). (For details, see sections on _Winter range_, _Spring migration_,
and _Fall migration_.)
Although we noted a small band of Caribou passing through a thick and
extensive stand of spruce at dusk on October 2, Fred Schweder, Jr.,
remarked that they do not rest in such a place; they are safer from
Wolves in open areas. Charles Schweder reported about 50 Caribou, in
three slightly separated bands, appearing on the south side of Windy
River near Four-hill Creek during the evening of September 24, but not
making up their minds to cross; he thought they might have been scared
by Wolves. Possibly there was a similar explanation for the crossing of
the river at this point by large numbers of the animals during an
October night several years previously.
According to Fred Schweder, Jr., a day’s movement of Caribou past the
mouths of Little and Windy rivers during the fall migration generally
does not commence before 10 a.m. and ends about 3 p.m. The explanation
of such a phenomenon is none too obvious; and in any event, there were
exceptions enough, though the general statement may hold true for the
bulk of the migrants. As remarked in the section on _Spring migration_,
the daily periods when the Caribou crossed the ice of Windy Bay were
mainly from 10 to 11 a.m., from 2:30 to 5 p.m., and in the evening.
On August 27, about 5:50 p.m., a majority (say half a dozen) of a small
band of Caribou were lying down on a slope near the mouth of Little
River. They faced down wind to watch for enemies in that direction,
while their noses would warn them of any approaching from the opposite
direction. Their attitude was very much like that of Norway Reindeer
figured by Seton (1929, +3+: pls. 11, 15, 18).
Charles Schweder spoke of having seen whole herds lying down to rest,
while none of the animals remained standing up on guard. He had noted
one such herd of 600 or 700 along the Thlewiaza River in August. He
further stated that when the Caribou lie down to rest and to chew the
cud, they hold the head up. They may also sleep in this position. In the
hard winter of 1944-45, when the snow was deep and the animals were
tired and hungry, he came up to a resting herd. All but one of them got
up and moved away. That one remained sleeping, head up and eyes closed;
Charles walked up to within 10 feet and shot it. He has also seen
resting Caribou lay their heads down on the side, but only for a few
moments at a time.
_References._--J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 129; Jones, 1899: 359;
Harper, 1949: 227; Banfield, 1951a: 23.
_Organization of herds_
The Barren Ground Caribou is a distinctly gregarious species. It goes in
herds for at least the greater part of the year; this is especially true
of the spring and autumn migration periods and of the winter months. We
know comparatively little of the behavior of the does at fawning time in
June; but probably there is a tendency toward solitariness on their part
at that season. It is true that solitary Caribou may be met with at
almost any season of the year; but this doubtless represents merely
temporary rather than permanent segregation of such individuals. At the
very end of the spring migration and at the beginning of the autumn
migration, there may be, among the sparse southernmost elements of the
population, a larger proportion of solitary animals.
While marching over the Barrens and feeding as they go, the smaller
bands maintain a fairly loose organization, as apparently best suiting
their needs. On the other hand, the huge herds of former times, such as
the Tyrrells met on the upper Dubawnt in 1893 (J. B. Tyrrell, 1897:
49-50, pl. 1; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908: pls. facing pp. 80, 81; Seton, 1929,
+3+: pl. 22), obviously maintained very compact ranks. In my limited
experience, the animals bunched more closely in crossing the rivers than
was normally the case on land among feeding herds. While swimming, they
would follow each other in files at minimum intervals; but in stepping
across rapids they might extend these intervals somewhat.
When merely covering ground, without stopping to feed, or when following
a trail through brush or along a narrow ridge, there is a strong
tendency for the animals to go in a single file, or at least in a
procession many times longer than wide. This was also apparent when they
were crossing the ice of Windy Bay in June.
When Caribou flee from some source of alarm, a distinct tendency toward
compact bunching may be observed. This may have been developed as a
measure of protection from pursuing Wolves; the latter could naturally
overcome a straggling or isolated individual more readily than one in a
compact herd. The Caribou running away from the train in the “Little
Barrens” south of Churchill very clearly demonstrated the tendency
toward a close formation. (See also, in the section on _Disposition_,
the account of a herd attacked by a hunter near Lake Charles.)
The larger herds of the autumn migration seemed to be generally composed
of all sexes and ages; yet some sizable bands were made up chiefly of
bucks on the one hand, or of does and fawns on the other hand. The rear
guard of the spring migration and the vanguard of the autumn migration
are generally composed of bucks, traveling either singly or in small
bands; this state of affairs is looked upon as evidence that the
majority of the bucks do not advance so far to the north in June and
July as the does do.
The following are a few examples of the composition and leadership (or
rear-guarding) of groups of Caribou. (Other examples are mentioned in
the sections on _Migration_.) A band of about 20, after feeding for a
time on the south bank of Windy River on June 16, moved off upstream,
mostly in single file, with a patriarchal buck in the lead. The
remainder of the band included several lesser bucks and various does and
yearlings. On the following day a band of equal size, composed chiefly
of bucks but including three hornless individuals (does?), was led by
two of the bigger bucks. When a band of some 40 does and fawns
approached Little River to cross it on August 25, a doe came first to
the water’s edge to make a careful inspection. On the same day I
remarked having noted several times that a buck brought up the rear of a
band. On August 26 I noted that a distinct majority in the herds of the
previous two or three days were does and fawns, although there were
generally a few bucks present also. At this period I got the impression
that the number of individuals in a band was frequently not far from 25.
On August 28, when a band of 40 crossed the mouth of Little River, three
or four bucks plunged in first, but a doe was almost even with them. At
the Bear Slough, on September 3, a group consisted of two bucks, two
does, and a fawn. On September 15 Fred Schweder, Jr., reported seeing
about 100 Caribou, with not a buck among them. On September 24 about 15
does and fawns were resting or feeding quietly by Glacier Pond. On
September 28 a band of six large bucks crossed the Camp Ridge. On
October 1, an older and a younger buck appeared in the shoal waters of
Duck Bay. On November 3, in the same locality, a band of about 50 was
composed largely of does, but included a few fawns and a few
well-antlered bucks. On November 11 five does were reported crossing the
mouth of Windy River on the ice.
Charles Schweder remarked that the leader of a band is generally a doe;
but sometimes it is a buck, or even a fawn. There is virtually no way of
telling whether the same doe habitually leads a band. In the big migrant
herds, bucks bring up the rear. Once in September, in a herd of about
100 animals, the front half was composed of does and fawns, the rear
half of bucks. In the rutting season the does are naturally in the lead,
the bucks following them.
_References._--Hearne, 1795: 198; Richardson, “1825”: 329;
Simpson, 1843: 277, 281, 381; J. Anderson, 1856: 24, and 1857:
324; Schwatka, 1885: 83; Pike, 1917 (1892): 49, 174, 204, 209;
Dowling, 1893: 107; Stone and Cram, 1904: 52; Blanchet, 1925:
32-33, and 1926b: 48; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 192-196; Hoare,
1930: 13, 33, 37; Kitto, 1930: 88; Mallet, 1930: 20-23; Jacobi,
1931: 190, 203-204; Hornby, 1934: 106; Birket-Smith, 1936: 112;
Hamilton, 1939: 247; Clarke, 1940: 95; Downes, 1943: 256;
Manning, 1943a: 52; Harper, 1949: 228, 229; Banfield, 1951a:
23-26.
_Disposition_
The Barren Ground Caribou comes close to holding the palm for unwariness
among the larger land mammals of North America. It is fortunate that its
range lies so far from the centers of civilization. It is scarcely
conceivable that it could survive, as the White-tailed Deer does, in
some of our most thickly settled areas. At the river crossings, where I
watched the pageant of migration for day after day, some of the animals
would come up to within a rod while I handled my cameras in the open,
with no more cover than knee-high bushes and rocks (figs. 11, 14). Where
else, among the larger creatures of the wilderness, could one find such
a close approximation to a Garden-of-Eden existence? Until they detected
the human scent, they would stare at me at such close quarters with
little more concern than so many barnyard cattle. (For examples, see the
section on _Fall migration_.) Moreover, there were occasions when they
must have gotten my wind and still did not show panic. There is an
obvious deficiency of eyesight or judgment, or both.
To account for their behavior on such occasions, I speculated as
follows. The species has scarcely any predatory enemies save man, the
Wolf, and (perhaps to some extent) the Wolverine. In their normal
experience, any such enemy, if within close range, would be making an
attack. Thus a questionable figure, not becoming evident to them until
they are within close range, and then making no motion to attack, may be
dismissed by them as something different and therefore harmless.
The attitude of unconcern has probably been developed in past
generations through the habit of the Caribou of traveling in vast
throngs. The threat of danger to a given individual in a herd of, say,
100,000 is practically negligible. From time immemorial the river
crossings have represented a particular point of attack on the part of
the natives. Yet when a large band of Caribou come to such a crossing,
they may plunge in with little pause or hesitation. On the other hand,
when a lone doe with her fawn approaches the river bank, she may be very
circumspect, taking time to look carefully upstream and down, and
across, before venturing into the water. I also saw another doe with a
fawn exercise similar precaution, when she was merely the first of a
band of 40 to reach the river’s edge. It is probably concern for her
fawn that renders a doe more circumspect than a buck.
When Fred Schweder, Jr., was endeavoring to intercept a Wolf on
September 6, a fullgrown buck came feeding around a tree within 10 feet
of him. The animal winded Fred without apparently seeing him, and went
back and forth uncertainly for about a minute; finally it moved off very
slowly.
Stefánsson’s account (1913b) of his various adventures with Caribou
near the Arctic coast of Mackenzie indicates a far wilder animal in that
region than the one in Keewatin. It appeared a great deal easier for me,
with no particular effort at caution, to get within photographic range
(say a dozen feet to 50 yards) than for him to approach within rifle
range (several hundred yards).
Even after being fired upon, a single animal or a band in the Nueltin
Lake region will rarely put distance between themselves and a hunter
with all possible dispatch, as an alert White-tailed Deer would, but
will run hither and thither in confusion, with frequent pauses to
display their befuddlement. On October 8 I was a distant and saddened
spectator of a scene of slaughter. A hundred or more Caribou were
resting or feeding quietly on a bare ridge south of Lake Charles. They
were distributed in a narrow formation, 75-100 yards long and from one
to several animals deep. A hunter, approaching close to the south end of
the herd, began firing. With one accord they made toward the north, but
very shortly executed a sharp turn and came back rapidly in the opposite
direction, passing in a narrow, compact column within 30 feet of the
hunter, who continued shooting. In 200 or 300 yards they paused and
allowed the hunter to come up with them and resume shooting. The process
was repeated over a distance of three miles; but the pursuer now and
then circled ahead of the herd instead of following in its tracks. The
final toll: 29 Caribou hit and 22 or 23 secured--virtually a quarter of
the herd destroyed and most of it to be used for dog feed.
It is said that the attachment between a doe and its fawn is such that
when one of them is killed, the hunter can approach within 50 feet of
the surviving doe or within 20 feet of the surviving fawn. A fawn is apt
to linger for days in the vicinity where its dam has been killed.
Charles Schweder has never seen fawns playing with each other or with
their mothers; two or three times he has seen one frisking by
itself--such as jumping about or running in a circle--but never for more
than half a minute at a time. Seriousness of life for a Caribou seems
confirmed from its infancy.
In the hard winter of 1944-45, when the Caribou were tired and hungry,
Charles had the rare experience of driving his dogteam right through
herds on Nueltin Lake; the animals merely moved aside enough to let him
pass. In like vein Joe Chambers spoke of encountering such numbers of
migrating Caribou on or near the “Little Barrens” south of Churchill in
the spring of 1947 that his dogs “went wild” and he had to halt for a
time; the animals came within about 100 yards of his team.
A Caribou bold enough to attack a man is very rarely heard of. Yet that
was the experience of 15-year-old Anoteelik on September 8. Having run
out of ammunition, he undertook to kill a 2-year-old buck with a rock in
a patch of timber. (Possibly the animal had already been wounded with
Anoteelik’s .22 rifle.) When the missile failed of its mark, the buck
made for the boy, who escaped by climbing a tree. Perhaps this is the
first case on record of a man or a boy (especially an Eskimo!) being
treed by a Barren Ground Caribou. Jenness mentions (1922: 150) a case of
an Eskimo being fatally gored by a Caribou on Victoria Island.
Otherwise, under all general circumstances, and in contradistinction to
the Bison, the Muskox, the Moose, and even the White-tailed Deer, the
Caribou may be regarded as quite innocuous to man.
The restlessness so frequently exhibited by Caribou during the summer,
in trotting rapidly over the Barrens or in feeding hurriedly here and
there while constantly forging ahead (in contrast to the placidity of
grazing sheep and cattle), may be attributed in large part to the
relentless scourge of fly pests.
(See also _Relations to man_.)
_References._--Lyon, 1824: 336-337; J. McLean, 1932 (1849): 359;
Simpson, 1843: 207; Armstrong, 1857: 478-479, 481-482; Gilder,
1881: 78; Schwatka, 1885: 85; Pike, 1917 (1892): 51-52, 90;
Whitney, 1896: 242; Hanbury, 1904: 85; Amundsen, 1908, +1+: 103;
Stefánsson, 1913b: 278, and 1921: 251; Hornaday, 1914, +2+:
104; Jenness, 1922: 150; Blanchet, 1925: 34; Birket-Smith, 1929
(1): 106; Seton, 1929, +3+: 105-107; Jacobi, 1931: 219, 220;
Ingstad, 1933: 88, 293, 297; Downes, 1943: 236-237; Porsild,
1943: 389; Harper, 1949: 229-230; Banfield, 1951a: 22.
_Senses_
There is fairly general agreement on the Caribou’s keen sense of smell,
good hearing, and less well-developed vision. But perhaps the
last-mentioned attribute does not so much constitute poor eyesight as
lack of _perception_ or _recognition_. In other words, is it not
possible that the animal is merely deficient in interpreting what it may
see clearly enough?
_References._--R. M. Anderson, 1913a: 8, and 1913b: 504;
Stefánsson, 1913b: 164, 1914: 58, and 1921: 307; Blanchet,
1925: 34, and 1926b: 48; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 106; Seton,
1929, +3+: 104; Murie, 1939: 245; Banfield, 1951a: 22.
_Gaits_
The three principal gaits of the Caribou are walking, trotting, and
loping. The animal seems to be in such a constant hurry that trotting is
fairly habitual. The speed of this gait varies with the urgency of the
occasion; also, according to Stefánsson (1921: 248), with sex and age.
When frightened by an enemy, a Caribou may start off with a loping gait,
but it soon settles down to its space-consuming trot, which keeps it
safely ahead of a Wolf in any brief chase. The initial leap takes all
four feet off the ground at once (_cf._ Buchanan, 1920: 126). According
to Charles Schweder, it is usually a single animal that reacts in this
way; but he has seen as many as six together leaping into the air. Fred
Schweder, Jr., has seen both bucks and does in this performance. My own
observations covered two lone adults (at least one a buck) and a lone
fawn. One of the former turned and took a step or so before making the
leap. The fawn (at Simons’ Lake in October), after allowing a canoe to
approach within 100 feet, started off twice in succession, and each time
with an initial leap into the air before settling down to a trot.
Even a summer fawn is reputed to be able to outdistance a Wolf. Lyon
(1824: 67) found a Caribou too fleet for a greyhound.
In trotting rapidly, a Caribou points its snout pretty straight to the
front, thus tilting the antlers backward a little. This gait, with front
legs stretching well out in front and hind legs thrust backward
correspondingly, gives a very characteristic and distinctive stamp to
the appearance of a fast-trotting Caribou. (Compare the sketches of
trotting Norway Reindeer by Seton, 1929, +3+: pls. 15, 18.) It is
apparently quite different from any normal gait of the White-tailed
Deer. A buck’s well-grown antlers are of such weight as apparently to
force it to hold its head rather rigidly while going at speed. If its
head swayed appreciably, the top-heavy antlers might tend to throw the
animal off balance. In a trotting gait, the hind foot may be planted
just beyond the spot where the front foot had rested. In walking, the
print of the hind foot may be superimposed on that of the other (fig.
20). The white “spats” just above the hoofs show to fine advantage when
the Caribou trots; they fairly twinkle. In a retreating animal the white
rump-patch appears in marked contrast to the dark brown adjacent fur.
In stepping across a shallow rapid in peaceful surroundings, the
rhythmic splashings of the water to the front and the sides of the
alternately descending hoofs make a scene of rare charm. In moving
through deeper water, where the bottom is rough, rocky, and slippery,
the animals may pick their way quite slowly. When alarmed near the
water’s edge from some such cause as detecting a human scent, they may
make great splashing leaps into a river or bay, fairly enveloping
themselves in huge clouds of spray. There can be few more spirited
scenes of animal life in the North.
I have seen several of the animals running with open mouths, even when
they had gone no more than a quarter of a mile from a point of alarm.
Every now and then a Caribou will be seen limping--perhaps from wounds,
perhaps because of a leg sprained in rough terrain.
_References._--Lyon, 1824: 67; Osborn, 1865: 227; Russell, 1895:
50, and 1898: 90; Hanbury, 1904: 131; Nelson, 1916: 460;
Buchanan, 1920: 126; Stefánsson, 1921: 248; Blanchet, 1925: 33,
and 1926b: 47; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 193; Sutton and
Hamilton, 1932: 83; Ingstad, 1933: 87; Murie, 1939: 245; Downes,
1943: 236-237; Harper, 1949: 226, 229; Banfield, 1951a: 21.
_Tracks_
Caribou trails, resulting from the impact of countless hoofs on the same
restricted courses for unnumbered years, have been discussed in the
section on _Ecology_. The placing of the feet has been touched upon in
the section on _Gaits_. The individual tracks remain to be considered.
Each of two foot-prints photographed in mud was approximately 4 inches
(102 mm.) long and 4½ inches (114 mm.) wide. Another such photograph
(fig. 19) shows tracks about 114 by 95 and 102 by 102 mm. The foot
sketched by Seton (1929, +3+: 129) is obviously a front foot, though not
so labeled; the hoofs as drawn are approximately 89 and 93 mm. in
length; the width of the foot is approximately 100 mm.
A track (fig. 20) photographed in 2-inch snow represents a hind
foot-print superimposed upon a front foot-print in a walking gait;
including the marks of the dew claws, it was approximately 6 inches (153
mm.) long and 5 inches (127 mm.) wide. The “square-toed” appearance is
very characteristic.
A front hoof is a little broader as well as longer than a hind hoof
(fig. 24). The extreme and average lengths of the front hoofs in five of
my adult male specimens are 80-92 (85.2); of the hind hoofs, 74-84.5
(79.8). In an adult doe a front hoof measures 77; a hind hoof, 72.
_Reference._--Banfield, 1951a: 19.
_Swimming_
In their extensive and long-continued migrations over a territory
composed in large part of lakes, ponds, and rivers, the Caribou have
almost daily need, from June to October, of surmounting these barriers
by swimming. The low temperature of the water seems to have no deterring
effect on them. Yet it appears that some of the animals may fail in
attempting the passages of wide waters. Charles Schweder spoke of
finding a number of dead Caribou, including bucks as well as fawns, that
had apparently succumbed in crossing a 4-mile-wide lake on the Thlewiaza
River. (Or had they perhaps come to grief in some upstream rapid and
finally been washed ashore on the lake?) Bones on the shore indicated
that this sort of tragedy might be more or less of an annual occurrence.
Perhaps some of the victims had been wounded or were otherwise in poor
condition.
The buoyant, hollow hairs of a Caribou’s coat enable the swimming animal
to keep almost the whole median dorsal line of its body perhaps 2 or 3
inches above the surface (figs. 9, 12). In a doe noticed on August 28
the lowest point on the top of the neck, just in front of the shoulders,
was practically level with the surface, but elsewhere the dorsal line,
from snout to tail, was out of the water. In both doe and fawn the head
is held so high that the lower side of the snout at the tip does not
touch the water; in the older bucks of the autumn, however, the weight
of their antlers presses the head down until the lower side of the snout
is frequently in contact with the water. The swimming position tilts the
antlers backward until the basal portion is practically horizontal
(figs. 9, 12). All ages and sexes, while swimming, hold the tail nearly
erect; but the very tip (perhaps only the tuft of hairs) inclines toward
the rear.
[Illustration: FIG. 19. Caribou tracks in mud; one about 114 by 95
mm.; another, 102 by 102 mm. Between Bear Slough and Eider Pond,
September 3, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 20. Caribou track in 2-inch snow; hind foot
superimposed on track of front foot. Combined track about 153 by
127 mm. Camp Ridge, October 29, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 21. A Caribou doe (specimen No. 1101). Mouth
of Windy River, September 21, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 22. A Caribou buck (specimen No. 1111). Mouth
of Windy River, September 29, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 23. A male Caribou fawn (specimen No. 1095),
in its first, woolly pelage. Mouth of Windy River, September 7,
1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 24. Hoofs of a male Caribou fawn (specimen No.
1072); hind hoofs in the middle. Mouth of Windy River, August 21,
1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 25. Enormous set of old antlers of a Barren
Ground Caribou, with exceptional palmation. (A 10.5-inch length of
a steel rule visible.) Simons’ Lake, October 15, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 26. Rubbing trees: two small black spruces
(_Picea mariana_)--the larger 4 feet high--broken and barked by
Caribou in rubbing velvet off the antlers. Simons’ Lake, October
18, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 27. Pile o’ Rocks, an ancient enclosure
erected as a game lookout on the summit of a hill 1.5 miles NW. of
the mouth of Windy River. June 30, 1947.]
[Illustration: FIG. 28. Adult male Western Woodland Caribou
(_Rangifer caribou sylvestris_) (No. 235361, U.S. Biol. Surveys
Coll.). Stony Mountain, about 27 miles S. of Fort McMurray,
Alberta, October 22, 1920. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.)]
On October 30 tracks indicated that half a dozen Caribou had swum across
Little River near its mouth, breaking through a 10-foot rim of ice on
the near side. When a herd of 2,000 or 3,000 crossed Windy River during
an October night about 1944, as reported by Charles Schweder, they broke
three channels through the thin ice that covered the river.
Once Charles saw a buck cross the 100-yard-wide Nahiline Rapids on
Kasmere River, where it drops about 40 feet in a quarter of a mile; yet
the animal did not seem to be carried far downstream. When about 10
Caribou (mostly big bucks) crossed the Windy River at our camp on June
24, the last two, I noted, were pointing almost upstream in the 6- to
8-mile-per-hour current.
The usual formation in which a small number of Caribou cross a bay or a
quiet stretch of river is a single file, but a larger band is likely
to make the passage in several simultaneous files. The fawns, in
particular, follow as closely as possible behind their mothers.
Although the Caribou are strong and speedy swimmers, the natives are
able, in canoe or kayak, to overtake and spear them. In 1947 several
fawns were speared in Windy Bay by Anoteelik.
Other notes on swimming may be found in the sections dealing with
_Migrations_.
_References._--Back, 1836: 367; Simpson, 1843: 76, 310; Rae,
1850: 27; Richardson, 1852: 290; Schwatka, 1885: 68, 71-72;
W. J. McLean, 1901: 6; R. M. Anderson, 1913b: 503; Blanchet,
1925: 34; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 109-110; Seton, 1929, +3+:
107; Hoare, 1930: 27, 31; Jacobi, 1931: 216; Clarke, 1940:
88-90; Downes, 1943: 256; Harper, 1949: 227, 229, 230; Banfield,
1951a: 21.
_Shaking off moisture and insects_
The long, dense fur of the Caribou holds so much moisture that when the
animal emerges from swimming it endeavors to rid itself of the extra
burden and cooling agency. This is effected to a large extent by a
vigorous shaking of the body, head, and ears and a switching of the
tail. The initial performance, lasting for perhaps a second or two, may
be undertaken while the animal’s lower extremities are still in the
water; and it is likely to be repeated from one to several times as it
moves over the shore and ascends the adjacent ridge. The cloud of spray
flying off is a sight to behold (fig. 9). The action is very much like
that of a dog under similar circumstances. The fur may remain wet for a
least 10 or 15 minutes after emergence from the water. In driving rain
on September 5, I noticed an individual in a band of 20 Caribou shaking
itself and sending the rain drops flying off in spray, just as when one
emerges from the water.
The Caribou also go through a very similar but perhaps still more
strenuous performance for the obvious purpose of shaking off flies
(perhaps primarily the warble flies, _Oedemagena_). On August 20 a buck
passing along a ridge in the Barrens agitated the hide on its body
several times with considerable vigor. A young animal (fawn or yearling)
thus shook itself on August 28 as it approached the far side of Little
River. I got the distinct impression that the hide was shaken
horizontally in the case of moisture, but vertically in the case of
insects; for the present, however, this is best considered as just an
impression, and not a statement of fact. The muscles that agitate the
skin of the sides should be particularly well developed through frequent
practice with water and flies during the warmer part of the year.
At the mouth of Little River, on August 30, I heard one of the Caribou
in a large band “blow its nose,” so to speak, with vigor. The sound
suggested that produced by a horse in vibrating its nostrils by
forcefully expelling air through them. I suspect that the Caribou uses
the same means, in an effort to fend off a nostril fly (_Cephenemyia_)
bent on depositing its larvae.
_Reference._--Harper, 1949: 230.
_Signaling_
Apparently the commonest method employed by the Caribou for indicating
or communicating suspicion or alarm is erecting the stub of a tail to a
vertical position. This brings its white under side into full view, as
the silent flashing of a danger signal to other Caribou. However,
a solitary animal will exhibit signaling behavior as well as one in a
band. The tail remains erect, whether the animal stands to stare
uneasily at a suspicious object or flees from it in alarm. The action is
common to old and young of both sexes. It is so characteristic of a
fleeing animal as to give significance to the expression, “high-tailing
it.” In normal, unalarmed progress the tail extends backward in a
drooping curve (figs. 11, 12).
I was not fortunate enough to detect any flashing of the white throat,
as described by Preble (1902: 42).
Another silent signal is a most peculiar sprawling posture of the hind
legs, attained by thrusting one of them well out to one side and setting
the foot down. The legs are not then symmetrically placed; the one not
moved obviously bears most of the weight of the hind quarters. I managed
to film this stance in a buck standing on a sky-line on August 24
(cover). On September 9 another buck assumed the posture while looking
over our camp from a ridge on the opposite side of Windy River.
According to Charles Schweder, this is an expression of suspicion or
alarm, designed to communicate the same feeling to other Caribou. When
the others notice it, they stop and assume the same pose; it may be
observed in does and even fawns. Charles added that the tail is erected
at the same time--a very natural accompaniment, though I failed to
notice it.
In all the literature on the Barren Ground Caribou, I have found just
one reference to this posture, and that a distinctly fragmentary one:
“While [the Caribou are] thus circling around I have often been amused
at the manner in which they carry one hind leg. A novice in the hunting
field, after having fired a shot in their direction, would think that he
had broken one hind leg of each member of the herd.” (A. J. Stone, 1900:
53.)
The author makes this observation just after mentioning a herd sighted
near the shore of Franklin Bay. A virtually identical posture in the
Norway Reindeer has been sketched by Seton (1929, +3+: 112, pl. 18), who
labels it “surprize.” An analogy to the posture of the Caribou might be
found in a hand thrust out, with fingers spread, by a military scout as
a signal of warning or caution to his fellow scouts. A sprawling leg is
perhaps the nearest approximation to the human signal that a Caribou can
attain.
As noted in the section on _Gaits_, an alarmed Caribou may set off by
taking an initial leap into the air. According to Dugmore, such an act
on the part of the Newfoundland Caribou plays an important role in its
system of communications, not by means of sight or sound, but through
the olfactory sense. He observes (1913: 89-90):
“For hours afterwards _every_ Caribou, on arriving at the place where
the frightened ones had jumped, has started violently, and has on nearly
every occasion turned and run in a manner that showed every indication
of fear, even though my presence was entirely unknown to them. My idea
is that when the animal is suddenly frightened it expels a certain fluid
from the glands in the foot, and that this fluid is a signal of alarm,
a silent and invisible warning, but none the less so positive that none
dare ignore it.”
As for the foot click--a presumptive means of communication (_cf._
Seton, 1929, +3+: 69; Jacobi, 1931: 212-216)--I must confess that I was
always so engrossed with photography whenever the Caribou were close
at hand (up to within a dozen feet) that I had no thought of this
phenomenon and did not detect it.
_References._--Richardson, 1829: 242; A. J. Stone, 1900: 53;
Preble, 1902: 42; Seton, 1929, +3+: 105; Murie, 1939: 245;
Harper, 1949: 230; Banfield, 1951a: 19, 27.
_Food_
The ground lichens (including the various species of _Cladonia_) in the
Windy River area in 1947 did not seem, for the most part, to have a
height of more than 2 or 3 inches. The average length of several local
specimens of _Cladonia_ is approximately 51 mm. This condition was in
considerable contrast to the great spongy masses I had noted in the
Tazin River basin, between Athabaska and Great Slave lakes, in 1914.
I have no means of knowing whether the condition in Keewatin represented
severe cropping by Caribou in past years and subsequent slow recovery,
or whether it is a normal condition. According to Charles Schweder, the
growth depends upon rain, and so varies from year to year. During the
warmer months, from June to September, the local Caribou seemed to me to
be feeding very largely on the higher vegetation, such as willow, dwarf
birch, alder, and sedges. I had no definite evidence of their consuming
lichens during that period. By early October the species of _Cladonia_
seemed to have attained a somewhat fuller growth than they had exhibited
several months previously. Perez-Llano discusses (1944: 29-30) the
utilization by Reindeer of various lichens. Dix has reported (1951) on a
collection of lichens from the Windy River area.
Some miscellaneous observations along Windy and Little rivers follow:
June 16, 20 Caribou feeding apparently on patches of crowberry
(_Empetrum_) and dwarf birch (_Betula glandulosa_) on a ridge; June 29,
a Caribou feeding apparently on dwarf birches; June 30, a buck grazing
in a sedge bog; August 26, several bucks browsing on willow tops
(probably _Salix planifolia_) in a riverside thicket, and some does on
dwarf birch and perhaps tall grass or low willow; August 27, numbers
feeding largely on willow and dwarf birch; August 28 and 30, low alders,
willow, and dwarf birches nibbled off. By early October the leaves of
the three last-mentioned shrubs were no longer available, having dropped
off. During the summer they had seemed to be preferred above the
lichens. Cabot has remarked (1912: 46) on the fondness of _Rangifer
arcticus caboti_ for dwarf birch in Labrador.
Charles Schweder reported as follows on the food of Caribou. In summer
they live chiefly upon leaves, especially those of dwarf birch, and to
some extent upon “grass” (probably largely sedges). Toward the last of
June a Caribou was killed with fat an inch thick on its
haunches--perhaps the effect of recent feeding on the fresh green
vegetation. In August and September the animals also eat mushrooms and
get very fat on them; they seem to be especially fond of a certain red
kind, which Charles has found in their stomachs. The Eskimos’ name for
mushrooms signifies “deer food.” The Caribou feed upon dead “grass”
(perhaps mostly sedges) in the fall, but not in the winter. Charles has
seen them digging through 4 feet of snow to get at the reindeer lichens;
but for the most part their winter feeding in this region is on the tops
of the hills, which remain bare. They also eat tree lichens, especially
in the winter time.
Charles has seen Caribou chew the cud while standing as well as while
lying down. He once saw a buck thus occupied while standing on a hill
for half a day in a breeze that kept the mosquitoes down.
Among the hundreds of Caribou observed at the river crossings and
elsewhere, I do not recall seeing a single one pause to drink.
The _Influence of food supply on distribution_ of the Barren Ground
Caribou has been discussed in a previous section.
_References._--Hearne, 1795: 317; Franklin, 1823: 242;
Richardson, “1825”: 329, and 1829: 243; Godman, 1831, +2+: 284;
Richardson, in Back, 1836: 498, and 1861: 275; Murray, 1858:
202; B. R. Ross, 1861: 439; Kumlien, 1879: 54; J. B. Tyrrell,
1894: 441; Russell, 1898: 226; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 80;
Lydekker, 1898: 49; Elliot, 1902: 276; Stone and Cram, 1904: 53;
Buchanan, 1920: 105-106, 131; Hewitt, 1921: 61; Blanchet, 1925:
33; Seton, 1929, +3+: 107-108; Kitto, 1930: 87; Jacobi, 1931:
223; Harper, 1932: 30; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 84; Weyer,
1932: 39; Hornby, 1934: 105; Murie, 1939: 245; Clarke, 1940:
106-107; G. M. Allen, 1942: 299; Soper, 1942: 143; Downes, 1943:
228; Porsild, 1943: 383; R. M. Anderson, 1948: 15; Manning,
1948: 26-28; Rand, 1948a: 212; Harper, 1949: 230; Banfield,
1951a: 11, 19-20, 28-29; Barnett, 1954: 106.
_Scatology_
The pellets of the Caribou are small, more or less blackish, very
irregular in shape, somewhat compressed, and generally deposited in
little piles, in which the individual components do not stand out very
distinctly, being pressed against each other. They are quite unlike the
oblong, curvilinear, comparatively symmetrical scats of the White-tailed
Deer and the Moose. I did not observe, nor learn of, any particular
seasonal variation in the shape or other characters.
_References._--Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 81; Manning, 1943a:
50.
_Voice_
My impression of the adult Caribou is that it is a comparatively silent
animal during most of the year. At the rutting season, however, when the
bucks do their fighting with a clash of antlers, their voice is heard,
as Fred Schweder, Jr., informed me. It is about as loud as the fawn’s
grunt, but a different sort of sound. Fred has also known a doe to call
when its fawn was shot.
The only vocal sound that I heard from the Caribou was the grunt or
bawling of the fawns on the fall migration, and only during the last
week of August, when the “big movement” was under way. It was uttered
chiefly at the river crossings, apparently as a result of the fawns’
anxiety lest they be separated from their mothers during the slight
uncertainty or confusion of these passages, when a considerable number
of animals were participating. It seemed to be a fair equivalent of a
human child’s crying out: “Don’t leave me behind!” or “Where are you,
mamma?” The grunt is very different from the bleating of a lamb or the
bawling of a domestic calf. It is a surprisingly raucous or guttural,
almost explosive, yet not very loud note, which I rendered at various
times as _gwuf_, _goff_, _gowk_, or _gorr_. Perhaps the last rendering
comes nearest to the actual sound. With one or two exceptions, I did not
identify any individual uttering one of these grunts; but the Schweder
boys, from their intimate knowledge of the species, assured me that this
was the voice of the fawn. In one case the sound came rather definitely
from a fawn that had become somewhat separated from its band in going up
the adjacent ridge after crossing Little River. But for the most part
the grunts seemed to come from swimming animals.
On August 30 another sort of sound--probably not a vocal one--seemed to
come from one of the older animals among a large band crossing Little
River. It was probably produced by a vigorous vibration of the nostrils.
It is further discussed in the section on _Shaking off moisture and
insects_.
It is rather astonishing that Seton, after seeing and studying many
Caribou at close range in Mackenzie, should say no more about their
voice than: “They snort a good deal and grunt a little” (1911: 210). In
his later monographic account he practically ignores the topic, merely
referring to the animals’ “sniffing, snorting” (1929, 3: 105).
_References._--Lyon, 1824: 336; Pike, 1917 (1892): 89; Stone and
Cram, 1904: 53; Seton, 1911: 210, and 1929, +3+: 105; Hornaday,
1914, +2+: 103; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 193; Sutton and
Hamilton, 1932: 84; Murie, 1939: 245; Downes, 1943: 226,
256-257; Harper, 1949: 230; Banfield, 1951a: 22.
_Reproduction_
By the time the rutting season arrived in mid-October, there were
comparatively few Caribou left in the Windy River area. Consequently my
information on the subject was derived mainly from Charles Schweder and
Fred Schweder, Jr. Weeks before the scheduled season, there were certain
manifestations of the sexual urge. For example, on September 5 about 20
Caribou were passing the Bear Slough. The band consisted mostly of does
and fawns, but included several middle-aged bucks (with antlers much
less than the maximum size) and possibly some younger bucks. Twice I saw
one of the animals attempt to cover another, but driving rain and the
compactness of the band prevented me from determining the sex or age of
those involved. During a trip to the Kazan River, lasting from September
17 to October 1, Fred observed a good deal of fighting among the
Caribou--obviously a prelude to the mating season. In Charles’ opinion,
these early contests are not very much in earnest; the real fighting
begins about October 15. On October 8 Charles and Fred referred to
fighting that was going on among a herd of about 100 between Glacier
Pond and Lake Charles. Perhaps less than a quarter of this herd were
older bucks; the rest, younger bucks, does, and fawns.
In former years, while living at the “Old Post” on Red River, Charles
used to go out and watch the fighting on a big open muskeg, about a mile
square, where the Caribou would congregate practically every year at the
rutting season, up to a thousand strong. They would stay for three or
four days, then disappear. Nothing on the same scale had come to his
notice in the vicinity of the Windy River post. At this season, when the
animals are in large herds, the bucks utter their calls, as mentioned in
the section on _Voice_. According to Fred, one sees in October a good
many bucks with an antler broken off in the fighting. The break
generally occurs at about the middle of the antler. On September 29
Charles reported a buck with a broken antler, which he interpreted as
evidence of the beginning of the fighting season. During the rutting
season he once shot a buck with a broken jaw, and another with an eye
gone. The possible inference was that these injuries had been sustained
in fighting. A buck secured on October 16 had apparently been wounded in
fighting; there was pus in its neck, and it was considered unfit for
eating. I heard nothing as to the possible use of hoofs in contests
between bucks, as reported by Jacobi (1931: 233) for the Reindeer.
During the rutting season the herd is likely to be a large one, and to
do little traveling. It is composed of fawns as well as adults. The
bucks pursue the does, and sometimes chase each other. Charles thinks
the young bucks keep away from the does at this time, being unable to
fight the older bucks with larger antlers. Fred reports a proportion of
about 10 bucks to 50 does in these herds--a probable indication of
polygamy. He expressed the opinion that the bucks do not mate until 8-10
years old, and the does not until about four years old. However, he was
basing his estimate of the age on the total number of points on the
antlers--one point for each year; and on this basis the age was probably
much overestimated. Earlier sexual maturity on the part of the doe might
be another indication of polygamy in the species.
At the onset of this season, the bucks neglect their feeding to some
extent; consequently those killed have stomachs only partly filled,
instead of completely filled, as at other times. By mid-October their
fat becomes tinted with reddish, and the whole flesh becomes so rank and
musky that it is disdained not only by human beings but even by the
Wolves. This condition seems to be considerably more pronounced in the
Caribou than in the White-tailed Deer. The hunters forego eating the old
bucks for a period of several weeks. Meanwhile the younger bucks, not
engaged in mating, remain fit to eat. Hearne (1795: 69) reported the
flesh of bucks as still unpalatable as late as December 30.
The rutting season is said to continue through October into November.
The end of the period is uncertain, but it may coincide with the
shedding of the antlers of the old bucks.
_References._--Hearne, 1795: 72, 198-199; Richardson, “1825”:
327-328, 1829: 243, and 1861: 274; Pike, 1917 (1892): 48, 90;
J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 80; Hanbury, 1904: 73; Stone and
Cram, 1904: 52; Blanchet, 1925: 33; Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 51,
56; Seton, 1929, +3+: 124-125; Jacobi, 1931: 232; Sutton and
Hamilton, 1932: 81, 84-86; Weyer, 1932: 40; Ingstad, 1933: 158;
Hornby, 1934: 105; Murie, 1939: 244; Manning, 1943a: 52;
Banfield, 1951a: 10, 26, 31.
_Fawns_
Since the fawning takes place far to the north of the Nueltin Lake
region, practically no local information concerning it was obtained.
Charles Schweder stated that in the spring migration the pregnant does
pass to an undetermined distance north of the upper Kazan River (below
Ennadai Lake). Although the migration at Nueltin Lake continues
throughout June, the rearguard is composed largely of bucks, and the
comparatively few does accompanying them toward the last may be barren.
Fisher (1821: 199) and Parry (1821: 183) report a small fawn of _R.
pearyi_ on Melville Island on June 2. Richardson states (“1825”: 329)
that the young are born in May and June. There is evidently some
geographical and individual variation in the time of birth (_cf._
Jacobi, 1931: 232). Apparently the gestation period in the Caribou
covers approximately eight months or a little less. In the domesticated
Reindeer it is 231 to 242 days, according to Jacobi (1931: 234); in the
White-tailed Deer, 205 to 212 days, according to Seton (1929, +3+: 258).
Fred Schweder, Jr., stated that he had never found more than a single
unborn fawn in any one of the animals he had secured; yet he has seen as
many as four fawns following a doe. Of course there is no proof that
this individual was the actual mother of so many fawns; a stray or
bereaved youngster might well endeavor to attach itself to a foster
mother. On August 28, at Little River, I saw a doe being followed by two
fawns. On September 16 Fred reported seeing three old does without
fawns. Presumably most of the does do not bear young until they are two
years old (_cf._ Jacobi, 1931: 235); thus many yearling does without
family cares should be observed during the summer.
On September 12 Charles Schweder stated that the does would soon be
losing their milk; yet on occasion he has found them with milk as late
as November (_cf._ Jacobi, 1931: 235). On September 21, when he secured
a doe (fig. 21) that was accompanied by a fawn, I asked if he thought
the latter was still nursing. By way of answer, he squeezed a couple of
the doe’s mammae, and some milk exuded. Thus the mammary glands were
still functioning at that date; they appeared well developed. By August
27, at an age of perhaps two and a half months, the fawns were browsing
on their own account, and their teeth were well developed. Fred
Schweder, Jr., then spoke of having seen fawns nursing four times during
that month, the last occasion having been on the 25th. On the 27th I had
the rare privilege of witnessing such a nursery rite across the mouth of
Little River. The wilderness baby was so large that it was obliged to
lower its forequarters very decidedly in order to reach the maternal
font (from a lateral position). This attitude left its hind quarters
thrust high and ludicrously into the air. I did not notice that it
wriggled its tail as a bovine calf might have; but Charles Schweder
spoke of having seen a fawn hold its tail erect while nursing. He also
said that the bigger fawns kneel down with their front legs while so
engaged. In his opinion, when a doe is killed in the autumn, its fawn
does not go and join other Caribou, but lingers near the fatal spot
until a Wolf or some other enemy overcomes it. For this reason it is his
practice to secure the fawn also, if possible, when he takes the mother.
On September 13 a fawn remained by its dead mother, permitting one of
the hunters to approach within 30 feet and to throw rocks at it three
times, finally taking it by that means. After a doe was killed on
September 21, its fawn lingered in the vicinity for a day or two.
_References._--Franklin, 1823: 242; Richardson, “1825”: 329;
John Ross, 1835a: 432; Simpson, 1843: 277, 281, 381; J.
McLean, 1932 (1849): 359; Armstrong, 1857: 477-478; Murray,
1858: 202; Osborn, 1865: 227; Nourse, 1884: 264-265; Pike, 1917
(1892): 204, 209; Dowling, 1893: 107: Russell, 1895: 51; R. M.
Anderson, 1913b: 504-505; Hewitt, 1921: 62; Blanchet, 1926b: 47;
Seton, 1929, +3+: 124-125; Blanchet, 1930: 49, 53;
Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 192, 193; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932:
86; Ingstad, 1933: 161; Clarke, 1940: 88-90; Gavin, 1945: 228;
Banfield, 1951a: 26, 27; Scott, 1951: 179, 180; Barnett, 1954:
96.
_Growth_
During late August and early September the fawns probably averaged about
50 lb. in weight. (For the measurements of two specimens, see the
section on _Measurements_.) Yet they varied so much in size that some
appeared nearly twice as big as others. On September 7 an exceptionally
small fawn was secured (estimated weight, 35 lb.) (fig. 23). Its coat
was soft and woolly, representing an earlier stage than that seen in any
of the other fawns of that season. It was molting into the next pelage,
and its hide was unprime. It must have been born at an unusually late
date. Fred Schweder, Jr., remarked that he sometimes sees this stage in
the growth of fawns when the Caribou come down early from the north
(about the first of August), but it seems remarkable that it should have
been found in a September fawn. The present specimen has actually
smaller measurements than one secured on August 2 at Artillery Lake
(Seton, 1929, +3+: 97). The collector reported that the parent doe
appeared of ordinary size--not a particularly small or young one. The
yearlings noted on the spring migration in May (south of Churchill) and
in June (at Nueltin Lake) appeared roughly half the size of the adults.
Evidently several years are required for the attainment of full growth.
The younger adult bucks, with smaller antlers, are appreciably inferior
in body size to the older bucks, with better developed antlers.
_References._--Seton, 1929, +3+: 97, 98; Banfield, 1951a: 30.
_Antlers_
In late August and early September antlers were already in evidence on
the fawns, at an age of less than three months. They consisted of bony
knobs, covered with skin, and were an inch or two long. I obtained no
information as to when the fawns may shed the velvet or the antlers
themselves. By analogy with the Reindeer (_cf._ Jacobi, 1931: 237), the
fawns might be expected to drop their antlers in late winter.
When the adult Caribou return from the north in August, the antlers of
all are still in the velvet. However, completely hornless does are not
particularly uncommon at this season; in Charles Schweder’s opinion,
some remain permanently in that condition. Hornless does are reported in
various forms of Caribou or Reindeer in both hemispheres (Jacobi, 1931:
48). I saw also a few one-horned does on the autumn migration. In a
single group of three adult does photographed at close range on August
28, one was hornless and another one-horned (fig. 11). A considerable
proportion of my other photographs of Caribou groups at this season show
one or more animals with a single antler or none. The hornless condition
appears to be astonishingly more common in Keewatin than in regions
farther west. Stefánsson, whose field operations were chiefly in
northern Mackenzie and southwestern Franklin, remarks (1913b: 151) on
having found, at any season when Caribou are normally horned, just three
hornless animals among a thousand at whose killing he had been present.
Murie (1935: 20) speaks of having observed only one hornless doe in
Alaska, in September.
By late August the bucks’ antlers have attained nearly their full
growth, though still in the velvet. The largest head of the season was
obtained on August 22. Its measurements were: right antler, in straight
line from base to tip of longest prong, 995; left antler, 980; distance
between main tips of the two antlers, 620; brow tine, from base to upper
tip, 335; to lower tip, 290. For the older bucks, the principal period
for shedding the velvet is September 10 to 20, although Charles Schweder
once observed a buck that had completed the process by September 1, and
Fred secured one in that condition on September 6, 1947. In Alaska old
bucks shed the velvet more or less regularly in September (Murie, 1935:
26). Sick or wounded animals are said to retain the velvet for an
indefinite period. For example, a buck secured on September 29 had some
velvet hanging in shreds from the tips of its antlers, and it was found
to have been shot in the mouth sometime previously. The younger bucks
and the does lose their velvet somewhat later than the older bucks (say
toward the end of September). In a doe of September 21 (fig. 21) the
antlers were covered with velvet and still had soft tips. A young buck
of October 2 was just shedding the velvet.
Charles Schweder spoke of noting as many as 30-33 points on the antlers
of old bucks. (He probably included the brow and the bez tines in this
count.) He also referred to an exceptional set of antlers at Simons’
Lake with about 40 points; he had first noted it about 10 years
previously, and it had doubtless been there for years before that. He
had never been able to secure its equal. When I saw and photographed it
in October (fig. 25), some of the points were broken off, so that an
accurate count was impossible; but there must have been close to 40
originally, even without the brow tines, which were missing. The
palmation was much broader than I have seen in any other Caribou.
The prong projecting backward at the angle of the main beam is by no
means so uncommon in the animals of this region as a Chipewyan hunter
seemed to indicate to Downes (1943: 227-228).
Charles Schweder found a pair of locked antlers about 1940 near Josie’s
Bay. This was the only case of which he had any knowledge. An instance
of locked antlers in _Rangifer pearyi_ is mentioned by Peary (1907: 84).
There is marked variation in the dates of shedding the antlers,
according to sex, age, and physiological condition of the individual.
This has resulted in various conflicting statements in the literature.
In the present region, the old bucks with 25 or more points are said to
shed their antlers about the end of October or in November, at the close
of the rutting season. (Fred Schweder, Jr., encountered a hornless buck
as early as November 7, 1947.) The younger bucks, with 15 to 20 points,
and the does retain their antlers till late May or June of the following
year. A doe of June 3 and another of June 16 were still horned. In
Alaska “the young bucks may carry their old antlers until late in April,
while does carry theirs until the middle of May, some of them until
June” (Murie, 1935: 26).
John Ingebrigtsen reported having seen two or three shallow lakes,
between Churchill and (South?) Knife Lake, whose bottoms were fairly
covered with caribou antlers. They were visible through clear ice. It
appears probable that these lakes, while ice-covered, were favored
resorts of large numbers of Caribou for their midday or nocturnal rests
at a period when they were shedding their antlers (November for the old
bucks, May or June for the does and young bucks).
It is natural that the season at which the new antlers of the Barren
Ground Caribou begin to grow should vary greatly according to sex and
age, just as the shedding of the antlers does; probably also, for the
various forms of _Rangifer_, according to locality (_cf._ Jacobi, 1931:
237). On Southampton Island “the new antlers begin to appear in the
males in March and April” (Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 85). In Alaska
Murie (1935: 24) “has found old bucks late in April with velvet knobs
well begun.” Seton’s account (1929, +3+: 102-103) of the seasonal change
of antlers is not only meager but largely at variance with the
information I assembled in Keewatin. Recently gathered information is
supplied by Banfield (1951a: 17-18).
Measurements of the length of antlers in the velvet (right and left,
respectively) were recorded as follows: adult male, June 18, 420, 440;
adult male (figs. 3, 4), August 17, 1165, 1205; adult female (fig. 21),
September 21, 220, 165.
Scratching or anointing of antlers in the velvet with a hind hoof was
observed in an adult buck on June 16, and in a fawn on August 27.
While there is undoubtedly some correlation between the age of a Caribou
and the number of points on its antlers, I am not aware that such a
correlation has been worked out to a satisfactory degree. The Schweder
brothers judged a Caribou’s years by the number of points on both
antlers, yet freely admitted that they had limited confidence in such a
criterion. Probably they would be nearer the actual facts if they
counted the points on only one antler. The situation is complicated by
the fact (if we are to credit Jacobi, 1931: 238) that bucks in other
forms of _Rangifer_ exhibit the best development of antlers at six to
eight years.
_References._--Hearne, 1795: 198-199; Franklin, 1823: 240-241;
Lyon, 1824: 270; Richardson, “1825”: 327-328, and 1829: 241;
Richardson, in Back, 1836: 499; Armstrong, 1857: 478; Murray,
1858: 199-206; B. R. Ross, 1861: 439; Osborn, 1865: 227; Pike,
1917 (1892): 49; J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128; Dowling, 1893: 107;
Russell, 1895: 51, and 1898: 225; Whitney, 1896: 238-239; J. W.
Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 79-80; A. J. Stone, 1900: 53; W. J.
McLean, 1901: 6; Elliot, 1902: 279-280; Hanbury, 1904: 95, 116,
133; Hornaday, 1904: 138; J. A. Allen, 1908a: 488; R. M.
Anderson, 1913b: 505; Stefánsson, 1913b: 151; Buchanan, 1920:
126; Blanchet, 1925: 33, 1926b: 47-48, and 1930: 49;
Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 50, 89, 239-251; Seton, 1929, +3+:
102-103; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 192; Jacobi, 1931: 237; Sutton
and Hamilton, 1932: 81-86; Ingstad, 1933: 159; Hornby, 1934:
105; Murie, 1935: 20, and 1939: 244; Clarke, 1940: 95; Downes,
1943: 228; Manning, 1943a: 52-53; Harper, 1949: 228; Banfield,
1951a: 17-18; Barnett, 1954: 104.
_Rubbing trees_
Charles Schweder gave the following account. The bucks hasten the
shedding of the velvet in the autumn by rubbing their antlers on various
trees--willow, spruce, or tamarack. The individual may complete the
operation in possibly half a day. It is thought, however, that most of
the velvet comes off at the first tree. The animals usually select a
tree standing by itself rather than one in a thicket. It is usually a
small tree--say 4 feet high and 1 inch in diameter. Perhaps a spruce is
most often selected. Branches are broken and much of the bark is scraped
off in the process. The velvet soon dries up, so that it is little
noticed. Charles did not recall having seen any hanging in a tree.
The numbers of rubbing trees that I noticed at Simons’ Lake in
mid-October indicated that Caribou must have been much more numerous
there during the previous month than in the vicinity of the Windy River
post. These trees were particularly in evidence on the outskirts of a
spruce and tamarack thicket at the head of the lake. They were mostly
tamaracks, with some black spruces. Of the two spruces shown in figure
26, the larger was about 4 feet high. Many of the young trees had been
killed. The branches and the tops had been pretty generally broken off
and were lying on the ground. Most of the damage was fresh, but some of
it dated from previous years.
_Reference._--Hanbury, 1904: 232.
MORPHOLOGY AND TAXONOMY
_Pelage and molt_
When the Caribou migrate northward through the Nueltin Lake region in
May and June, they still retain their winter pelage. It is now worn and
faded, and harsh as well, in contrast to the fresh, dark, soft autumn
coat.
This stage is represented by an adult buck (No. 1046) of June 18. The
general color above is Cream-Buff (capitalized color terms are derived
from Ridgway, 1912), changing gradually to Isabella Color on sides of
head and body; no distinct dark longitudinal stripe on lower sides (such
as appears in summer and autumn pelage); tail Cream-Buff above, the rest
Cartridge Buff; rump-patch varying from Cartridge Buff to Cream-Buff;
tip of snout and chin dirty whitish; small area below nostrils near
Mummy Brown; triangular area behind nostrils Cream-Buff; crown Cartridge
Buff; ears Olive-Buff on outer surface, Cartridge Buff on inner surface;
posterior venter Cartridge Buff; legs Isabella Color in front, remainder
Cream-Buff; hoofs black, bordered above with Cartridge Buff hairs,
forming a band ½-2 inches in width; antler velvet in this and other
specimens Olive-Brown. The marked difference between the dark brownish
and white pelage of the autumn and the Cream-Buff coat of early June
presumably results from wear and fading, without molt. The does and the
yearlings in June appear grayer than the adult bucks.
In another adult male (No. 1033), collected June 3, the darker part of
the pelage is Buffy Brown rather than Cream-Buff.
The molt of the bucks begins in June but takes place chiefly in July,
while the animals are somewhere to the north of the Nueltin Lake region.
On their return in August they have largely completed their summer
transformation in appearance. A buck of August 17 had just a little of
the winter fur still clinging to its lower back; and another on August
20 was in similar condition. At this season the white mane is developed
only on its lower portion (figs. 9, 10, 12), but by the end of September
the white has spread upward over practically the whole neck (fig. 22),
and in some cases over the shoulders.
In an adult male (No. 1144) of October 16, representing the pelage of
the rutting season, the posterior crown is near Tilleul Buff, the
anterior crown somewhat browner; sides of head and upper throat between
Verona Brown and Buffy Brown; area about and between eyes somewhat
darker; triangular area behind nostrils (apex extending halfway to eyes)
and lower chin between Mummy Brown and Warm Blackish Brown; tip of snout
and chin Cartridge Buff; ears pale creamy white on both surfaces; whole
neck and shoulder mantle whitish, washed with Cartridge Buff, and
changing gradually to the brownish of the sides of the head; long hairs
along median ventral line of the neck tipped with Natal Brown; dorsal
area, from shoulders to rump, Prout’s Brown; stripe on lower sides Mummy
Brown, separated from dorsal area by an ill-defined lighter stripe,
mixed with whitish hairs; top of tail slightly paler than back, the rest
white; small rump-patch mostly white; chest Mummy Brown; mid-venter
varying from Deep Olive-Buff anteriorly to Cream-Buff posteriorly;
posterior venter white; forelegs near Bone Brown; hind legs between
Mummy Brown and Olive-Brown, with a pale spot on the inner side of the
heel (this spot noticeable also in doe and fawn); hoofs black, bordered
above with whitish hairs. The hides of this specimen and of two other
adult bucks (No. 1111, September 29, and No. 1132, October 16) were
prime. The dark lateral stripe, which shows quite distinctly in summer
and fall specimens of both sexes (figs. 7, 8, 10, 21, 22), from fawns
(except very young ones) to adults, and which is also a prominent
feature in Old World Reindeer (_cf._ Flerov, 1933), has been largely or
wholly overlooked in some descriptions of _Rangifer a. arcticus_.
The summer molt occurs later in the does than in the bucks. Some of the
former return toward the end of August while still retaining most of the
winter pelage. Others exhibit remnants of it in patches, especially on
the lower back; this was true even of an adult doe (No. 1101) secured as
late as September 21 (fig. 21). Its hide, however, was prime. In this
specimen the crown is near Verona Brown, with varying admixture of
whitish hairs; sides of head Verona Brown; upper throat a little paler;
a poorly defined area behind nostrils, and lower chin, Mummy Brown; tip
of snout and chin Cartridge Buff; ears Drab, varying to Pale Olive-Buff,
especially on inner surface; neck Drab dorsally, mixed with whitish
hairs, the remainder Pale Olive-Buff; dorsal area, from shoulder to
rump, Mars Brown; lateral stripe on lower sides Mars Brown, separated
from dorsal area by a poorly defined but conspicuous area of Light
Cinnamon-Drab; top of tail like back, the rest whitish, washed laterally
with Pale Pinkish Buff; small rump-patch mostly white; chest Mummy
Brown; venter Light Drab, becoming whitish in inguinal region; forelegs
Natal Brown, slightly darker in front; hind legs Natal Brown, with a
pale spot on the inner edge of the heel; hoofs black, bordered above
with whitish “spats” varying from ½ to 1½ inches in width.
Another doe, secured on November 3 but not preserved, was apparently in
long, full winter pelage, with whitish mane and shoulders. The dorsum
generally was grayish; the top of the rump, buffy gray. The white
rump-patch appeared to be more extensive, and to contain longer hairs,
than in the doe of September 21; likewise the white “spats” appeared
much more extensive.
As winter comes on, the fur of the Caribou grows longer and paler gray.
One incipient stage of such a change from the summer coat began to be
noticeable as early as September 13. A buck that came trotting down out
of the Windy Hills on September 27 revealed the splendor of its new
winter coat, with an amazing amount of creamy white, chiefly on the mane
and shoulders. The long mane wears off during the winter, according to
Charles Schweder. It looks best, he added, when the bucks start to fight
in the fall. A yearling or large fawn on October 21 was distinctly
creamy about the neck and shoulders. After describing a winter female
from Wager River, Seton remarks (1929, +3+: 98): “The general impression
is of a creamy white animal, with a gray blanket on its back.”
For the first couple of months of its life the fawn wears a soft and
woolly coat. An example was furnished by a male fawn (No. 1095; fig. 23)
of September 7, which must have been born several weeks later than the
average date. It was actually smaller and less developed than another
male fawn collected on August 20. It was molting into the next pelage
(described in the following paragraph), and its hide was unprime. The
general color is Deep Brownish Drab; this is overlaid with longer hairs
of Pale Olive-Buff on the median dorsal line of the neck, on the venter,
and on part of the legs; a median stripe on the back near Hay’s Brown;
no distinct lateral stripe; ears and posterior crown Cartridge Buff;
forepart of crown Deep Brownish Drab; area above eye Cream-Buff; snout
varying from Deep Brownish Drab above to Pale Gull Gray on sides;
transverse band behind nostrils Dusky Brown; tip of snout whitish; tail
Deep Brownish Drab above, pale creamy on sides, and white beneath;
rump-patch whitish; chin anteriorly whitish, posteriorly Dusky Drab;
throat whitish to Pale Gull Gray; lower part of legs, in front, Buffy
Brown; hoofs black, bordered above with a very narrow (¼-inch) strip of
whitish hairs. A very similar young fawn, taken on August 2, 1907, has
been described by Seton (1929, +3+: 98).
In a male fawn (No. 1072) collected on August 20 the general color is
between Olive-Brown and Natal Brown; a paler longitudinal area
separating the lateral stripe from the dorsal area; ears Clove Brown
externally, pale creamy internally; transverse band behind nostrils
Blackish Brown; tip of snout whitish; sides of head varying from
Cream-Buff above eyes to Cartridge Buff below; tail Bone Brown above,
white below; rump-patch whitish; legs Buffy Brown, darker in front; chin
anteriorly whitish, posteriorly Hair Brown; throat Cartridge Buff;
venter Light Drab; hoofs black, bordered above with a narrow (¼- to
½-inch) strip of whitish hairs.
_References._--Franklin, 1823: 240-241; Richardson, 1829: 242;
B. R. Ross, 1861: 439; Schwatka, 1885: 60-61; J. B. Tyrrell,
1892: 128; Russell, 1898: 91, 226; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898):
79; A. J. Stone, 1900: 52; Hanbury, 1904: 194; MacFarlane, 1905:
682-683; Blanchet, 1925: 33, and 1926b: 47; Seton, 1929, +3+:
98-99, 104; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 193; Jacobi, 1931: 236;
Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 81, 84-86; Murie, 1939: 244; Clarke,
1940: 89, 90; Downes, 1943: 226; Manning, 1943a: 53; Harper,
1949: 228, 229, 230; Banfield, 1951a: 15-17.
_Albinism_
In _Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ this appears to be an exceptionally rare
phenomenon. There are references to albinos by the following authors:
Russell (1895: 51; 1898: 91, 226), Whitney (1896: 237), Boas (1901: 150,
501), MacFarlane (1905: 682-683), Ingstad (1933: 312), and Degerbøl
(1935: 49, 51).
_Foot-glands_
I dissected out the glands from the hind feet of an adult male Caribou
(No. 1046). Seton (1929, +3+: 68) has discussed these structures in the
Woodland Caribou and the Norwegian Reindeer; and Pocock (1911: 960-962,
fig. 138B) and Jacobi (1931: 22, fig. 4), in the Reindeer. Many hairs
had their base in the glands, and there was a fatty secretion on the
hairs adjacent to the glands. I judged that the opening to the exterior
extended in a more or less dorso-anterior direction. One of the
suggested functions of these glands is anointing the velvet covering of
the antlers. I was highly interested, therefore, in seeing an old buck
on June 16 rub the tips of its growing antlers with each hind foot in
turn. Meanwhile it inclined its antlers alternately to one side and
backwards to place one of them at a time within convenient reach of the
hind foot on that side. It seemed to rub its snout as well as the antler
tips. In Charles Schweder’s experience this action was always carried
out with the hind foot, not the forefoot. The latter contains a similar
but smaller gland, according to Jacobi (1931: 22), while Pocock (1911:
960-961) gives contrary testimony. On August 27 I also saw a fawn
rubbing a knob of its skin-covered antlers with a hind foot.
Another function of the foot-glands is suggested by an observation of
Dugmore’s (1913: 89-90), which has been mentioned in the section on
_Signaling_. I could not definitely connect any of the various occasions
of panic that I observed, with scent from the foot-glands of preceding
Caribou that had been frightened.
_References._--Caton, 1881: 265; Pocock, 1911: 960-962; Seton,
1929, +3+: 68, 105; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 84; Harper, 1949:
230.
_Mastology_
Very little seems to have been published on this subject. Jacobi (1931:
24) merely remarks that in the Reindeer the mammae number four, or
occasionally six, but that the supernumerary ones are not functional.
The four rudimentary mammae in a male fawn of _arcticus_ (No. 1072) of
August 20 seemed remarkable for their arrangement in a nearly straight
transverse row--quite different from the more rectangular pattern in a
domestic Cow or in a male Moose, as figured by Seton (1929, +3+: 221).
In an adult doe (No. 1101) of September 21 the anterior pair are about
twice as far apart as the posterior pair; each of the mammae appears no
more than a couple of inches from the one nearest to it. The arrangement
in a two-year-old buck, as shown by Seton (1929, +3+: 106), is
approximately intermediate between linear and rectangular.
_Fat_
A Caribou (probably a buck) secured about the end of June was reported
to have back fat half an inch thick--possibly resulting from the fresh
green spring feed. In August, however, scarcely any fat was to be found
on the animals; perhaps the annual renewal of pelage and the summer
harassment by flies had been deterrents to the storage of fat. In
September and early October the Caribou were in prime condition. On
September 19 there was a fresh piece of back fat half an inch thick; two
days later there was another piece three times as thick. In 1943 (a year
of great mushroom growth) the animals were said to have become
particularly fat. According to Charles Schweder, the doe never becomes
so fat as the buck; one of September 21, still nursing, was just
slightly fat. An adult buck of September 29 was recorded as “somewhat
fat”; two of October 16 were “rather fat” and “quite fat.” Charles has
seen as much as 3 inches of fat on a buck. The strips of back fat
brought into camp on October 8 from several bucks weighed about 5 to 10
lb. apiece. Such fatness evidently prepares the bucks for the strain of
the rutting season, when they neglect their feeding and become very poor
and thin. This loss of fat occurs in about two weeks. The does also lose
some fat at this season, but slowly. In some winters the Caribou remain
fat, but in other winters they do not. In the latter case there may be
deep snow that hinders their feeding. In the spring the Caribou become
fat again, and they are in that condition when they arrive from the
south in May.
The eagerness of the Eskimos and the Indians for fat results in their
selection of the biggest bucks, which generally carry the most fat.
Charles Schweder spoke of the tail of such an animal almost
disappearing, apparently engulfed in fat! Besides its use in the native
diet, the fat goes into the making of “Eskimo candles” (see section on
_Relations to man_).
_References._--Franklin, 1823: 240; Armstrong, 1857: 477-478;
Whitney, 1896: 161; Elliot, 1902: 276; R. M. Anderson, in
Stefánsson, 1913b: 505-506; Stefánsson, 1921: 231-234,
246-247, 252; Jenness, 1922: 48, 101, 248; Birket-Smith, 1929
(1): 48, 90; Seton, 1929, +3+: 113-114; Critchell-Bullock, 1930:
193; Weyer, 1932: 40; Hornby, 1934: 105; Hamilton, 1939: 109;
Downes, 1943: 228; Manning, 1943a: 53.
BODY-MEASUREMENTS AND WEIGHTS
Columns:
A: No.
B: Sex and age
C: Date
D: Length
E: Tail
F: Foot
G: Ear from crown
H: Height at shoulder
I: Shoulder joint to hip joint
J: Circumference of neck at base
K: Circumference of body behind shoulders
L: Length of front hoof
M: Length of hind hoof
N: Estimated weight (lbs.)
======================================================================
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1033 ♂ ad Jun 3 1820 160 516 130 1000 1000 81.5 78 140
1046 ♂ ad Jun 18 1880 190 546 137 1029 92 84.5
1065 ♂ ad Aug 17 1750 146 555 120 1080 1010 1185* 80 74 200
1111 ♂ ad Sep 29 1710 155 532 129 1020 740 82.5 78 200
1132 ♂ ad Oct 16 1710 120 530 120 1002 975 200
1144 ♂ ad Oct 16 117 545 120 1110 90 84.5 200
Average of ♂ ♂ ad 1774 148 537 126 1080 995 740 1093 85.2 79.8 188
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1101 ♀ ad Sep 21 1590 113 490 134 870 860 490 77 72 160
1095 ♂ juv Sep 7 960 90 360 85 620 525 290 610 49 45 35
1072 ♂ juv Aug 20 1150 125 423 89 750 645 60.5 55.5 50
[Footnote *: _After skinning._]
======================================================================
MEASUREMENTS OF SKULLS
Columns:
A: No.
B: Sex and age
C: Date
D: Condylobasal length*
E: Zygomatic width
F: Interorbital width
G: Length of nasal
H: Maxillary tooth-row
I: Mandibular tooth-row
======================================================================
A B C D E F G H I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1065 ♂ ad Aug 17 373 130 140 125 94 101
1144 ♂ ad Oct 16 356 135 140 122 82
1111 ♂ ad Sep 29 359 134 138 112 82
1046 ♂ ad Jun 18 374 131 135 121 97 104
1132 ♂ ad Oct 16 350 136 138 117 83 91
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Average of ♂ ♂ ad 362.4 133.2 138.2 119.4 87.6 98.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1101 ♀ ad Sep 21 324 117 121 101 85
1036 ♀ ad Sep -- 118 120 83.5 79 83.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1072 ♂ juv Aug 20 215 92 85 54
1095 ♂ juv Sep 7 189 85 77 42
[Footnote *: _Tip of premaxillary to posterior plane of condyles._]
======================================================================
MEASUREMENTS OF ANTLERS
Columns:
A: No.
B: Sex and age
C: Date
D: Total length, right antler
E: Total length, left antler
F: Brow antler, length
G: Brow antler, width
H: Greatest spread of beams (outside measurement)
I: Total number of points
==============================================================
A B C D E F G H I
--------------------------------------------------------------
1065 ♂ ad Aug 17 1165* 1205* 875*
1144 ♂ ad Oct 16 1200 1180 290 232 668 32
1111 ♂ ad Sep 29 1080 1080 279 235 655 32
1132 ♂ ad Oct 16 960 903 225 197 677 30
--------------------------------------------------------------
Average of last 3 1080 1054.3 264.7 221.3 666.7 31.3
[Footnote *: _Antlers in velvet. Unless otherwise specified,
lengths of antlers were measured along the curve._]
==============================================================
MEASUREMENTS OF TESTES
Seasonal change in the size of testes in adult males is indicated by the
following data: June 3, 30×18 mm.; June 18, 51×28.5; August 17, 50×35;
September 29, 61×38; October 16, 60×40. Two male fawns: August 20, 18×7;
September 7, 15×8.5.
_References on measurements._--J. C. Ross, in John Ross,
1835b: xviii; J. A. Allen, 1910: 8; Seton, 1929, +3+: 97;
Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 87; Flerov, 1934: 240; Murie, 1935:
75; Soper, 1944: 248; Banfield, 1951a: 30.
_References on weight._--Parry, 1824: 305; Richardson, 1829:
241, and 1852: 290; Armstrong, 1857: 475, 498; Baird, 1857: 635;
M’Clintock, 1860?: 184; Osborn, 1865: 227; Schwatka, 1885:
84-85; Collinson, 1889: 153; J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128; Whitney,
1896: 237; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908 (1898): 79; Jones, 1899: 329;
Hornaday, 1904: 138, and 1914, +2+: 104; J. A. Allen, 1910: 8;
Seton, 1929, +3+: 97-98; Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 55; Hornby,
1934: 105; Banfield, 1951a: 15, 30.
_Geographical variation_
The comparatively few specimens available indicate that different
populations on the mainland, between Hudson Bay and the Mackenzie River,
vary in size. Final judgment on the significance of this variation must
await the accumulation of more and better material. The lack of
topotypical material from the Fort Enterprise area, Mackenzie, is a
particular handicap.
The extreme and average body measurements of five adult males
from the Windy River area (see accompanying table) may be
compared with those of three adult males, taken by R. M.
Anderson, 1910 and 1912, at Langton and Darnley Bays (Nos.
34431, 34432, and 34435, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist.): length, 1980-2095
(2052); tail (two specimens), 152-165 (158.5); height at
shoulder, 1066-1167 (1117); shoulder to hip (one specimen), 964.
The average length of these specimens exceeds that of the Windy
River specimens by 278 mm.; the average height at the shoulder,
by 37 mm. The length of an adult male from Artillery Lake (J. A.
Allen, 1910: 8) exceeds the Windy River average by 156 mm., and
its shoulder height (Seton, 1929, +3+: 97), by 10 mm., but the
length of its hind foot, as recorded, is 17 mm. less than the
Windy River average.
The measurements of four adult females, taken by Anderson, 1910
and 1911, at Langton Bay, Horton River, and Great Bear Lake
(Nos. 34429, 34434, 34441, 34442, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist.) are:
length, 1625-1815 (1736); height at shoulder, 825-1066 (968);
shoulder to hip (one specimen), 863. The average length of these
specimens exceeds that of a Windy River adult female by 146 mm.;
the average height at the shoulder, by 98 mm. The length of an
adult female from Aylmer Lake (J. A. Allen, 1910: 8) exceeds
that of the Windy River specimen by 112 mm.; the length of its
hind foot, by 18 mm.; and the height at the shoulder (Seton,
1929, +3+: 97), by 43 mm.
Thus there appears to be a fairly uniform tendency toward greater body
measurements from southwestern Keewatin to northwestern Mackenzie. The
weight of Seton’s male from Artillery Lake (270¾ lb.) considerably
exceeds the maximum (200 lb.) that I estimated for any of the Windy
River males. Maximum measurements are furnished by winter specimens from
the region of Langton and Darnley Bays.
The skulls of two adult males from Horton River and Artillery
Lake (Nos. 34502 and 29031, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist.) measure,
respectively: condylobasal length (tip of premaxillary to
posterior plane of condyles), 381, 371; zygomatic width, 138,
approximately 142; interorbital width, 143, 144; nasal, 126,
112; maxillary tooth-row, 87, 84; mandibular tooth-row (of No.
29031), 93. The rostral profile of the former is slightly
convex; of the latter nearly flat. Comparison with Windy River
adult males (see accompanying table) indicates a longer and a
broader skull in the more northwesterly specimens. The
measurements of the skulls of Southampton Island specimens as
presented by Sutton and Hamilton (1932: 87), suggest a somewhat
larger animal than the mainland form.
The left antler of an adult male from Horton River (No. 34502,
Am. Mus. Nat. Hist.) measures: length, 1248; length of brow
tine, 345; width of brow tine, 360; total points (both antlers),
16 + 14 = 30. The corresponding measurements of two sets of
antlers from Fort Reliance in the American Museum of Natural
History are: No. 121471 (left), 1242-285-108; (right),
1244-412-294; total points, 16 + 23 = 39; No. 121473 (left),
1312-360-290 (broken); (right), 1230 (approx.), brow tine a
spike, not palmated; total points, approximately 19 + 13 = 32.
The Fort Reliance specimens were selected by George G. Goodwin
from a large number of old antlers lying about, and they are
naturally above the average in size. The antlers of adult males
from the Windy River area (see accompanying table) measure
distinctly less than those just mentioned.
Anderson (1913b: 505) and Stefánsson (1913a: 106, and 1913b: 241,
276-277) have called attention to certain rather well-defined
differences between the Caribou on both sides of Coronation Gulf and
those elsewhere in northern Mackenzie. It may be assumed that the summer
home of the former type is on Victoria Island. Many of these animals in
former years crossed over to the mainland in the autumn after the
freezing of Dolphin and Union Strait, Coronation Gulf, and Dease Strait
made such a migration possible; and they recrossed to the island in the
spring. During recent years this migration has greatly dwindled
(Blanchet, 1930: 50; Birket-Smith, 1933: 93; Clarke, 1940: 98; Gavin,
1945: 227; Godsell, 1937: 288; Banfield, 1949: 481); consequently the
Victoria Island population now seems to be largely confined to that
island throughout the year. In the American Museum of Natural History I
have examined several of Anderson’s specimens of 1911-1912 that are
obviously of this form, and I should scarcely hesitate to give them
nomenclatural recognition except for the fact that there has obviously
been some confusion in the labeling of the specimens (after they reached
the museum). Needless to say, a specimen selected as a type should bear
unquestionable data.
During the winter there is some interchange of populations between Banks
and Victoria islands across the frozen Prince of Wales Strait
(Armstrong, 1857: 297, 336). The description that Armstrong gives (1857:
478), based ostensibly on Banks Island specimens, indicates that the
animals of that island are very close to, if not identical with,
_Rangifer pearyi_ of the more northerly Arctic islands. Yet there is no
known interchange of populations across the frozen McClure Strait or
other wide sea channels in approximately latitude 74° N.
The Caribou of Boothia Peninsula and Somerset and Prince of Wales
islands are said to be a small form (Wright, 1944: 195).
The Caribou of the Dubawnt River region, as far as may be judged from
J. B. Tyrrell’s photographs (1897: pl. 1; Seton, 1929, +3+: pl. 22), are
indistinguishable from those of the Nueltin Lake region.
The Southampton Island antlers figured by Sutton and Hamilton (1932:
pl. 8) are so strikingly different from all but one (No. 1132) of those
that I noticed in southwestern Keewatin that I should be much inclined
to regard them as representing a separate subspecies, provided they are
typical of that island. In most of the bucks of the Windy River area the
beams are deeply and fairly uniformly bowed, although there is a strong
tendency for approximately the basal third to be nearly straight, with a
pronounced forward bend just above it (_cf._ figs. 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 22,
25). The bend at this point in the Southampton antlers is extremely
slight by comparison. In mainland specimens the beam in cross-section
is generally more or less round, with rarely any tendency toward
flattening, such as may be seen in the Southampton set and in my No.
1132. Furthermore, I cannot recall in the mainland animals a single such
pronounced zigzag effect as may be seen in the Southampton antlers. In
extremely few of them does the bez tine originate at such a distance
(apparently 8 inches or so) above the base, as in Sutton and Hamilton’s
figure. The lack of palmation in the bez tines of their specimen is
noteworthy.
There is a distinct likelihood that the isolated herd of Coats Island
(Wright, 1944: 188; Banfield, 1949: 481), and also that of Salisbury
Island in Hudson Strait (Grant, 1903: 189; Tweedsmuir, 1951: 37), may be
distinct from the populations on the nearest large land bodies.
I have briefly examined a dozen or more heads (skulls with antlers) of
the Labrador Barren Ground Caribou (_R. a. caboti_ G. M. Allen) in the
United States National Museum; they were collected by L. M. Turner in
the 1880’s. Some of these antlers appear longer than any I saw in
Keewatin. Furthermore, the tips of the bez tines in these specimens
seem, on the average, more strongly incurved than in _R. a. arcticus_.
For the purpose of comparing the Barren Ground Caribou with the Western
Woodland Caribou, _Rangifer caribou sylvestris_ (Richardson), the
following notes are offered on an adult male of the latter form in the
United States Biological Surveys Collection (No. 235361; fig. 28). It
was secured by a Cree Indian on Stony Mountain, about 27 miles south of
Fort McMurray, Alberta, on October 21, 1920, and it was measured and
prepared by myself. The general dorsal color is near Prout’s Brown,
overlaid more or less with longer whitish hairs; outer surface of ears
near Prout’s Brown, with an admixture of grayish white hairs; tip of
snout, between nostrils and upper lip, Cartridge Buff; this area of more
restricted extent than the similar patch in _arcticus_; neck creamy;
longest hairs of throat fringe about 20 mm. (longer than in _arcticus_);
no appreciable dark longitudinal stripe on lower sides, but an
ill-defined lighter patch on the side behind the shoulder; rump-patch
apparently less extensive than in _R. a. arcticus_; venter near Buffy
Brown, posteriorly creamy; creamy white “spats” above hoofs ¼ to 1½
inches wide, not extending up hind leg as indicated by Seton (1929, +3+:
pl. 10). Length, 2025; tail, 225; foot, 625; front hoof, 109; hind hoof,
101; estimated weight, 300 lb. The Western Woodland Caribou is thus a
distinctly larger animal than _R. a. arcticus_, with a noteworthy
difference in the virtual absence of a light lateral stripe, setting off
a darker stripe below it. The specific distinctness between the two
animals seems abundantly clear.
_References to general descriptions (including geographical
variation)._--Richardson, 1829: 239, 241-242; Armstrong, 1857:
478; Baird, 1857: 635; Caton, 1881: 105; Lydekker, 1898: 47-48,
1901: 38-40, and 1915: 254; Elliot, 1901: 37, and 1902: 281-282,
286-287; Preble, 1902: 42-43; Stone and Cram, 1904: 52; J. A.
Allen, 1908a: 488; Millais, 1915: 261; Buchanan, 1920:
125-126; Anthony, 1928: 530-531; Seton, 1929, +3+: 98-99;
Jacobi, 1931: 78-80; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: 88; Degerbøl,
1935: 48-51; R. M. Anderson, 1937: 103; Hamilton, 1939: 109;
Murie, 1939: 239; G. M. Allen, 1942: 297-298; Wright, 1944: 195;
Rand, 1948a: 211-212; Banfield, 1951a: 15-17; Mochi and Carter,
1953: text to pl. 9.
_References to illustrations._--Parry, 1824: pl. facing p. 508;
Richardson, 1829: 240; Caton, 1881: 207; Pike, 1917 (1892): pl.
facing p. 89; J. B. Tyrrell, 1897: pl. 1; J. W. Tyrrell, 1908
(1898): pls. facing pp. 80, 81; Grant, 1903: 6th and 7th pls.
following p. 196; J. A. Allen, 1908a: 500-503; Seton, 1911:
254, 256, 262, and pls. facing pp. 222, 224, 226, 228, 234;
Buchanan, 1920: pl. facing p. 132; Hewitt, 1921: pls. 3, 5;
Blanchet, 1926b: 47; Seton, 1929, +3+: pls. 17, 21, 22, 23;
Blanchet, 1930: 50; Sutton and Hamilton, 1932: pl. 8, fig. 4;
Ingstad, 1933: pl. facing p. 178; Clarke, 1940: frontisp., 85,
87, 89; Harper, 1949: 224, 229; Banfield, 1951a: figs. 1, 2,
12-16, 20, 21, 23; Anonymous, 1952: 261, 263, 266, 267; Mochi
and Carter, 1953: pl. 9; Barnett, 1954: 90-91, 103-105.
LITERATURE CITED
ALCOCK, F. J.
1936. Geology of Lake Athabaska region, Saskatchewan. _Canada Dept.
Mines, Geol. Survey Mem._ 196: [1]+41, 8 pl., 6 maps.
ALLEN, GLOVER M.
1942. Extinct and vanishing mammals of the Western Hemisphere with the
marine species of all the oceans. [New York]: xv + 620, 1 pl., 24 fig.
ALLEN, J. A.
1908a. The Peary caribou (_Rangifer pearyi_ Allen). _Bull. Am. Mus.
Nat. Hist._ +24+ (22): 487-504, 12 fig.
1908b. Note on the type locality of _Rangifer arctica_ (Richardson).
_Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist._ +24+ (29): 583-584.
1910. Mammals from the Athabaska-Mackenzie region of Canada. _Bull. Am.
Mus. Nat. Hist._ +28+ (2): 7-11.
AMUNDSEN, ROALD.
1908. The North West Passage. London: +1+: xiii + 335, 23 pl., 45 fig.,
2 maps; +2+: ix + 397, 22 pl., 49 fig., 1 map.
ANDERSON, JAMES.
1856. Letter from Chief Factor James Anderson, to Sir George Simpson,
F.R.G.S., Governor in Chief of Rupert Land. _Jour. Royal Geog. Soc._
+26+: 18-25.
1857. Extracts from Chief-Factor James Anderson’s Arctic journal.
(Communicated by John Richardson.) _Jour. Royal Geog. Soc._ +27+:
321-328.
ANDERSON, RUDOLPH MARTIN.
1913a. Arctic game notes. _Am. Mus. Jour._ +13+ (1): 4-21, 21 fig.
1913b. Report on the natural history collections of the expedition.
Mammals. In: Vilhjálmur Stefánsson, My life with the Eskimo: 436-527,
4 pl. New York.
1924. The present status and future prospects of the larger mammals of
Canada. _Scottish Geog. Mag._ +40+ (Nov.): 321-331.
1934a. Mammals of the Eastern Arctic and Hudson Bay. In: Canada’s
Eastern Arctic: 67-108, 8 fig., 1 map. Dept. Interior, Ottawa.
1934b. The distribution, abundance, and economic importance of the
game and fur-bearing mammals of western North America. _Proc. Fifth
Pacific Sci. Congress_: 4055-4075, 17 maps.
1937. Mammals and birds of the western Arctic district, Northwest
Territories, Canada. In: Canada’s western northland: 97-122, 4 fig.,
1 map.
1938. The present status and distribution of the big game mammals of
Canada. _Trans. Third No. Am. Wildlife Conference_: 390-406.
1947. Catalogue of Canadian Recent mammals. _Nat. Mus. Canada Bull._
102: v + 238, 1 map, “1946.”
1948. A survey of Canadian mammals of the north. _Prov. Quebec Assoc.
Protection Fish and Game Ann. Rept. 1948_: 9-16.
ANONYMOUS.
1869. Biography of Robert Kennicott. _Trans. Chicago Acad. Sci._ +1+:
133-226, 1 pl. (Contains extracts from his journals).
1952. Canada counts its caribou. _Nat. Geog. Mag._ +102+ (2): 261-268,
12 fig., 1 map.
ANTHONY, H. E.
1928. Field book of North American mammals. New York--London: xxv + 625,
48 pl., 114 fig., 37 maps.
ARMSTRONG, ALEX.
1857. A personal narrative of the discovery of the North-West Passage.
. . . London: xxiv + 616, 1 pl., 1 map.
AUDUBON, JOHN JAMES, and JOHN BACHMAN.
1854. The quadrupeds of North America. Vol. 3. New York: v + 348, 55 pl.
BACK, GEORGE.
1836. Narrative of the Arctic Land Expedition to the mouth of the Great
Fish River, and along the shores of the Arctic Ocean, in the years 1833,
1834, and 1835. London: xi + 663, 16 pl., 2 maps. (Also a Philadelphia
ed., 1836, with 456 pp.)
BAILEY, ALFRED M., and RUSSELL W. HENDEE.
1926. Notes on the mammals of northwestern Alaska. _Jour. Mammalogy_ +7+
(1): 9-28, 3 pl.
BAIRD, SPENCER F.
1857. General report upon the zoology of the several Pacific railroad
routes. Part 1. Mammals. _Reports of Explorations and Surveys, . . .
from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean_ +8+: xxi-xlviii, 1-757,
44 pl., 35 fig.
BANFIELD, A. W. F.
1949. The present status of North American caribou. _Trans. Fourteenth
No. Am. Wildlife Conference 1949_: 477-491, 2 maps.
1950. Caribou investigation. _Canadian Geog. Jour._ +40+ (1): 48-51,
5 fig.
1951a. The barren-ground caribou. _Canada Dept. Resources and
Development_, Ottawa: vi + 56, 24 fig., 8 maps (Mimeographed.)
1951b. Notes on the mammals of the Mackenzie District, Northwest
Territories. _Arctic_ +4+ (2): 112-121, 4 fig., 1 map.
1952. Report on caribou investigations in the Canadian Arctic, 1948-50.
_Polar Record_ +6+ (44): 532-534. (Apparently a summary of Banfield,
1951a.)
1954. Preliminary investigation of the barren ground caribou. Part 1.
Former and present distribution, migrations, and status. Part 2. Life
history, ecology, and utilization. _Canada Dept. Northern Affairs and
National Resources, National Parks Branch, Canadian Wildlife Service,
Wildlife Management Bull._, ser. 1, 10A: [2]+79, 5 fig., 12 maps; 10B:
[2]+112, 30 fig., 1 map. (Not seen until after the present report had
gone to press.)
BARNETT, LINCOLN.
1954. The world we live in: part 10. The arctic barrens. _Life_ +36+
(23): 90-115, 33 fig., 1 map.
BEDDARD, FRANK EVERS.
1902. The Cambridge natural history. Vol. 10. Mammalia. London: xii +
605, 285 fig.
BELL, J. MACINTOSH.
1901a. Report on the topography and geology of Great Bear Lake and of
a chain of lakes and streams thence to Great Slave Lake. _Ann. Rept.
Geol. Survey Canada_ +12+ (n.s.) 1899, report C: 1-28.
1901b. Explorations in the Great Bear Lake region. _Geog. Jour._ +18+
(3): 249-258, 6 fig.
BELL, ROBERT.
1881. Report on Hudson’s Bay and some of the lakes and rivers lying to
the west of it. _Geol. and Nat. Hist. Survey Canada Rept. Progress
1879-80_: [6], 1C-113C, 8 pl., 1 map.
BERGMAN, ARVID M.
1917. Om renens oestrider. _Entom. Tidskrift_ +38+: 1-32, 113-146, 26
pl.
BIRKET-SMITH, KAJ.
1929. The Caribou Eskimos. Material and social life and their cultural
position. 1. Descriptive part. _Rept. Fifth Thule Exped. 1921-24_, +5+:
1-306+[4], 116 fig., 1 map.
1933. Geographical notes on the Barren Grounds. _Rept. Fifth Thule
Exped. 1921-24_, +1+ (4): 1-128+[4], 43 fig., 4 maps.
1936. The Eskimos. New York: xiv + 250, 32 pl., 1 map.
BLANCHET, G. H.
1925. An exploration into the northern plains north and east of Great
Slave Lake, including the source of the Coppermine River. _Canadian
Field-Naturalist_ +38+ (10): 183-187, “1924”; +39+ (1): 12-16; (2):
30-34; (3): 52-54; 8 fig., 1925.
1926a. New light on forgotten trails in the far Northwest. _Canadian
Field-Naturalist_ +40+ (4): 69-75; (5): 96-99; 5 fig., 2 maps.
1926b. Great Slave Lake area, Northwest Territories. _Dept. Interior,
North West Territories and Yukon Branch_, Ottawa: 3-58, 25 fig., 1 map.
1927. Crossing a great divide. _Bull. Geog. Soc. Philadelphia_ +25+:
141-153, 4 fig., 1 map.
1930. Keewatin and northeastern Mackenzie. _Dept. Interior, North West
Territories and Yukon Branch_, Ottawa: 1-78, 52 fig., 6 charts.
BOAS, FRANZ.
1888. The central Eskimo. _Sixth Ann. Rept. Bur. Ethnology 1884-’85_:
399-675, 6 pl., 152 fig., 7 maps.
1901, 1907. The Eskimo of Baffin Land and Hudson Bay. _Bull. Am. Mus.
Nat. Hist._ +15+, pt. 1: vi-xviii, 1-370, 1901; pt. 2: 371-570, 1907; 10
pl., 270 fig.
BOMPAS, WILLIAM CARPENTER.
1888. Diocese of Mackenzie River. London: [1]+108, 1 map.
BUCHANAN, ANGUS.
1920. Wild life in Canada. Toronto: ix-xx, 1-264, 16 pl., 1 map.
CABOT, WILLIAM B.
1912. In northern Labrador. Boston: xii + 292, 48 pl., 2 maps.
CAMERON, AGNES DEANS.
1912. The new North . . . New York and London: xix + 398, 1 pl., 114
fig., 1 map.
CAMSELL, CHARLES.
1916. An exploration of the Tazin and Taltson Rivers, North West
Territories. _Geol. Survey_ [Canada] _Mem._ 84, _Geol. Ser._ 69: iii +
124, 18 pl., 1 map.
CAMSELL, CHARLES, AND WYATT MALCOLM.
1919. The Mackenzie River basin. _Canada Dept. Mines, Geol. Survey Mem._
108: ii + 154, 14 pl., 2 maps.
CATON, JOHN DEAN.
1881. The antelope and deer of America. Revised ed. Boston: v-xvi,
17-426, 1 pl., 76 fig. (Orig. ed. in 1877.)
CHAMBERS, ERNEST J.
1914. The unexploited West. Dept. Interior, Ottawa: xv + 361+viii+xi, 52
fig., 8 maps.
CHRISTIAN, EDGAR.
1937. Unflinching, a diary of tragic adventure. London: xi + 156, 8 pl.,
1 map.
CLARKE, C. H. D.
1940. A biological investigation of the Thelon Game Sanctuary. _Nat.
Mus. Canada Bull._ 96: iv + 135, 4 pl., 21 fig., 4 maps.
COLLINSON, RICHARD.
1889. Journal of H.M.S. Enterprise, on the expedition in search of Sir
John Franklin’s ships by Behring Strait. 1850-55. London: xii + 531,
2 pl., 6 maps.
CRAIG, J. D.
1927. Canadian Arctic Expedition 1923. In: Canada’s Arctic islands:
13-28, 9 fig. Dept. Interior, Ottawa.
CRITCHELL-BULLOCK, JAMES C.
1930-1931. An expedition to sub-Arctic Canada, 1924-25. _Canadian
Field-Naturalist_ +44+ (3): 53-59; (4): 81-87; (5): 111-117; (6):
140-145; (7): 156-162; (8): 187-196; (9): 207-213, 1930; +45+ (1):
11-18; (2): 31-35; 1 pl., 1931.
DEGERBØL, MAGNUS.
1935. Mammals. Part 1. Systematic notes. _Rept. Fifth Thule Exped.
1921-24_, +2+ (4-5): 1-67, 12 fig.
DIX, W. L.
1951. Lichens and hepatics of the Nueltin Lake Expedition, Keewatin.
1947. _Bryologist_ +53+ (4): 283-288, 3 fig., “December, 1950.”
DOBBS, ARTHUR.
1744. An account of the countries adjoining to Hudson’s Bay. . . .
London: ii + 211, 1 map.
DOUGLAS, GEORGE M.
1914. Lands forlorn; a story of an expedition to Hearne’s Coppermine
River. New York: xv + 285, 1 pl., 185 fig., 1 map.
DOWLING, D. B.
1893. Narrative of a journey in 1890, from Great Slave Lake to Beechy
Lake, on the Great Fish River. From the journal of Mr. James
McKinley. . . . _Ottawa Naturalist_ +7+ (6): 85-92; (7): 101-114.
DOWNES, P. G.
1943. Sleeping Island. New York: vii + 296, 24 pl.
DUGMORE, A. RADCLYFFE.
1913. The romance of the Newfoundland caribou, an intimate account of
the life of the reindeer of North America. Philadelphia and London: viii
+ 192, 64 pl., 39 fig., 2 maps.
DUTILLY, ARTHÈME.
1949. A bibliography of reindeer, caribou, and musk-ox. Dept. of the
Army, Office of Quartermaster General, Military Planning Division,
Research and Development Branch, Environmental Protection Section, Rept.
129, Washington: x + 462. (Mimeographed.)
DYAR, HARRISON G.
1919. The mosquitoes collected by the Canadian Arctic Expedition,
1913-18. (Diptera, Culicidae.) _Rept. Canadian Arctic Exped. 1913-18_,
+3+, part C: 31-33, 2 fig.
EKBLAW, W. ELMER.
1926. The American Arctic Archipelago. In: Victor E. Shelford (editor),
Naturalist’s guide to the Americas: 98-102. Baltimore.
ELLIOT, DANIEL GIRAUD.
1901. A synopsis of the mammals of North America and the adjacent seas.
_Field Columbian Mus. Zool. Ser._ +2+: xv + 471, 49 pl., 94 fig.
1902. The caribou. In: Theodore Roosevelt, T. S. Van Dyke, D. G. Elliot,
and A. J. Stone, The deer family: 259-287, 8 pl.
1905. A check list of mammals of the North American continent, the West
Indies, and the neighboring seas. _Field Columbian Mus. Publ._ 105,
_Zool. Ser._ +6+: v + 761, 1 pl.
FISHER, ALEXANDER.
1821. A journal of a voyage of discovery to the Arctic regions, in His
Majesty’s ships Hecla and Griper, in the years 1819 and 1820. Ed. 2.
London: iii-xi, 1-320, 18 fig., 1 map.
FLEROV, CONSTANTINE C.
1933. Review of the Palaearctic reindeer or caribou. _Jour. Mammalogy_
+14+ (4): 328-338, 9 fig., 1 map.
1934. A new palaeolithic reindeer from Siberia. _Jour. Mammalogy_ +15+
(3): 239-240.
FRANKLIN, JOHN.
1823. Narrative of a journey to the shores of the Polar Sea, in the
years 1819, 20, 21, and 22. Zoological appendix: quadrupeds and birds,
by Joseph Sabine, pp. 647-703; notices of the fishes, and botanical
appendix, by John Richardson, pp. 705-783. London: xv + 783 + [1], 30
pl., 4 maps.
FRANKLIN, JOHN, and JOHN RICHARDSON.
1828. Narrative of a second expedition to the shores of the Polar Sea,
in the years 1825, 1826, and 1827, by John Franklin. . . . Including an
account of the progress of a detachment to the eastward, by John
Richardson. . . . London: 320 + clvii, 31 pl., 6 maps.
FREUCHEN, PETER.
1935. Mammals. Part 2. Field notes and biological observations. _Rept.
Fifth Thule Exped. 1921-24_, +2+ (4-5): 68-278, 1 map.
GAVIN, ANGUS.
1945. Notes on mammals observed in the Perry River district, Queen Maud
Sea. _Jour. Mammalogy_ +26+ (3): 226-230.
GILDER, WILLIAM H.
1881. Schwatka’s search. Sledging in the Arctic in quest of the Franklin
records. New York: xvi + 316, 12 pl., 18 fig., 2 maps.
GODMAN, JOHN D.
1831. American natural history. Ed. 2, vol. 2. Philadelphia: 1-330, 18
pl.
GODSELL, PHILIP H.
1934. Arctic trader. New York: i-xvii, 19-329, 12 pl., 1 map.
1937. The “Blond” Eskimos and the “created want.” _Nat. Hist._ +39+ (4):
285-289, 4 fig.
GOLDMAN, EDWARD A.
1944. Part 2. Classification of wolves. In: Stanley P. Young and Edward
A. Goldman, The wolves of North America: 387-636, 44 pl., 2 maps.
GRANT, MADISON.
1903. The caribou. _Seventh Ann. Rept. New York Zool. Soc. . . . 1902_:
175-196, 32 pl., 1 map.
HAMILTON, W. J., JR.
1939. American mammals, their lives, habits, and economic relations. New
York: xii + 434, 1 pl., 92 fig.
HANBURY, DAVID T.
1900. A journey from Chesterfield Inlet to Great Slave Lake, 1898-9.
_Geog. Jour._ +16+ (1): 63-77, 1 map.
1903. Through the Barren Ground of north-eastern Canada to the Arctic
coast. _Geog. Jour._ +22+ (2): 178-191, 9 fig., 1 map.
1904. Sport and travel in the northland of Canada. London and New York:
xxxii + 319, 38 pl., 2 fig., 2 maps.
HARPER, FRANCIS.
1915. The Athabaska-Great Slave Lake expedition. _Summary Rept. Geol.
Survey_ [Canada] _1914_: 159-163.
1932. Mammals of the Athabaska and Great Slave Lakes region. _Jour.
Mammalogy_ +13+ (1): 19-36, 3 pl.
1945. Extinct and vanishing mammals of the Old World. _Am. Committee
Internat. Wild Life Protection, Spl. Publ._ 12. New York: xvi + 850,
1 pl., 67 fig.
1949. In caribou land. _Nat. Hist._ +58+ (5): 224-231, 239-240, 12 fig.,
2 maps.
1953. Birds of the Nueltin Lake Expedition, Keewatin, 1947. _Am. Midland
Naturalist_ +49+ (1): 1-116, 8 fig., 1 map. (“Jan.” = April?).
HEARNE, SAMUEL.
1795. A journey from Prince of Wales’ Fort in Hudson’s Bay, to the
Northern Ocean . . . in the years 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772. London: xliv +
458, 9 pl. (A Dublin edition, 1796, with nearly identical pagination.)
HENDERSON, F. D.
1927. Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1924. In: Canada’s Arctic islands:
29-41, 6 fig. Dept. Interior, Ottawa.
HENRIKSEN, KAI L.
1937. Zoology. Insects collected on the Fifth Thule Expedition. _Rept.
Fifth Thule Exped. 1921-24_, +2+ (8). 1-34, 1 map.
HEWITT, C. GORDON.
1921. The conservation of the wild life of Canada. New York: xxi + 344,
24 pl., 4 fig., 10 maps, 5 charts.
HOARE, W. H. B.
1930. Conserving Canada’s musk-oxen; being an account of an
investigation of the Thelon Game Sanctuary 1928-29. . . . (Including
Appendix B, Notes on the musk-ox and the caribou, pp. 49-53, by R. M.
Anderson.) Dept. Interior, Ottawa: 2-53, 22 fig., 4 maps.
HOFFMAN, ARNOLD.
1949. The Northwest Territories: the last frontier. _Explorers’ Jour._
+27+ (1): 10-12, 64.
HOOPER, W. H.
1853. Ten months among the tents of the Tuski, with incidents of an
Arctic boat expedition in search of Sir John Franklin, as far as the
Mackenzie River, and Cape Bathurst. London: xvi + 417, 5 pl., 6 fig.,
2 maps.
HORNADAY, WILLIAM T.
1904. The American natural history. . . . New York: xxv + 449, 343 fig.,
maps.
1914. The American natural history. Fireside ed., vol. 2. New York: xv +
332, 23 pl., 62 fig., 6 maps.
HORNBY, JOHN.
1934. Wild life in the Thelon River area, Northwest Territories, Canada.
_Canadian Field-Naturalist_ +48+ (7): 105-115.
HUSTICH, ILMARI.
1951. The lichen woodlands in Labrador and their importance as winter
pastures for domesticated reindeer. _Acta Geographica_ +12+ (1): 1-48,
18 fig., 4 maps.
INGSTAD, HELGE.
1933. The land of feast and famine. New York: 1-332, 31 pl., 1 map.
ISHAM, JAMES.
1949. James Isham’s observations on Hudsons Bay 1743. . . . (Edited by
E. E. Rich and A. M. Johnson.) _Publ. Champlain Soc., Hudson’s Bay
Company ser._ 12. Toronto: iii-cv, 1-198, 1 pl., 18 fig.
JACKSON, HARTLEY H. T.
1944. Big-game resources of the United States 1937-1942. _U.S. Dept.
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Research Rept._ 8: ii + 56, 31 fig.
JACOBI, ARNOLD.
1931. Das Rentier. _Zool. Anzeiger_, suppl. vol. 96: vii + 264, 6 pl.,
25 fig., 7 maps.
JENNESS, DIAMOND.
1922. The life of the Copper Eskimo. _Rept. Canadian Arctic Exped.
1913-18_, +12+: 1-277, 9 pl., 69 fig., 2 maps.
1932. The Indians of Canada. _Nat. Mus. Canada Bull._ 65: x + 446,
7 pl., 118 fig., 10 maps.
JOHANSEN, FRITS.
1921. Insect life on the western Arctic coast of America. _Rept.
Canadian Arctic Exped. 1913-18_, +3+, pt. K: 1-61, 10 pl., 1 map.
JONES, CHARLES J.
1899. Buffalo Jones’ forty years of adventure. . . . Compiled by Henry
Inman. Topeka: xii + 469, 37 pl., 9 fig.
KENNEDY, WILLIAM.
1853. A short narrative of the second voyage of the _Prince Albert_, in
search of Sir John Franklin. London: xiv + xxv, 27-202, 4 pl., 1 map.
KENNICOTT, ROBERT. (_See_ Anonymous, 1869.)
KINDLE, E. M.
1917. A note on the migration of the Barren Ground Caribou. _Ottawa
Naturalist_ +31+ (9): 107-109.
1928. Canada north of fifty-six degrees: the land of long summer days.
_Canadian Field-Naturalist_ +42+ (3): 53-86, 19 pl., 9 fig., 4 maps.
KING, RICHARD.
1836. Narrative of a journey on the shores of the Arctic Ocean, in 1833,
1834, and 1835; under the command of Capt. Back, R.N. London: +1+: ix +
312; +2+: viii + 321.
KITTO, F. H.
1930. The North West Territories 1930. Dept. Interior, Ottawa: 1-137, 44
fig., 3 maps.
KUMLIEN, LUDWIG.
1879. Contributions to the natural history of Arctic America. . . .
Introduction, ethnology, mammals. _Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus._ 15: 3-67.
LANTIS, MARGARET.
1950. The reindeer industry in Alaska. _Arctic_ +3+ (1): 27-44, 2 fig.,
1 map.
LOFTHOUSE, J.
1899. A trip on the Tha-anne River, Hudson Bay. _Geog. Jour._ +13+ (3):
274-277, 1 map.
LYDEKKER, RICHARD.
1898. The deer of all lands. London: xx + 329, 24 pl., 80 fig.
1901. The great and small game of Europe, western & northern Asia, and
America; their distribution, habits, and structure. London: xx + 445,
8 pl., 75 fig.
1915. Catalogue of the ungulate mammals in the British Museum (Natural
History). Vol. 4. London: xxi + 438, 56 fig.
LYON, GEORGE F.
1824. The private journal of Captain G. F. Lyon, of H.M.S. Hecla, during
the recent voyage of discovery under Captain Parry. London: xiv + 468,
7 pl., 1 map.
M’CLINTOCK, F. L.
1860? In the Arctic seas. A narrative of the discovery of the fate of
Sir John Franklin and his companions. Philadelphia: xxiii + 375, 1 pl.,
5 fig.
MACFARLANE, R.
1890. On an expedition down the Begh-ula or Anderson River. _Canadian
Record Sci._ +4+ (1): 28-53.
1905. Notes on mammals collected and observed in the northern Mackenzie
River district, Northwest Territories of Canada. . . . _Proc. U.S. Nat.
Mus._ +28+ (1405): 673-764, 5 pl., 2 fig.
MCLEAN, JOHN.
1932. John McLean’s notes of a twenty-five year’s service in the
Hudson’s Bay territory. (Edited by W. S. Wallace.) _Publ. Champlain
Soc._ 19. Toronto: xxxvi + 402, 1 map. (Originally published in 1849.)
MCLEAN, W. J.
1901. Notes and observations of travels on the Athabasca and Slave Lake
regions in 1899. _Trans. Hist. and Sci. Soc. Manitoba_ 58: 7 pp.
MALLET, THIERRY.
1926. Plain tales of the North. New York and London: 1-136.
1930. Glimpses of the Barren Lands. New York: 1-142, 7 pl.
MALLOCH, J. R.
1919. The Diptera collected by the Canadian Expedition, 1913-1918.
(Excluding the Tipulidae and Culicidae.) _Rept. Canadian Arctic Exped.
1913-18_, +3+, pt. C: 34-90, 4 pl.
MANNING, T. H.
1942. Remarks on the physiography, Eskimo, and mammals of Southampton
Island. _Canadian Geog. Jour._ +24+ (1): 16-33, 16 fig., 1 map.
1943a. Notes on the mammals of south and central west Baffin Island.
_Jour. Mammalogy_ +24+ (1): 47-59, 1 map.
1943b. Notes on the coastal district of the eastern Barren Grounds and
Melville Peninsula from Igloolik to Cape Fullerton. _Canadian Geog.
Jour._ +26+ (2): 84-105, 16 fig., 2 maps.
1948. Notes on the country, birds and mammals west of Hudson Bay between
Reindeer and Baker Lakes. _Canadian Field-Naturalist_ +62+ (1): 1-28,
8 fig., 1 map.
MILLAIS, J. G.
1907. Newfoundland and its untrodden ways. London: xvi + 340, 86 pl.,
1 fig., 2 maps.
1915. The caribou. In: The gun at home & abroad: the big game of Asia
and North America: 255-280, 9 pl. London.
MILLER, GERRIT S., JR.
1924. List of North American recent mammals 1923. _U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull._
128: xvi + 673.
MOCHI, UGO, AND T. DONALD CARTER.
1953. Hoofed mammals of the world. New York and London: 89 unnumbered
pp., 294 fig., 5 maps.
MUNN, HENRY TOKE.
1932. Prairie trails and Arctic by-ways. London: 1-288, 16 pl.
MURIE, OLAUS J.
1935. Alaska-Yukon caribou. _U.S. Dept. Agric., No. Am. Fauna_ +54+:
1-93, 10 pl., 13 fig., 3 maps.
1939. The Caribou. Description and distribution. In: Alfred Ely, H. E.
Anthony, and R. R. M. Carpenter, North American big game: 239-246,
1 pl., 1 map. New York and London.
1941. Wildlife introductions in Alaska. _Trans. Fifth No. Am. Wildlife
Conference_: 432-436.
MURRAY, ANDREW.
1858. Contributions to the natural history of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s
territories. Part 1.--Reindeer. _Edinburgh New Philos. Jour._ +7+ (2):
189-210, 4 fig.
NATVIG, L. REINHARDT.
1918. Beitrag zur Biologie der Dasselfliegen des Renntieres. _Tromsø
Mus. Aarshefter_ +38+/+39+: 117-132, 1 pl., 5 fig.
NELSON, E. W.
1916. The larger North American mammals. _Nat. Geog. Mag._ +30+ (5):
385-472, 33 pl., 24 fig.
NOURSE, J. E.
1884. American explorations in the ice zones. . . . Boston: 3-578, 121
fig., 6 maps.
OSBORN, SHERARD.
1852. Stray leaves from an Arctic journal; or, eighteen months in the
polar regions, in search of Sir John Franklin’s Expedition, in the years
1850-51. New York: 1-216.
1865. The discovery of a North-west Passage by H.M.S. Investigator,
Capt. R. M’Clure, during the years 1850-1851-1852-1853-1854. Ed. 4.
Edinburgh and London: xxvi + 358, 1 map. (Ed. 1 in 1856.)
PARRY, WILLIAM EDWARD.
1821. Journal of a voyage for the discovery of a north-west passage from
the Atlantic to the Pacific; performed in the years 1819-20, in His
Majesty’s ships Hecla and Griper. . . . Ed. 2. London: [8] + xxix + 310
+ clxxix, 14 pl., 6 maps.
1824. Journal of a second voyage for the discovery of a north-west
passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific; performed in the years
1821-22-23, in His Majesty’s ships Fury and Hecla. . . . London: [6] +
xxx + 572, clxxv-cccx, 30 pl., 16 fig., 9 maps.
PEARY, R. E.
1907. Nearest the Pole. . . . New York: xx + 411, 65 pl., 2 maps.
PEREZ-LLANO, GEORGE ALBERT.
1944. Lichens--their biological and economic significance. _Botanical
Rev._ +10+ (1): 1-65.
PIKE, WARBURTON.
1917. The Barren Ground of northern Canada. [Ed. 2?] New York: xii +
334, 15 pl., 1 map. (Originally published in 1892.)
POCOCK, R. I.
1911. On the specialized cutaneous glands of ruminants. _Proc. Zool.
Soc. London 1910_: 840-986, 60 fig.
_Polunin, Nicholas._
1949. Arctic unfolding. . . . London: 1-348, 33 pl., 3 maps.
_Porsild, A. E._
1943. Reindeer and caribou grazing in Canada. _Trans. Seventh No. Am.
Wildlife Conference_: 381-390, “1942.”
1950. A biological exploration of Banks and Victoria Islands. _Arctic_
+3+ (1): 45-54, 6 fig., 1 map.
1951. Caribou in Greenland. _Arctic Circular_ +4+ (4): 52-58.
(Mimeographed.)
PREBLE, EDWARD A.
1902. A biological investigation of the Hudson Bay region. _U.S. Dept.
Agric., No. Am. Fauna_ 22: 1-140, 13 pl., 1 map.
1908. A biological investigation of the Athabaska-Mackenzie region.
_U.S. Dept. Agric., No. Am. Fauna_ 27: 1-574, 21 pl., 12 fig., 8 maps.
1926. The Mackenzie watershed; northern Hudson Bay region, upper Yukon
region, and the Arctic islands. In: Victor E. Shelford (editor),
Naturalist’s guide to the Americas: 115-141. Baltimore.
RAE, JOHN.
1850. Narrative of an expedition to the shores of the Arctic Sea in 1846
and 47. London: viii + 248, 2 maps.
1852a. Journey from Great Bear Lake to Wollaston Land. _Jour. Royal
Geog. Soc. London_ +22+: 73-82, 1 map.
1852b. Recent explorations along the south and east coast of Victoria
Land. _Jour. Royal Geog. Soc. London_ +22+: 82-96, 1 map.
RAND, A. L.
1948a. Mammals of the eastern Rockies and western plains of Canada.
_Nat. Mus. Canada Bull._ 108: ii-vii, 1-237, 4 pl., 81 fig., 4 maps.
1948b. Mr. W. H. Bryenton’s notes on Manitoba mammals of the Herb
Lake-Flin Flon area. _Canadian Field-Naturalist_ +62+ (5): 140-150.
RASMUSSEN, KNUD.
1927. Across Arctic America: narrative of the Fifth Thule Expedition.
New York-London: 1-388, 66 pl., 4 maps.
RAUP, HUGH M.
1933. Range conditions in the Wood Buffalo Park of western Canada with
notes on the history of the wood bison. _Am. Comm. Internat. Wild Life
Protection, Spl. Publ._ +1+ (2): 1-52, 1 map.
RAUSCH, ROBERT.
1951. Notes on the Nunamiut Eskimo and mammals of the Anaktuvuk Pass
region, Brooks Range, Alaska. _Arctic_ +4+ (3): 147-195, 12 fig.,
3 maps.
RICHARDSON, JOHN.
“1825.” Zoological appendix. No. 1. Account of the quadrupeds and birds.
In: Appendix to Captain Parry’s journal of a second voyage for the
discovery of a north-west passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific,
performed in His Majesty’s ships Fury and Hecla, in the years
1821-22-23: 287-379. London. (“Published probably in 1827”--Preble,
1908: 536.)
1829. Fauna boreali-americana . . . . Part 1. Quadrupeds. London; xlvi +
300, 28 pl., 5 fig.
1836. Zoological remarks. In: George Back, Narrative of the Arctic Land
Expedition to the mouth of the Great Fish River, and along the shores of
the Arctic Ocean, in the years 1833, 1834, and 1835: 475-542. London.
1852. Arctic Searching Expedition: a journal of a boat-voyage through
Rupert’s Land and the Arctic Sea, in search of the discovery ships under
command of Sir John Franklin. [Ed. 2?] New York: iii-xi, 13-516, 8 fig.
1861. The polar regions. Edinburgh: ix + 400, 1 map.
RIDGWAY, ROBERT.
1912. Color standards and color nomenclature. Washington, D.C.: iv + 44,
53 pl.
ROSS, BERNARD R.
1861. An account of the animals useful in an economic point of view to
the various Chipewyan tribes. _Canadian Naturalist and Geologist_ +6+
(6): 433-441.
1862. List of mammals, birds, and eggs, observed in the McKenzie’s River
district, with notices. _Canadian Naturalist and Geologist_ +7+ (2):
137-155.
ROSS, JAMES CLARK.
1826. Natural history. Zoology. Mammalia. In: William Edward Parry,
Journal of a third voyage for the discovery of a North-west Passage
. . .: 92-95. London.
ROSS, JOHN.
1835a. Narrative of a second voyage in search of a North-west Passage
. . . during the years 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, 1833. London: [5] + xxxiv
+ 740, 23 pl., 5 maps.
1835b. Appendix to the narrative of a second voyage in search of a
North-west Passage . . . during the years 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, 1833.
London: xii + 120 + cxliv + [1], 20 pl. (Includes a report by James
Clark Ross on zoology [mammals], pp. vii-xxiv.)
ROUSSEAU, JACQUES.
1948. The vegetation and life zones of George River, eastern Ungava and
the welfare of the natives. _Arctic_ +1+ (2): 93-96.
RUSSELL, FRANK.
1895. Hunting the Barren Ground Caribou. _Ottawa Naturalist_ +9+ (2):
48-51.
1898. Explorations in the Far North. [Iowa City, Iowa]: ix + 290, 21
pl., 6 fig., 1 map.
SCHEFFER, VICTOR B.
1951. The rise and fall of a reindeer herd. _Sci. Monthly_ +73+ (6):
356-362, 9 fig.
SCHWATKA, FREDERICK.
1885. Nimrod in the North. New York: 1-198, 1 pl., 78 fig.
SCOTT, PETER.
1951. Wild geese and Eskimos. . . . London and New York: 1-254, 25 pl.,
41 fig., 3 maps.
SETON, ERNEST THOMPSON.
1911. The Arctic prairies. New York: xvi + 415, 32 pl., 116 fig.,
9 maps.
1929. Lives of game animals. . . . Garden City, N.Y.: +1+: xxxix + [1] +
640, 118 pl., 16 fig., 12 maps; +2+: xvii + [1] + 746, 98 pl., 27 fig.,
13 maps; +3+: xix + [1] + 780, 96 pl., 23 fig., 10 maps.
SIMPSON, THOMAS.
1843. Narrative of the discoveries on the north coast of America . . .
during the years 1836-39. London: xix + 419, 2 maps.
SIPLE, PAUL A., and CHARLES F. PASSEL.
1945. Measurements of dry atmospheric cooling in subfreezing
temperatures. _Proc. Am. Philos. Soc._ +89+ (1): 177-199, 7 fig., 1 map.
SOPER, J. DEWEY.
1936. The Lake Harbour region, Baffin Island. _Geog. Rev._ +26+ (3):
426-438, 9 fig., 1 map.
1942. Mammals of Wood Buffalo Park, northern Alberta and district of
Mackenzie. _Jour. Mammalogy_ +23+ (2): 119-145, 2 pl., 1 map.
1944. The mammals of southern Baffin Island, Northwest Territories,
Canada. _Jour. Mammalogy_ +25+ (3): 221-254, 2 pl., 2 fig., 2 maps.
STEFÁNSSON, VILHJÁLMUR.
1913a. Victoria Island and the surrounding seas. _Bull. Am. Geog.
Soc._ +45+ (2): 93-106, 1 map.
1913b. My life with the Eskimo. New York: ix + 538, 60 pl., 2 maps.
1914. The Stefánsson-Anderson Arctic Expedition of the American Museum:
preliminary ethnological report. _Anthrop. Papers Am. Mus. Nat. Hist._
+14+, pt. 1: [1] + 395, 95 fig., 2 maps.
1919. “Living off the country” as a method of Arctic exploration. _Geog.
Rev._ +7+ (5): 291-310, 15 fig.
1921. The friendly Arctic. . . . (With appendix, including (pp.
737-757): The work of the southern section of the expedition, by Rudolph
M. Anderson.) New York: xxxi + 784, 70 pl., 9 maps.
STEWART, NORMAN H.
1930? Preliminary report on the occurrence of the nose fly (Cephenomyia)
in the deer of Pennsylvania. _Board Game Commissioners Pennsylvania
Bull._ (12) rev.: 61-65, 2 fig.
STOCKWELL, C. H.
1933. Great Slave Lake--Coppermine River area, Northwest Territories.
_Canada Dept. Mines, Geol. Survey, Summary Rept. 1932_, pt. C: 64-72,
1 map.
STONE, A. J.
1900. Some results of a natural history journey to northern British
Columbia, Alaska, and the Northwest Territory, in the interest of the
American Museum of Natural History. _Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist._ +13+
(5): 31-62, 2 fig., 3 maps.
STONE, WITMER, and WILLIAM EVERETT CRAM.
1904. American animals, a popular guide to the mammals of North America
north of Mexico. . . . New York: xxiii + 318, 86 pl., 17 fig.
SUTTON, GEORGE MIKSCH, and WILLIAM J. HAMILTON, JR.
1932. The mammals of Southampton Island. _Mem. Carnegie Mus._ +12+,
pt. 2, sect. 1: 1-111, 5 pl., 4 fig.
THOMPSON, DAVID.
1916. David Thompson’s narrative of his explorations in western America
1784-1812. Edited by J. B. Tyrrell. _Publ. Champlain Soc._ 12: xcviii +
582, 21 pl., 2 maps.
TWEEDSMUIR, [LORD].
1951. Hudson’s Bay trader. New York: 1-195, 8 pl., 1 map.
TWINN, C. R.
1950. Studies of the biology and control of biting flies in northern
Canada. _Arctic_ +3+ (1): 14-26, 11 fig.
TYRRELL, JAMES W.
1908. Across the sub-Arctics of Canada. Ed. 3. Toronto: i-viii, 9-280,
18 pl., 66 fig., 3 maps. (Orig. ed. in 1898.)
1924. Report on an exploratory survey between Great Slave Lake and
Hudson Bay, districts of Mackenzie and Keewatin. Dept. Interior, Ottawa:
1-38, maps. (Reprinted from _Ann. Rept. Dept. Interior_ 1901 [1902].)
TYRRELL, J. BURR.
1892. The winter home of the Barren Ground Caribou. _Ottawa Naturalist_
+6+ (8): 128-130.
1894. An expedition through the Barren Lands of northern Canada. _Geog.
Jour._ +4+ (5): 437-450, 1 map.
1895. A second expedition through the Barren Lands of northern Canada.
_Geog. Jour._ +6+ (5): 438-448, 1 map.
1896. Report on the country between Athabasca Lake and Churchill River
with notes on two routes travelled between the Churchill and
Saskatchewan Rivers. Ann. _Rept. Geog. Survey Canada_ +8+ (n.s.), 1895,
rept. D: 1-120, 3 pl., 1 map.
1897. Report on the Doobaunt, Kazan and Ferguson Rivers and the
north-west coast of Hudson Bay, and on two overland routes from Hudson
Bay to Lake Winnipeg. _Ann. Rept. Geol. Survey Canada_ +9+ (n.s.), 1896,
rept. F: 1-218, 11 pl., 3 maps.
[UNITED STATES] WAR DEPARTMENT.
1944. Arctic manual. _Technical Manual_ 1-240. Washington: 1-131, 21
fig., 1 map.
WEBER, NEAL A.
1950. A survey of the insects and related arthropods of Arctic Alaska.
Part 1. _Trans. Am. Entom. Soc._ +76+ (3): 147-206, 7 pl.
WEEKS, L. J.
1933. Maguse River and part of Ferguson River basin, Northwest
Territories. _Canada Dept. Mines, Geol. Survey, Summary Rept. 1932_,
pt. 64-72, 1 map.
WEYER, EDWARD MOFFATT, JR.
1932. The Eskimos: their environment and folkways. New Haven: xvii +
491, 6 fig., 23 maps.
WHEELER, DAVID E.
1912. Notes on the spring migration at timber line, north of Great Slave
Lake. _Auk_ +29+ (2): 198-204, 1 map.
1914. The Dog-rib Indian and his home. Bull. _Geog. Soc. Philadelphia_
+12+ (2): 47-69, 3 pl., 1 map.
WHITNEY, CASPAR.
1896. On snow-shoes to the Barren Grounds. . . . New York: x + 324, 35
pl., 77 fig., 2 maps.
WHITTAKER, E. J.
1919. Notes on midwinter life in the Far North. _Ottawa Naturalist_ +32+
(9): 166-167.
WRAY, O. R.
1934. In the footsteps of Samuel Hearne. _Canadian Geog. Jour._ +9+ (3):
138-146, 15 fig., 2 maps.
WRIGHT, J. G.
1944. Economic wildlife of Canada’s eastern Arctic--caribou. _Canadian
Geog. Jour._ +29+ (4): 184-195, 12 fig., 1 map.
YOUNG, STANLEY P.
1944. The wolves of North America. Part 1. Their history, life habits,
economic status, and control. Washington: 1-385, 74 pl., 4 fig., 8 maps.
YULE, ROBERT F.
1948. The disappearing caribou. _Canadian Medic. Assoc. Jour._ +58+:
287-288, 1 fig.
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
TO
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_
These references are arranged chronologically, year by year; but within
a given year, the arrangement for the most part is alphabetical by
authors. The full citations of the publications (here designated merely
by author and year) may be found in the preceding “Literature Cited.”
The name or names at the beginning of each entry are those by which the
animal is referred to in that particular publication. If the author
supplies a technical name (such as _Rangifer arcticus_), that name alone
is furnished here. The authority for the technical name is included or
omitted according to the usage of each author. If he omits a technical
name, the common name or names he employs (such as “Caribou” or
“Reindeer”) are supplied.
In some of the earlier accounts, particularly, more than one form of
_Rangifer_ (_e.g._, Peary’s Caribou, the Labrador Caribou, or even the
Woodland Caribou, in addition to the typical Barren Ground Caribou) may
have been treated under a single designation, such as “Reindeer” or
“_Cervus tarandus_.” In such case the word “part” is added in
parentheses after the name at the beginning of the entry. As far as
is possible or feasible, the references are here limited to _R. a.
arcticus_. They constitute a partial summary of the nomenclatural
history of the typical subspecies.
The annotations aim to provide a sort of abstract of, or unalphabetized
index to, the treatment of this animal in each publication. Each topic
or rubric of the annotations (such as migration, distribution, food,
voice, antlers, or relation to Wolves) is accompanied by page
references.
In the earlier part of the present publication, at the end of the
discussion of each topic, references are given (merely by author, year,
and page) to previous literature on the same topic. The Annotated
Bibliographical References now supplied represent an amplification of
those earlier and briefer references--an intermediate stage between
them and the original literature. It is hoped that they will prove
particularly helpful to those who may not have ready access to all the
items of the original literature. My own coverage of the literature has
not been by any means exhaustive; limitations of time and insufficient
accessibility of some of the rarer publications have been the principal
factors involved in this deficiency.
The chronological arrangement of the entries throws an interesting light
on the gradual acquisition, during more than two centuries, of our
present stock of information on the distribution, taxonomic characters,
life habits, and general status of _Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. It may
be remarked, however, that one of the very earliest accounts (Hearne,
1795) was one of the fullest. It contributes toward bringing into focus
the remarkable attainments of that pioneer explorer-naturalist of the
Barren Grounds.
“Deer” (one of three kinds): Isham, 1949 (1743): 151
(description); 152 (inhabit Barren Grounds); 152-153 (snares);
154 (Eskimos hunting with spears and arrows).
“Rain-deer” or “Cariboux”: Dobbs, 1774: 9, 78, 94 (Marble
Island); 19 (Indians living on Caribou W. of Hudson Bay); 20
(herds of up to 10,000 between Churchill and Nelson rivers); 22
(migration [of Barren Ground or Woodland species?] near York
Factory--S. in March-April, N. in July-August); 47, 59 (N. of
Churchill); 73-74 (Wager Inlet); 80 (Cape Fullerton).
“Deer”: Hearne, 1795: 4, 7, 8, 14, 24 (vicinity of Seal River or
Shethanei Lake); 28 (near Baralzon Lake); 35 (spearing by
Chipewyans on upper Kazan River); 39, 40 (W. of upper Kazan
River, July 22-30); 40-42, 50-52 (vicinity of upper Dubawnt
River); 50 (skins suitable for clothing in late August); 56, 66
(vicinity of Egg River, Manitoba, November and December); 67-68
(E. of Nueltin Lake); 69, 72, (Nueltin Lake); 69 (flesh of bucks
still unpalatable on December 30); 73, 74 (W. of Nueltin Lake,
January); 76 (plentiful W. of Kasba Lake); 77 (Snowbird Lake);
78 (Indians living all winter on deer at Wholdaia Lake); 78-80
(description of a pound); 80-84 (deer in Indian economy); 84
(remoteness a barrier to trade in skins); 85-87 (W. of Wholdaia
Lake, plentiful, March); 87 (“Thelewey-aza-yeth” Lake [on Thelon
River], numerous, April); 96 (Indians living all winter on deer
near Clowey Lake); 112, 114 (“Peshew” [Artillery?] Lake and
vicinity); 117 (plentiful, vicinity of Thoy-noy-kyed and
Thoy-coy-lyned lakes); 119, 123 (N. of Cogead Lake, where
Indians kill deer at a river crossing); 139 (N. of Buffalo
Lake); 141 (E. of Coppermine River); 142, 143, 147, 171
(Coppermine River and vicinity); 184 (Stony Mountains); 195
(Thaye-chuck-gyed Lake [Lac de Gras?]; great numbers killed);
196-197 (use for clothing, boots, tents, etc.); 197 (warbles
eaten by Indians); 198 (rutting season in October; subsequent
segregation of sexes); 198-199 (old bucks’ antlers shed in
November; young bucks still retain theirs at Christmas, and does
till summer); 201, 204 (Point Lake); 222 (between Great Slave
and MacKay lakes); 275 (large numbers reported on upper Taltson?
River); 281 (W. of Hill Island Lake); 285, 286 (plentiful in
April on Thee-lee-aza [Thelon?] River, NE. of Hill Island Lake);
293 (near Wholdaia Lake); 295, 296 (W. and E. of Kazan River);
297 (method of drying meat); 299 (plentiful in June, Nueltin
Lake region); 300 (vicinity of Egg River, Manitoba); 316-319
(stomach contents, unborn young and uterus eaten by Indians);
321-322 (Indians driving deer between converging rows of
sticks); 322-323 (tents of deerskin); 323-325 (skins used in
manufacture of sledges, snowshoes, and clothing).
“Rein-deer”: Parry, 1821: 273 (E. coast of Baffin Island).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Franklin, 1823: 215-227, 285 (Yellowknife
River region); 230-232, 239-240, 245, 248, 268-271, 285, 297,
299, 309, 315-320, 438-440, 459-462, 480-488 (Winter Lake
region); 233, 324-325, 418-426, 446-447 (Point Lake region); 240
(back fat; rutting season); 240-241 (antler and pelage change);
241 (larvae of warble and nostril flies); 241-242 (migration);
242 (fawning; food; weight; predation by wolves); 243-244
(Indian hunting methods); 327, 328, 333, 337, 344 (Coppermine
River region); 327 (pursuit by a wolf); 344 (driven by wolves
over a precipice); 363-374 (coast of Coronation Gulf); 379-395
(Bathurst Inlet region); 397-400 (Hood River region); 404-413
(Contwoyto Lake region); 478 (Marten Lake); 486, 487 (pursuit
and killing by wolves, Winter Lake region).
_Cervus Tarandas_. . .: Sabine, in Franklin, 1823: 665, 667
(Barren Grounds, migrating in summer to Arctic islands).
“Deer” or “reindeer”: Lyon, 1824: 48, 58-60 (Frozen Strait); 54
(Repulse Bay); 64-67 (Gore Bay; too fleet for a greyhound); 70,
74, 76, 77, 80, 82 (Lyon Inlet and vicinity); 119, 123, 130,
144, 203, 212 (Winter Island; food of Eskimos; bows made of
antlers; use of sinews; deerskin clothing); 192-198, 217, 221,
223, 229, 238, 241, 282-283, 311-317 (Melville Peninsula, E.
coast; deerskin clothing of Eskimos); 257, 269-270 (near Fury
and Hecla Strait; buck shedding velvet, September 4); 324, 327
(Eskimo use of antlers in sledges and bows); 336 (Melville
Peninsula, in summer; voice; inquisitiveness); 336-337 (Eskimo
hunting with bow and spearing in water); 415, 419-423, 430, 436
(near Igloolik, Melville Peninsula, in June).
“Deer” or “reindeer”: Parry, 1824: 42 (Southampton Island); 52,
61, 69, 71, 72, 83, 84, 92, 101, 106-108, 214, 230, 235, 236,
245, 254, 265 (s. Melville Peninsula and vicinity); 289, 305,
308, 324, 329, 332, 339, 343, 434, 438, 439, 441, 446, 447,
453-460 (Fury and Hecla Strait); 289 (stomach contents eaten by
Eskimos); 305 (estimated weight 220 lb.); 380 (venison supplied
by Eskimos); 403 (15 deer killed by an Eskimo during a summer);
494-497 (deerskin clothing of Eskimos, Melville Peninsula); 505
(their dependence on reindeer for food); 508 (Eskimo spear for
killing deer in water); 512 (Eskimo methods of hunting deer);
513 (numerous, Cockburn Land); 537 (Eskimo use of skins and
sinew).
_Cervus tarandus_ L.: Richardson, “1825” (= 1827?): 326 (native
names); 327-328 (antler growth and change); 328 (rutting season
and strong-tasting meat, about beginning of October; warble
flies); 328-329 (migrations, in relation to attacks of parasitic
flies and to food; does precede on northward migration); 329
(fawns born in May and June; stragglers in every part of the
country at all seasons); 330 (utilization of Caribou--including
fly larvae--as food by natives; nostril flies); 331 (marrow used
as hair-dressing by native women).
_Cervus tarandus_. . .: J. C. Ross, 1826: 94 (North Somerset
Island).
“Rein-deer”: Franklin, in Franklin and Richardson, 1828: 54, 57,
60, 64, 71, 72, 288 (Great Bear Lake).
“Rein-deer”: Richardson, in Franklin and Richardson, 1828: 200
(sinews used in Eskimo bows); 209, 218 (between Mackenzie River
and Cape Dalhousie); 224 (Liverpool Bay); 231 (E. of Cape
Bathurst); 241, 246 (near Cape Lyon); 249 (Cape Young); 255
(Dolphin and Union Strait); 269-273 (lower Coppermine River);
275 (stalking device of Hare Indians); 277 (Dease River); 282
(Great Bear Lake).
_Cervus tarandus_, var. [Greek: alpha] _arctica_ Richardson:
Richardson, 1829: 241-242 (original description); 239 (type
locality, neighborhood of Fort Enterprise, Mackenzie); 241
(rutting season); 241-242 (antler change); 242 (pelage change;
infestation with warble fly; foot click); 242-245 (economic uses
of hide, flesh, bones, and antlers; migration; not wintering S.
of Churchill); 242-244 (reproduction); 243, 245 (food); 245
(organization of herds; easy of approach); 245-249 (native
methods of hunting).
_Cervus tarandus_ L.: Godman, 1831, +2+: 283-284 (migration);
284 (food; gadfly attacking both Woodland and Barren Ground
Caribou); 285-293 (quotations from Franklin, 1823).
“Deer” or “reindeer”: John Ross, 1835a: 130-376, _passim_
(Boothia Peninsula); 243-244 (Eskimo clothing of deerskin); 252
(Eskimo method of hunting); 328, 330 (only small numbers up to
late April); 337 (many, early May); 352 (stomach contents as
food for Eskimos); 376 (migrating N., May 26); 389 (large herd);
390 (hundreds, June 4); 402 (pursued and eaten by wolves); 432
(with fawns, June 10); 438 (many in June); 512 (many killed by
Eskimos); 529 (many tracks, May 15); 530 (many passing, followed
by a wolf); 534 (many, May 21, with two wolves); 537 (Eskimos
killing deer in winter); 564 (a number pursued by a wolf); 612
(two, October 30); 628 (first tracks, March); 704 (tracks,
Somerset Island, late June).
_Cervus tarandus_. . .: J. C. Ross, in John Ross, 1835b: xvii
(great numbers, Boothia; weight 250 lb.; does arriving in April,
bucks in May; fawns hunted by Eskimos with dogs; utilization by
Eskimos; food; great numbers speared in water in autumn
migration; stragglers found in winter); xviii (measurements).
“Rein-deer” or “deer”: Back, 1836: 86 (Thelon River); 105 (Great
Slave Lake); 116 (Hoar-frost River); 128-129 (near Artillery
Lake, reindeer chased by wolves); 138-143 (Clinton-Colden and
Aylmer lakes); 156-157 (head of Great Fish River); 178, 205
(near Fort Reliance); 216, 225, 234 (remaining on Barren Grounds
near Great Slave Lake during winter); 261, 267, 268, 273, 280,
281, 285, 286 (Artillery Lake); 290, 292 (Lake Aylmer); 299,
307, 311, 320, 323, 325, 328, 337 (upper Back’s River); 367
(lower Back’s River, deer drowned in rapids); 420 (Chantrey
Inlet); 435, 439 (lower Back’s River).
_Cervus tarandus_ Linn.: Richardson, in Back, 1836: 498 (Barren
Grounds; migration; food); 499 (utilization by Indians and
Eskimos; antlers).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Simpson, 1843: 76 (destruction in 1831 of
a countless herd [of Woodland or Barren Ground species?]
crossing Hayes River in summer); 196, 198 (Great Bear Lake,
September); 206, 226, 232, 242, 247, 249, 250 (between Great
Bear Lake and Coppermine River); 207 (solicitude of a buck for a
wounded doe); 208 (antlers worn by Indian hunter as a decoy);
232 (deer driven over a cliff by wolves); 233 (numerous near
Dease River, early April); 255, 256, 261, 264 (lower Coppermine
River, June); 266, 271, 273 (Coppermine River to Cape Barrow,
July); 277 (does apparently crossing the ice to islands for
fawning); 278, 279 (Cape Barrow to Bathurst Inlet); 281 (first
does with fawns seen, August 3); 284 (Bathurst Inlet); 295, 297,
301 (E. of Cape Franklin, migrating S., late August); 309, 310
(lower Coppermine River, September; drowned in rapids); 312
(deer snares, Dease River); 320-321 (retiring in winter to
Coppermine River and country south of Great Bear Lake); 328
(numerous between Great Bear Lake and Mackenzie River in
winter); 342 (between Great Bear Lake and Coppermine River,
June); 347 (Eskimos hunting on Richardson River, summer); 352
(lower Coppermine River); 355 (Eskimos at Cape Barrow gone
inland to hunt deer, July); 361 (Ellice River, July 31); 365,
367 (Adelaide Peninsula); 370, 374 (Elliot Bay); 379 (King
William Island); 381 (does and fawns near Ogden Bay, early
September); 382 (Melbourne Island); 386 (Victoria Island, early
September); 391 (great numbers, lower Coppermine River,
September 20).
“Rein-deer”: J. McLean, 1932 (1849): 195 (immense herds
[Woodland or Barren Ground sp.?] in York Factory region prior to
1837; their disappearance reducing Indians to want); 359
(Yellowknife Indians reported to have the art of taming fawns,
which follow them like dogs till killed and utilized).
“Deer” or “rein-deer”: Rae, 1850: 26, 27 (Rankin’s Inlet); 27
(Eskimos spearing deer while crossing Chesterfield Inlet); 28
(Cape Fullerton); 31, 32 (near Whale Point); 35, 39 (Eskimo
clothing of caribou skin, Repulse Bay); 40, 64, 65, 73, 74, 76,
80, 84, 91, 92, 133, 134, 166, 169, 177 (Repulse Bay); 44 (stone
monuments erected by Eskimos to deflect deer); 44, 68, 99 (Rae
Isthmus); 52, 54, 55, 130, 132, 145, 160, 161 (Committee Bay);
79 (use by Eskimos for clothing and food); 93 (migrating N.,
Repulse Bay, early March); 116 (Pelly Bay); 149, 151 (Melville
Peninsula); 150 (use of stomach contents as food); 170 (Eskimo
drum of caribou skin); 184, 186 (near Chesterfield Inlet).
“Deer”: Osborn, 1852: 74 (near Pond Inlet).
“Deer”: Rae, 1852a: 75 (Victoria Island, near Richardson
Islands); 79 (many crossing Dolphin and Union Straits to
Victoria Island).
“Deer”: Rae, 1852b: 83 (lower Coppermine River); 91, 95
(Victoria Island, vicinity of Albert Edward Bay).
“Barren Ground reindeer”: Richardson, 1852: 156 (Point
Atkinson); 158 (Cape Brown); 166 (Franklin Bay); 173 (Buchanan
River); 188 (Rae’s River); 198 (Kendall River region); 290
(Great Bear Lake; weight; great numbers [of Woodland or Barren
Ground species?] crossing Hayes River, 1833, and slaughtered
there by Indians); 296 (Great Bear Lake, migrating N. in May).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Hooper, 1853: 296 (dried meat as winter
fare at Fort Norman); 302 (few along Bear River, November); 342
(Kendall Island); 343 (Richard Island); 378, 381 (meat as winter
fare at Fort Simpson); 391-393 (method of preparing pemmican).
“Rein-deer”: Kennedy, 1853: 128 (numerous tracks, North
Somerset, early April); 133 (Bellot Strait); 144, 150 (numerous,
Prince of Wales Island, late April).
_Rangifer caribou_ . . . (_C. tarandus, var. A. Arctica_
Richardson): Audubon and Bachman, 1854, +3+: 114 (quotations
from Richardson, 1829, and Hearne, 1795; “in every part of
Arctic America, including the region from Hudson’s Bay to far
within the Arctic circle”).
“Deer”: J. Anderson, 1856: 24 (about 100, mostly bucks, Adelaide
Peninsula, early August; Eskimos at Lake Franklin preparing to
hunt deer); 25 (a few does at Lake Macdougall, mid-August;
numerous at Aylmer and Clinton-Colden Lakes, early September).
“Deer”: J. Anderson, 1857: 321 (Eskimos hunting deer, Lake
Franklin, July 30); 322 (mouth of Back’s River, July 30); 323
(fat bucks killed, Montreal Island, August 2-3); 324, 325, 327
(100, mostly bucks, Adelaide Peninsula, August 6, 7, 11); 326
(all tracks going S., August 9); 328 (25 going S., Lake Pelly;
good deer passes between Lakes Pelly and Garry and at Hawk
Rapids).
“Reindeer” or “Deer”: Armstrong, 1857: 149, 154, 155 (Eskimos
with Reindeer meat and skins, Point Warren, E. of Mackenzie
River); 166 (skins and meat at Eskimo camp near Cape Dalhousie);
194 (deerskin clothing of Eskimos on coast of Mackenzie); 210,
316, 322, 384, 391, 395, 417 (Banks Island); 254, 335, 364, 365
(Victoria Island, in October, May, July, and August); 297, 336
(Prince of Wales Strait, January and May); 395 (predation by
wolves, Banks Island); 475-488, 497-499, 505-510, 514, 515,
521-530, 545-556, 568 (Banks Island; maximum weight 240 lb.;
distribution; remain during winter; fawning; 112 killed at Bay
of Mercy; quality of meat varying with season; wariness; antler
change; description; graze with heads to wind; pursuit by
wolves).
_Rangifer groenlandicus_ (Kerr) (part): Baird, 1857: 635
(description; weight); 635-636 (distribution).
_Cervus Tarandus_, var. [Greek: a] _arctica_ Richardson: Murray,
1858: 191 (Chesterfield Inlet region); 193-198 (comparison with
Lapland reindeer); 199-206 (antlers and shedding); 201-204
(quotations from previous literature on antlers, food, fawning
season, and winter range); 206 (teeth); 206-210 (fur); 210
(damage by warble flies).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: M’Clintock, 1860?: 147 (s. shore of Pond
Inlet); 167, 176, 177, 184-188, 191, 194, 201, 203, 217, 289,
290, 295, 299 (Bellot Strait); 184 (buck at Bellot Strait, minus
paunch, weighing 354 lb.); 212 (Eskimo clothing of reindeer
skins, Boothia Peninsula); 219 (Somerset Island); 239 (Adelaide
Peninsula); 244 (Montreal Island); 245 (Chantrey Inlet); 252,
279, 280 (King William Island).
“Rein-deer” (part): Richardson, 1861: 274 (migration; rutting
season; utilization by Indians and Eskimos); 275 (moving N. at
Repulse Bay, March 1; food).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . .: B. R. Ross, 1861: 438 (between Hudson
Bay and Arctic Ocean; infested by larvae of warble and nostril
flies); 438-439 (migrations); 439 (antler and pelage change;
food); 439-440 (value to Indians for food, clothing, etc.).
_Rangifer Groënlandicus_ . . .: B. R. Ross, 1862: 141
(distribution).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Osborn, 1865: 70 (Cape Bathurst); 80, 110,
162, 170, 173, 182, 186, 188, 189, 192, 199, 206-208, 219 (Banks
Island); 98, 139, 146 (Victoria Island); 112 (Prince of Wales
Strait, January); 223-224 (resident in Arctic archipelago,
including Banks Island); 226 (no migration across Barrow Strait
or Melville Sound); 227 (weight; gait; antler change; fawning);
227-228, 231, 232 (wolf predation).
“Reindeer”: Kennicott, in Anonymous, 1869: 166 (dried reindeer
meat one of chief foods at Fort Simpson); 170 (caribou clothing
used by Yellow Knives).
_Rangifer tarandus_ (Linné) Bd.: Kumlien, 1879: 19 (Eskimo
hunting at Cumberland Sound); 23-25 (Eskimo clothing of
deerskin); 36-37 (Eskimo arrows and bows of antlers); 53, 54
(pursuit by wolves); 54 (abundant in Cumberland Sound region;
migration; food; hunting and utilization by Eskimos).
“Barren ground caribou”: R. Bell, 1881: 15C (migrating in great
numbers, Reindeer Lake).
_Rangifer Groenlandicus_ “Baird” (part): Caton, 1881: 105
(description); 106 (Mackenzie River to Hudson Bay); 107 (food);
108 (habits; migration); 366-371 (hunting by Indians and
Eskimos).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Gilder, 1881: 11 (Eskimos near Lower
Savage Islands, Hudson Strait, with skins and meat); 23, 25, 26,
28 (hunting by Eskimos near Connery River, Keewatin); 42, 46
(near Chesterfield Inlet); 43 (Eskimo drum of deerskin); 50 (dog
harness of deerskin); 59, 61, 64, 67, 71 (522 reindeer killed by
Schwatka’s party between Hudson Bay and King William Island); 61
(pursued by wolves); 78 (wariness in winter); 83, 192 (Adelaide
Peninsula); 122, 132, 153, 157, 161, 162 (King William Island);
137-146 (Eskimo use of skins and meat); 154 (Eskimos use of fat
and meat); 196-197 (reindeer collecting in immense herds to
cross Simpson Strait on ice in early October); 217, 218 (lower
Back’s River, December); 223, 224, 225, 226 (numerous between
Back’s River and Chesterfield Inlet, January); 254-255
(deerskins as Eskimo bedding).
“Reindeer” or “deer”: Nourse, 1884: 220 (Eskimos dressing skins
near Wager Bay); 232 (37 killed by Hall’s party in July, Wager
Bay); 235 (a thousand passing in a day; many cached near North
Pole River, late September; seen from September to January, and
reappearing in March); 256 (deer-hunting, Melville Peninsula);
264-265 (18 deer and a fawn near Cape Weynton); 351 (found
abundant by Schwatka between Wager Bay and Back’s River); 354
(King William Island); 356 (plentiful, Terror Bay; immense
herds, Simpson Strait, September to October 14).
“Reindeer” or “Arctic deer”: Schwatka, 1885: 59-60, 65, 67-71,
73-75, 81-82, 86 (hunting by Eskimos and whites in n. Keewatin);
60-64 (skins for clothing, bedding, and drums); 60-61 (molt);
65, 67 (use of meat); 68, 71-72 (swimming); 72 (many on King
William Island); 77-79 (migrating across Simpson’s Strait, June
and October); 79 (Boothia and North Somerset); 81 (near mouth of
Back’s River); 83 (rarely seen in herds of more than 100;
migrations); 84-85 (weight); 85 (unwariness).
“Deer”: Boas, 1888: 419 (deer in Eskimo economy); 429, 461-462,
501 (Baffin Island; hunting by Eskimos in summer by spear or
line of cairns); 438 (varying numbers on Cumberland Peninsula);
502 (migration, Baffin and King William Islands); 502-503 (bows
made of antlers); 508-509 (stalking and trapping by Eskimos);
522 (dressing of skins by Eskimos); 555-560 (clothing of
deerskin).
“Reindeer”: Bompas, 1888: 24 (deflected in their migrations in
Mackenzie district by burning of the country); 60 (attacked by
wolves); 61 (Indian methods of hunting); 62 (palatability of the
flesh); 100 (utilization of hides and meat).
“Deer”: Collinson, 1889: 153 (Banks Island; weight); 166, 171,
173-175, 181, 186, 197, 209, 220, 237, 264, 272-274 (Victoria
Island); 200, 203, 229 (Prince of Wales Strait); 235 (Dolphin
and Union Strait); 243, 247, 281, 283 (Cambridge Bay); 244
(large herds waiting to cross Dease Strait, October; trailed by
wolves); 277 (stone monuments of Eskimos for deflecting deer,
Dease Strait); 290 (large numbers migrating in autumn from
Victoria Island to mainland).
“Reindeer”: MacFarlane, 1890: 32-34 (Anderson River; Eskimos
hunting reindeer there; their clothing in part of deerskin); 38
(Eskimo fish nets of deer sinew); 38, 43, 47 (numerous on
Anderson River).
“Barren Ground caribou”: Pike, 1917 (1892): 43, 64 (near Lake
Mackay); 44-46 (Lake Camsell); 48 (Arctic islands to s. part of
Hudson Bay and vicinity of Fort Smith, W. to Mackenzie River;
rutting season in October); 48-49 (migration); 49 (segregation
of sexes; antler change); 50 (migration deflected by burning of
country; thousands [Barren Ground or Woodland species?] at York
Factory, about 1888-1890; depletion by hunting); 51-55 (Indian
methods of hunting; economic uses); 51-52, 90 (unwariness);
56-58 (relations to Eskimos, wolves, and wolverines); 58-59
(parasitic flies); 59-60 (Indian superstition); 67, 72
(Coppermine River above Lac de Gras); 76 (near Lake Mackay; Lake
Camsell); 81-82 (S. of Lake Mackay; curing of meat and hides);
89-91 (la foule); 90 (rutting season over and bucks too strong
to eat, late October); 101 (mostly passed into the woods by
November 11); 108 (Lake Mackay); 134 (near Lac de Mort); 148
(near Gros Cap, Great Slave Lake, January); 171, 174, 177 (N. of
Great Slave Lake); 174 (bucks leaving woods in early June); 182
(Lake Aylmer); 186, 199 (Back’s River, July); 201, 204 (near
Lake Beechey; females with young, late July); 209 (females and
young in great numbers, upper Back’s River); 217 (Clinton-Colden
Lake, early August); 220 (thousands at Ptarmigan Lake, August);
221 (Artillery Lake); 224, 227 (Pike’s Portage).
_Rangifer Groenlandicus_ Linn.: J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128 (use in
economy of northern Indians; weight; antler shedding; pelage
change; infestation with warbles); 129 (wintering between
Churchill River and Lake Athabaska; collecting on frozen lakes);
130 (Indian hunters killing 100-400 apiece; Fond du Lac, Lake
Athabaska, on a main migratory path).
_Rangifer Groenlandica_ Linn.: Dowling, 1893: 89 (Bear Head Lake
[N. of Great Slave Lake]); 92 (near Lake Mackay, June 22); 103
(a favorite crossing on Great Fish River near Musk-ox Lake); 107
(Pike’s expedition living mainly on caribou; migrations; does
fawning near the sea-coast, bucks following behind; horns in
velvet prized as food by Indians).
“Barren Ground caribou”: J. B. Tyrrell, 1894: 441 (_Alectoria
jubata_, a lichen, at Daly Lake, as food of caribou); 442
(immense herd--“tens of thousands”--at Carey Lake, July 29;
tormented by black flies; animals lean and poor); 445 (Eskimo
wearing deerskin coat; Lady Marjorie Lake, lower Dubawnt River);
446 (caribou plentiful in country traversed as far as Baker
Lake; last one shot there September 3).
“Barren Ground Caribou”: Russell, 1895: 48 (a mass of caribou
passing Fort Rae for 14 days in 1877); 49 (a section of antler
used by Indian as a powder horn); 49-50 (caribou N. of North Arm
of Great Slave Lake, November); 50 (leaping high in air at
start; Indian hunting methods); 51 (Indian use of meat; albino
specimen; antler growth and shedding; thousands near Bathurst
Inlet, April; does fawning along sea coast in June).
“Deer”: J. B. Tyrrell, 1895: 440 (deer meat bartered by
Chipewyans at Brochet); 442-443 (Indians hunting deer at Ennadai
Lake; large numbers encountered there; Eskimos skinning deer on
upper Kazan River); 444 (deerskin clothing purchased from
Eskimos on Kazan River); 445 (no deer seen in rocky country
along Ferguson River).
_Rangifer Graenlandicus_ . . .: J. B. Tyrrell, 1896: 13 (S. in
winter to Reindeer Lake and Mudjatick and Foster Rivers); 63
(migrating past Fond du Lac, Lake Athabaska).
“Caribou”: Whitney, 1896: 157, 238, 241 (migrations); 161 (fat,
pemmican, and dried meat); 175 (use of dried meat by Dogribs);
176 (tepees of caribou skin); 202-206 (vicinity of Fort
Enterprise); 210 (near Point Lake); 210, 213 (Dogrib hunting
methods); 237 (importance to Indians; weight; an albino);
238-239 (antler shedding); 239 (warble and nostril flies;
persecution by wolves); 240 (seasonal condition of flesh;
distribution; recent decrease); 242 (wasteful killing by
Indians; variation in wariness); 252, 268-269 (S. of Coronation
Gulf); 262 (shoulder-blade as Indian talisman).
_Rangifer Groenlandicus_. . .: J. B. Tyrrell, 1897: 10, 49-50,
165 (herd of 100,000 to 200,000 at Carey Lake, Dubawnt River,
late July); 12 (plentiful near Thelon-Dubawnt junction; scarce
at Baker Lake, early September); 14 (S. of Dawson Inlet); 19,
124 (large numbers, Ennadai Lake, mid-August); 21, 140, 142
(plentiful along Ferguson River, September); 76 (plentiful along
Dubawnt River); 122, 131-132 (hunted by Chipewyans, Ennadai Lake
and Kazan River); 126-127, 131-132 (hunted by Eskimos, upper
Kazan River); 134 (many near Yathkyed Lake); 150-151 (near
source of Owl River, Manitoba; hunted by Indians, Wapinihikiskow
Lake); 166-167 (hunting by Chipewyans and Eskimos; use for food,
clothing, and kayaks).
_Rangifer tarandus arcticus_. . .: Lydekker, 1898: 47-48
(description); 48 (distribution); 48-49 (migration; food).
_Rangifer tarandus_ (Linn.): Russell, 1898: 88 (great numbers
passing Fort Rae for 14 days in 1877); 89 (N. of Fort Rae); 90
(leaping into air at start); 91 (use of flesh by Dog Ribs;
albino specimen); 111, 113, 119 (upper Coppermine River region,
abundant in March); 134 (caribou-skin clothing worn formerly by
Loucheux at Fort McPherson); 139 (on Mackenzie Delta in 1850);
168 (caribou-skin lodge at Fort Rae); 169-172 (caribou-skin
clothing among Dog Ribs); 176 (caribou-skin drum at Fort Rae;
use of sinew); 178 (caribou-skin gun cases among Indians);
187-189 (caribou-skin clothing among Eskimos); 225 (antler
change); 226 (albino; food; distribution and migrations); 227
(abundant along coast between Mackenzie River and Cape Bathurst,
1894; deer snares; spearing; hunting); 228-229 (utilization by
Eskimos and Indians; parasitic flies).
“Barren Ground Caribou,” “deer,” or “reindeer”: J. W. Tyrrell,
1908 (1898): 77-78 (Barlow Lake; Carey Lake, thousands, late
July); 79 (weight 100-400 lb.; molt); 79-80 (antler change); 80
(relation of prongs to age; migration; food; reproduction);
80-81 (utilization of meat, skins, and sinew); 87-88 (Dubawnt
Lake); 97 (lower Dubawnt River); 98 (Wharton Lake); 123-138
(utilization by Eskimos); 139-141 (hunting by Eskimos); 174-177
(near Dawson Inlet); 206-207 (E. of Churchill River); 215 (mouth
of Nelson River [Woodland or Barren Ground species?]); 241
(importance to natives).
“Caribou” or “reindeer”: Jones, 1899: 328-332, 342-343, 353-355
(Fort Reliance and vicinity); 329 (weight); 338, 340, 365, 394
(Artillery Lake and vicinity); 342 (Indian corral or trap); 359
(noonday rest of caribou); 368 (immense band, Clinton-Colden
Lake, early March); 374 (tens of thousands of does daily,
Clinton-Colden Lake, moving N., March); 374-375 (relations to
wolves); 381 (abundant, near mouth of Dubawnt River, March); 390
(near lower Dubawnt River); 411 (suffering from insects); 429
(spearing by Indians).
“Deer”: Lofthouse, 1899: 275 (mouth of Tha-anne River, early
July).
“Caribou or deer”: Hanbury, 1900: 64 (Eskimos bringing venison
to Churchill and reporting deer numerous along the coast); 65
(importance of deer in northern travel; scarce along west coast
of Hudson Bay in May and early June); 66-67 (very scarce at
Baker Lake in June, plentiful in July); 67 (flesh unpalatable in
fly-time; large bands at Aberdeen Lake, August); 69 (absent in
winter on lower Thelon River; very scarce on Hanbury River,
August); 71 (plentiful, Artillery Lake to Great Slave Lake,
September).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson) (part): A. J. Stone, 1900: 50
(distribution; migration); 51 (Richards Island); 53 (antlers;
does and fawns moving N. in May, Franklin Bay; sprawling posture
of hind leg); 57 (disastrous results of whalers’ demands for
meat; Darnley Bay; Bathurst Isthmus).
“Caribou”: J. M. Bell, 1901a: 16 (vast herds near Dismal Lake;
use by Eskimos).
“Caribou”: J. M. Bell, 1901b: 252 (furnishing food and
clothing for Hare Indians, Great Bear Lake); 255 (use by Eskimos
near Coppermine River; vast herds); 258 (plentiful, but
decreasing, S. of Great Bear Lake; wanton killing by Indian and
Eskimos).
“Caribou”: Boas, 1901: 52, 54 (Eskimo garments of caribou skin,
Cumberland Sound); 81 (Eskimos hunting caribou with harpoons);
102, 107 (Eskimo clothing of caribou skin, w. coast of Hudson
Bay); 150 (albino caribou).--1907: 465 (Eskimos W. of Hudson Bay
dependent on caribou); 474 (caribou plentiful on Southampton
Island and larger than on mainland); 493 (caribou-hunting at
Pond’s Inlet); 501 (taboo against killing albino caribou, W. of
Hudson Bay).
[_Rangifer_] _arcticus_ (Rich.): Elliot, 1901: 37 (“Barren
grounds of Arctic America, north of the tree limit, to the
shores and islands of the Arctic Ocean”; diagnosis).
_Rangifer tarandus arcticus_ . . . (part): Lydekker, 1901: 38-40
(description).
“Reindeer and caribou (Rangifer caribou)”: W. J. McLean, 1901: 5
(Great Slave Lake, annual arrival on August 12; hunting and
utilization by Indians); 6 (antler growth and change; migration;
trails; swimming).
_Rangifer tarandus_ . . . (part): Beddard, 1902: 298
(“circumpolar”).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . .: Elliot, 1902: 259 (“in 1856 they
migrated to latitude 47° in great numbers to Lake Huron” [???]);
260, 274-275 (migrations); 273 (Arctic regions, W. to Coppermine
and Mackenzie Rivers); 276 (food; fat); 276-277 (utilization by
Indians and Eskimos); 277-279 (native hunting methods); 279-280
(antlers shed by old bucks in December and January, carried by
young bucks till spring, and by does till birth of fawns);
281-282, 286-287 (description).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Preble, 1902: 41 (50 and 25
miles S. of Eskimo Point; pursued by wolves; attacks of
insects); 42 (flashing a white throat-patch; summation of
previous records; ranging S. to Churchill River and Reindeer
Lake); 42-43 (pelage described).
“Caribou”: J. W. Tyrrell, 1924 (1902): 15 (Fort Reliance, Great
Slave Lake); 17 (Pike’s Portage); 18-20 (Artillery Lake); 26
(nearly all gone farther N., only stragglers remaining along
Hanbury River, early July); 27-28 (numerous tracks but few
animals, middle Thelon River, early July; hundreds killed by
spring ice or Eskimos); 31 (large band moving S., Thelon River,
July 23); 33-35 (between Thelon River and Artillery Lake); 37
(great bands of caribou the chief food supply in Thelon River
region).
_Rangifer articus_ . . . (part): Grant, 1903: 186 (Barren
Grounds W. of Hudson Bay, W. to Mackenzie River, S. in winter to
Churchill River and Reindeer Lake; threatened with extinction by
whalers); 189 (Salisbury Island).
“Deer”: Hanbury, 1903: 185 (between Lake Pelly and Arctic coast,
May).
“Caribou” or “deer”: Hanbury, 1904: 8 (Marble Island and
Chesterfield Inlet, June); 9 (Baker Lake, July); 10 (large bands
migrating S., Aberdeen Lake, early August); 14 (scarce, Hanbury
River); 16 (plentiful, Lockhart River); 30 (Pike’s Portage, late
July); 31 (Artillery Lake); 32 (Abbott Lake; scourged by warble
flies); 34 (large bands migrating S., Hanbury River, late July);
41 (hunted by Eskimos near Thelon-Dubawnt junction); 43-44, 47
(Schultz Lake); 43 (voice; spearing by Eskimos); 48 (scarce,
Baker Lake, early September); 49 (Chesterfield Inlet); 51
(plentiful near Marble Island, mid-September); 58 (leaving the
coast, late September); 67 (dressing of skins by Eskimos); 70,
72 (killed by Eskimos, Baker Lake); 73 (thousands at Baker Lake;
fierce combats between old bucks in October rutting season); 75
(deerskin roof of igloo); 82 (deerskin clothing of Eskimos); 84,
88-90 (NW. of Baker Lake, November); 85 (unwariness); 89
(pursuit by wolves); 93 (bucks remaining all winter on Back’s
River); 95 (numerous, Chesterfield Inlet; in December the old
bucks had dropped their antlers); 100 (near Depot Island);
104-107 (Chesterfield Inlet region); 108 (does migrating N. in
April); 111 (plentiful, Baker Lake, March); 113 (many, Schultz
Lake, March); 114-115, 123 (snow pitfalls made by Eskimos); 115,
116 (numerous, Aberdeen Lake, March); 116 (antlers of bucks
commencing to grow); 118 (NW. of Aberdeen Lake; buck weighing
280 lb.); 119 (Buchanan River); 120 (migration; many remaining
on Barrens all winter; deer meat essential to Eskimos on Back’s
River); 121 (frequent famine among Indians and Eskimos; caribou
formerly migrating S. and W. to Forts Simpson and Providence);
127-131 (Pelly Lake and vicinity); 131 (antics; jumping and
trotting); 133-137 (near Ogden Bay); 133 (majority of does
shedding antlers by late April); 135 (ravens feeding on
carcasses); 137 (warbles eaten by Eskimos); 139 (caribou
wintering on Kent Peninsula, at Cape Barrow, and on Victoria
Island); 143 (Arctic coast Eskimos going inland, summer and
fall, to live on deer); 149 (White Bear Point); 153-167
(mainland near Kent Peninsula); 164-174 (Bathurst Inlet); 177,
185-197 (scarce, Cape Barrow to Coppermine River); 194 (molting,
July; suffering from mosquitoes); 200-208 (lower Coppermine
River); 209, 210 (Kendall River); 215-221 (Dismal Lake); 223,
229-233 (Dease River); 232 (rubbing trees).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . . (part): Hornaday, 1904: 136 (Great
Bear and Great Slave Lakes to Cape Bathurst); 137 (Carey Lake;
migration); 138 (weight; antlers).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Stone and Cram, 1904: 52
(description; Arctic islands to Hudson Bay and Mackenzie River;
migration; rutting in October; sexual segregation); 53 (food;
Mackay Lake; grunting). (Chiefly quoted from Pike, 1892.)
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson) (part): Elliot, 1905: 401
(“Barren grounds of Arctic America north of the tree limit, to
the shores and islands of the Arctic Ocean”).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): MacFarlane, 1905: 680
(Mackenzie Basin; depletion through wanton slaughter by
Indians); 681-682 (Anderson River, in winter; hunting and
utilization by Eskimos and Indians); 682-683 (albino); 683
(trade in skins; wintering at Prince of Wales Strait and Mercy
Bay, Banks Island; migration between Arctic islands and
mainland); 684-685 (table of migration at Reindeer Lake);
692-693 (predation by wolves).
_R[angifer] arcticus_. . .: J. A. Allen, 1908a: 488 (specimens
from near Wager River described); 490 (migration).
_Rangifer arctica_ (Richardson): J. A. Allen, 1908b: 584 (type
locality, Fort Enterprise).
“Reindeer”: Amundsen, 1908, +1+: 76 (Boothia); 83-84 (King
William Island, September); 97 (reported formerly at Simpson
Strait in large herds in autumn); 99 (20 killed, King William
Island, late September); 102-106 (common in October, passing S.
over Simpson Strait; very shy; no wolves on King William
Island); 120 (Eskimos trading skins); 200 (King William Island,
first reindeer of season seen, June); 201 (supplied by Eskimos);
224 (Simpson Strait); 235, 241-243 (King William Island,
September); 237 (Eskimos hunting in September); 247 (large herds
passing over ice of Simpson Strait); 248 (King William Island,
October 15); 326-329 (hunting and utilization by Eskimos in
Boothia; few reindeer coming N. as early as May).--1908, +2+:
110 (many killed by Eskimos, King William Island); 311-316
(several, April); 322-325 (Royal Geographical Society Islands).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson) (part): Preble, 1908: 137
(Barren Grounds and islands northward; Great Bear Lake to Hudson
Bay; economy; probably two or more races; E. of Fort Smith in
winter; long ago S. to Fort McMurray); 138 (in 1902-03 to Cree
Lake; large numbers, Great Slave to Great Bear lakes; lower
Coppermine River); 139 (migration); 139-143 (summation of
previous records); 214 (wolves living largely on caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): J. A. Allen, 1910: 8 (7 August
specimens from Artillery and Aylmer lakes; measurements and
weight).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Seton, 1911: 206-262, 341
(Artillery, Ptarmigan, Clinton-Colden, and Aylmer lakes;
habits); 210 (voice); 220, 258-260 (numbers); 225-226 (relation
to wolves); 259-262 (slaughter by natives and whalers).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Cameron, 1912: 127 (place in economy
of Caribou-eater Chipewyans; migration; on Lake Athabaska in
winter); 309 (Fort Rae as a “meat-post” for the Mackenzie
District).
“Caribou”: Wheeler, 1912: 199 (Fort Enterprise and Coppermine
River; 1910 a very poor caribou year; females and yearlings
taken in April; females [only?] wintering between Rae and
Enterprise, and largely exterminated; usual numbers in 1911;
large migration of males commenced May 18); 200 (between
Coppermine River and Bathurst Inlet; by June 10 all caribou
beyond [N. of] Coppermine River).
“Barren ground caribou”: R. M. Anderson, 1913a: 5 (recent
great decrease); 6 (stragglers left in Mackenzie Delta region;
great diminution along Arctic coast E. to Cape Parry, since
recent advent of whaling ships; great numbers on Victoria Island
in summer, crossing to mainland for winter; Great Bear Lake and
Coppermine River; drives and spearing by Eskimos); 6, 8
(importance to Eskimos for clothing and meat); 8 (poor sight of
caribou; hunting methods).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): R. M. Anderson, in Stefánsson,
1913b: 502 (importance in native economy; recent enormous
decrease; few left in Eskimo Lakes region, on Cape Bathurst, and
at Langton and Darnley Bays; great number in summer on Victoria
Island, migrating to the mainland); 503 (Great Bear Lake;
Coppermine River; occurrence on Arctic coast at any season;
Eskimos driving them between lines of stone monuments into water
and there spearing them); 504 (hunting methods; senses;
infestation by bot-fly); 504-505 (fawning); 505 (geographical
variation; antler growth and change); 505-506 (fat); 516
(relations to wolves).
_“Caribou”_: Stefánsson, 1913a: 93 (ravens in Arctic feeding
on caribou left by wolves); 94 (caribou moving N., Prince Albert
Sound, Victoria Island, May 12); 95-96 (migrating across Dolphin
and Union Strait, March and May); 99 (plentiful on Dease River,
winter of 1910-11; abundant on lower Coppermine River, March; no
great numbers cross central Coronation Gulf; wintering on coast
E. of Coppermine; many moving N. across w. Coronation Gulf and
Dolphin and Union Strait, April and May, and w. Victoria Island,
May); 100 (migration across Kent Peninsula and in se. Victoria
Island); 102 (E. of Cape Bexley); 103, 106 (numbers wintering on
Banks Island, but few or none on Victoria Island); 105 (Eskimos
hunting caribou in summer on s. Victoria Island); 106 (caribou
wintering from Cape Bathurst to Kent Peninsula; migration N.
across Coronation Gulf and Dolphin and Union Strait, April 1-May
20, and S. in the fall as soon as the ice is strong enough; tens
of thousands on Dease River in late October; differences between
Victoria Island and mainland specimens).
“Caribou”: Stefánsson, 1913b: 27 (Fort Smith a “meat post”);
29 (abundant at Fort Norman 50 years previously); 127, 128, 156,
158 (Langton Bay); 130, 135, 137, 141, 142 (Horton River); 146
(Cape Parry); 151 (extreme scarcity of hornless caribou); 163
(Cape Lyon); 164 (Port Pierce; human eye keener than caribou’s);
203 (summer hunting by Eskimos S. of Dolphin and Union Strait);
203-204 (migration N. to Victoria Island); 204 (bot-fly larvae);
205 (near Dolphin and Union Strait); 210, 212, 213 (lower
Coppermine River); 212-213 (seeking protection from mosquitoes
on snow banks); 214 (Dismal Lake); 215 (summer hunting by
Eskimos on Dease River); 219 (Great Bear Lake); 221 (August
skins for Eskimo clothing); 224-225 (hundreds of thousands,
Dease River, October); 228, 235 (N. of Great Bear Lake); 231,
232 (Horton River); 238, 239 (Kendall River); 241 (lower
Coppermine River); 241-244 (geographical variation in caribou);
263-265, 269 (migrating N. across Coronation Gulf and Dolphin
and Union Strait, early May); 274, 278, 287, 289, 297, 298, 301
(Victoria Island); 276-277 (variation from mainland animals);
278 (habitual wariness); 281 (caribou-skin tents and Eskimo
hunting, Victoria Island); 289 (Banks Island); 294 (few on
Victoria Island in winter); 324 (Cape Parry); 333 (Langton Bay;
skins spoiled by warble fly larvae, June and early July; skins
thick in summer and fall); 335 (“Endicott” [= Melville]
Mountains); 337-338 (Eskimo methods of hunting and curing meat);
348-350 (migrating NW., Horton River, October); 364 (Langton
Bay, February-March).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Chambers, 1914: 93 (immense
herd, between Churchill and Owl River, December); 291-294 (Great
Bear and Great Slave Lakes); 294 (Mackenzie Delta region);
342-350 (summation of records on the Barren Grounds).
“Caribou”: Douglas, 1914: 103, 167, 168, 179, 180 (Dease River);
121, 190, 192, 196, 214 (lower Coppermine River); 137 (Great
Bear Lake); 157, 158 (very scarce, Great Bear Lake, winter); 185
(Dismal Lakes); 191-192 (larvae of warble and nostril flies).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . . (part): Hornaday, 1914, +2+: 97
(importance to Indians); 100 (the great mass between Cape
Bathurst and Great Slave Lake; tens of thousands killed by
natives for whalers); 101-104 (migrations); 103 (voice); 104
(tameness of large numbers; weight); 225-226 (numbers).
“Caribou” or “deer”: Stefánsson, 1914: 13 (former abundance from
Mackenzie River eastward); 26 (scarce near +Rae River+); 39
(common the year round on Banks Island; abundant in summer, but
scarce in winter, Victoria Island); 41 (migrating S. across
Coronation Gulf in November); 48 (stomach contents and droppings
eaten by Eskimos, Coronation Gulf); 54 (crossing ice in
migrating N., April and May); 56 (chief source of Eskimo food in
summer, Coronation Gulf); 57 (hunting with spear and bow); 58
(poor eyesight); 58-59 (use as food by Eskimos); 97 (kayak used
in spearing caribou); 137, 139 (former hunting in Mackenzie
Delta region); 140-141 (skin clothing in Mackenzie Delta
region); 147-148 (methods of removing and drying skins,
Mackenzie Delta region); 150 (use of skins and sinew); 275
(status about Great Bear Lake); 296 (droppings and warbles eaten
by Eskimos, Victoria Island); 353 (caribou taboos); 355-356
(many on Mackenzie coast).
“Caribou”: Wheeler, 1914: 52 (Dog-rib clothing of caribou
skins); 54 (between Forts Rae and Enterprise); 56 (Fort Rae’s
early trade in caribou meat and skins); 58 (countless thousands,
moving E., Great Slave Lake; Indian use of meat); 60 (caribou
scarce N. of Great Slave Lake after burning of country); 65
(plentiful, Little Marten Lake); 67 (near Lake Providence).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Harper, 1915: 160 (Tazin-Taltson
Basin).
_Rangifer tarandus arcticus_ (Richardson): Lydekker, 1915: 254
(bibliographical references; type locality; description; Baffin
Island).
_Tarandus rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Millais, 1915:
255-256 (considered conspecific with Woodland Caribou); 258, 263
(supposed interbreeding with Woodland Caribou); 261
(description; in winter ranging “west to the Rockies above Fort
Vermilion”[!]).
“Barren Ground Caribou”: Camsell, 1916: 21 (Tazin-Taltson Basin,
autumn and winter).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . . (part): Nelson, 1916: 460 (Arctic
barrens; numbers; Artillery Lake; gait); 460-461 (use as food).
“Rein Deer”: Thompson, 1916: 19 (Eskimo lances pointed with
leg-bone); 99 ([Barren Ground or Woodland species?] numerous in
spring on Hayes River, where snared by Indians); 100-101
(immense herd estimated at 3,564,000 individuals, crossing Hayes
River 20 miles above York Factory in late May, 1792).
“Caribou”: J. B. Tyrrell, in Thompson, 1916: 16 (Eskimos on
Kazan River subsisting chiefly on caribou, killing them with
spears and using their skins for clothing and kayaks).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . .: Kindle, 1917: 107-108 (tens of
thousands E. of Slave River, early winter); 108-109 (previous
accounts of great numbers).
“Barren Ground Caribou”: Camsell and Malcolm, 1919: 46 (e.
border of Mackenzie Basin; migration).
“Barren Ground caribou”: Malloch, 1919: 55-56 (larvae of
_Oedemagena tarandi_ from skin of caribou, Dolphin and Union
Strait, Bernard Harbour, and Coronation Gulf); 56 (larvae of
_Cephenemyia_ sp. from nasal passages of caribou, May 25,
Bernard Harbour).
“Caribou”: Stefánsson, 1919: 310 (hunting in the Arctic).
“Caribou”: Whittaker, 1919: 166 (in greater numbers than usual,
E. of Slave River, winter); 167 (1,000 does crossing Great Slave
Lake in March toward Barren Grounds).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Buchanan, 1920: 105 (S. in winter to
Reindeer Lake and Churchill River, rarely to Cumberland House);
105-108, 128-129 (migration); 105-106, 131 (food); 113-125,
134-137, 142-151 (hunting by Indians and others); 122, 124
(traveling upwind); 125-126 (description); 126 (antler change;
gait); 130-131 (numbers); 135-136 (snares); 136-140 (economic
uses by Indians).
“Caribou”: R. M. Anderson, in Stefánsson, 1921: 743, 750
(Eskimos killing caribou, Victoria Island); 749 (Hood River);
750 (Bathurst Inlet).
_Rangifer arcticus_ . . . (part): Hewitt, 1921: 11-12 (as a
source of meat and clothing); 56 (most abundant of the larger
land mammals of the world); 58, 64-66 (place in native economy;
range and numbers becoming restricted by excessive slaughter);
59-60 (distribution); 59 (destruction by Eskimos and whalers);
60-63 (migration); 61 (food); 62 (fawning); 67 (warble flies,
black flies, and mosquitoes).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Johansen, 1921: 22-24 (larvae and
adults of _Oedemagena tarandi_ and larvae of _Cephenemyia_ sp.,
both parasites of caribou, at Bernard Harbour); 29 (adult _Oe.
tarandi_, Dolphin and Union Strait); 35, 37 (larvae of _Oe.
tarandi_, lower Coppermine River and Victoria Island).
“Caribou”: Stefánsson, 1921: 18 (abundant, Banks Island,
winter); 227-230 (Norway Island [W. of Banks Island]); 231-234
(qualities of meat and fat); 242-249, 255, 258, 262, 281-283,
358, 364, 397, 369, 372, 473, 475, 476 (hunting on Banks
Island); 246-247 (fat); 247 (attacks by insects); 248 (speed
according to sex and age); 248-249 (pursuit by wolves); 251
(wariness on Banks Island); 252 (back fat); 255 (perhaps
2,000-3,000 caribou on Banks Island in summer); 307 (sight); 401
(hunting on Victoria Island, September; some migrating S. to
mainland); 401-402 (stone monuments used by Eskimos for driving
caribou to ambush); 475-476 (relations of caribou and wolves).
“Caribou” or “deer”: Jenness, 1922: 15, 17 (migration between
mainland and Arctic islands; one route across Cape Krusenstern);
20-21 (Coppermine River to Great Bear Lake); 22 (Cape Barrow to
Bathurst Inlet); 25-26 (Victoria Island in summer); 47 (spearing
from kayaks in Coppermine region); 48, 101, 248 (use of fat for
fuel); 61 (skins as bedding); 78-81 (skins as tent material); 97
(stomach contents eaten by Eskimos); 100-103 (Caribou as food of
Eskimos; hunting on ice of Coronation Gulf and on Victoria
Island; Coppermine River to Bathurst Inlet); 124 (summer hunting
by Eskimos about Dolphin and Union Strait); 125 (October passage
from Victoria Island to mainland); 127-142 (hunting on Victoria
Island, April to October); 148-151 (Eskimo hunting methods about
Coronation Gulf and on Victoria Island; attacks on Eskimos by
Caribou); 182-189 (Eskimo superstitions concerning Caribou);
244, 249 (scarcity and destruction at Coronation Gulf).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: R. M. Anderson, 1924: 329 (varying
estimates of numbers; Barren Grounds of central mainland); 330
(relations to reindeer).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Miller, 1924: 491
(nomenclature; type locality).
“Caribou”: Blanchet, 1925: 15 (upper Coppermine); 32-34
(migration); 32-33 (sexual segregation); 33 (fawning; food;
torment of flies; gait; molt; antler growth and change); 34
(senses; utilization by Indians; wariness; swimming; relations
to wolves and foxes; Great Slave Lake to Great Bear Lake and
Back’s River).
“Caribou”: Blanchet, 1926a: 73 (trails, Nonacho Lake); 96-97
(trail and signs, Lake Eileen); 98 (caribou in economy of the
Caribou-eater Chipewyans).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Blanchet, 1926b: 46-48 (migrations);
47 (fawning in early June; attacks of flies; gait; molt;
utilization of hides); 47-48 (antler change); 48 (senses;
segregation by sex and age; numbers in millions; Lake MacKay,
Great Bear Lake, Lac de Gras, Clinton-Colden and Aylmer lakes;
wintering S. to Cree, Foster, and Reindeer lakes).
_Rangifer_ spp.: Ekblaw, 1926: 101 (s. Arctic Archipelago).
“Caribou”: Mallet, 1926: 79 (migration; wintering about
Reindeer, Cree, Wollaston, and Nueltin lakes and Pakatawagan;
predilection for frozen lakes; predation by wolves); 80
(dependence of travelers on Caribou for food; hunting on the ice
of lakes).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Preble, 1926: 119 (Barren Grounds);
121 (depletion along Arctic coast E. to Coppermine River); 125
(Yellowknife Preserve); 137 (Back’s River Preserve; great
numbers; migration); 138 (Arctic islands; partial migration);
139 (Banks and Victoria islands).
“Caribou”: Blanchet, 1927: 145 (Abitau River); 149 (sw.
tributary of Dubawnt River, July 5).
“Caribou”: Craig, 1927: 22 (Admiralty Inlet; former abundance;
depletion by hunting).
“Caribou”: Henderson, 1927: 40 (Clyde River, Baffin Island;
annual caribou hunt by Eskimos).
“Caribou”: Rasmussen, 1927: 5 (Eskimos clad in caribou skin,
Melville Peninsula); 20-21 (hunting on Melville Peninsula); 23
(Eskimo stores of caribou meat); 54 (caribou moving N., Baker
Lake, May); 59-60, 103, 105 (hunting by Eskimos, lower Kazan
River); 63, 68 (Yathkyed Lake); 65 (warble fly larvae as Eskimo
delicacy); 67 (decrease in Eskimos and caribou at Yathkyed
Lake); 68 (stone cairns for deflecting caribou); 73-77 (Eskimo
hunting methods); 104-106 (Eskimos starving for lack of caribou,
lower Kazan River); 145 (Eskimos hunting near Admiralty Inlet);
166-167 (caribou obtained by Eskimos, Pelly Bay); 205 (King
William Island); 214-217 (migration, September 15-21, King
William Island); 245 (Eskimos of Victoria Island living on
caribou in summer and autumn); 246 (enormous herds crossing
delta of Ellice River; Kent Peninsula becoming depopulated of
Eskimos through failure of caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Anthony, 1928:
530-531 (description); 532 (Barren Grounds; former abundance;
destruction).
“Caribou”: Kindle, 1928: 72-73 (numbers estimated at more than
30,000,000; utilization by natives for clothing and meat); 74
(economic value of reindeer).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 9, 47, 57
(importance to Caribou Eskimos); 48 (back fat); 50 (wintering on
Barren Grounds; moving against wind; antler shedding; poor
quality of winter meat); 51 (wolves hunting caribou; does first
on spring migration; fawning in June); 52-53 (Eskimos feasting
on caribou in spring); 56 (fawning in late June and early July;
great migration at Baker Lake, late July; plagued by _Oedemagena
tarandi_; most important Eskimo hunting in late summer and early
autumn); 86 (tents of caribou skin among Caribou Eskimos); 89
(Eskimo spade made of antler); 90 (bags of caribou skin; fat for
illumination); 94 (skins for household use); 96 (the principal
diet among Caribou Eskimos); 98 (hunting by means of fences);
100 (Yathkyed Lake); 101 (heedless slaughter by Eskimos;
migration always incalculable; fox-trapping replacing
caribou-hunting); 102 (former use of bow in hunting); 104
(arrowheads of caribou bones); 106 (hunting by Eskimos;
wariness; keen hearing and smell; buck attacking a man at
Vansittart Island; deer-crossings in region of Baker Lake and
Kazan River); 107 (Eskimo hunting methods); 108 (snow pitfalls);
109-110 (spearing in water; swimming ability); 110-111 (driving
between lines of cairns); 112 (snares); 133 (gadfly larvae as
Eskimo delicacy); 134-135 (seasonal hunting); 135 (frequent
starvation of Eskimos in lack of caribou); 137 (staple food of
Caribou Eskimos); 138-139 (taboos in use of meat); 140-147
(Eskimo dressing of carcasses); 141-144 (raw, cooked, and dried
meat in Eskimo diet); 171 (meat as dog food); 186 (deerskin for
kayaks); 191, 196, 199-223 (Eskimo clothing of deerskin); 232,
239-251 (various Eskimo uses of skin, bones, and antlers); 262,
263 (Eskimo laws for hunting caribou); 268-271 (drums of
deerskin).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Seton, 1929, +3+:
95-135 (monographic); 97-99 (measurements, weight, color); 102
(distribution); 102-103 (antlers); 104 (molt; senses); 105
(communication; voice); 105-107 (disposition); 107 (aquatic
ability); 107-108 (food); 108-109 (Wolves and other predators);
109-110 (effect of mosquitoes); 110-111 (warble and nostril
flies); 111-116 (utilization of flesh and hide by natives and
civilized man); 113-114 (fat); 117-122 (hunting by Eskimos and
Indians); 122 (Artillery Lake to Back’s River; Arctic islands;
migration); 124-125 (reproduction); 125-127 (migration); 127-128
(wintering between Great Bear, Great Slave, and Athabaska lakes
and Hudson Bay); 131 (Mackenzie River to Cape Bathurst; Langton
and Darnley Bays); 131-134 (numbers perhaps 30,000,000); 133-134
(destruction by Indians, whalers, and Eskimos).
“Caribou”: Blanchet, 1930: 49 (E. of Great Bear, Great Slave,
and Athabaska Lakes; fawns born in late May or June; antler
growth and shedding); 49-52 (migration; Lac de Gras, Lake
MacKay, Beverly, Aberdeen, and Baker lakes; Coppermine,
Lockhart, Taltson, Dubawnt, Kazan, and Ferguson rivers; S. to
Cree and Reindeer lakes and Churchill; only a small migration
now from Victoria Island to mainland; Wager and Repulse bays);
50-51 (importance to Indians and Eskimos; Dawson Inlet to North
Seal River; inland from Eskimo Point and Nunalla; Padlei); 52
(food destroyed by fire; several millions); 53 (fawning area);
53-54 (possibilities for reindeer); 54-55 (relation of wolves to
caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Critchell-Bullock, 1930: 55
(Artillery Lake; weight; therapeutic value of meat); 58 (Thelon
River, thousands, late July); 143 (use as fox bait); 159-160
(numbers); 159-162 (useful role of Wolf as Caribou predator);
192 (wind direction scarcely affecting migration; Artillery
Lake, mostly bucks, September to November; bucks getting lean,
October 17; antlers dropping and flesh improving, November 7;
practically all (buck) antlers dropped, November 19; Artillery
Lake, several hundred does, November 4, then continuing to pass
N. during winter; bands of bucks passing S., November 26 to
December 9; young bucks with does during winter; does dropping
antlers, March 24 to mid-April; all does gone N. by April 27;
bucks moved N. of Hanbury River by June 20; main s. migration,
Thelon River, July 23; all sexes and ages, in bands up to
2,000--total number 10,000+); 193 (scourged and driven by
insects; voice; stage of pelage differing in sexes; delta of
Dubawnt River; possibly yearling doe with fawn; flies gone
August 24, animals putting on fat; does massing in September,
hundreds slaughtered by Eskimos at Thelon-Dubawnt mouth; last
seen, Baker Lake, September 5); 194-196 (table of Caribou
movements--localities, dates, numbers, sex, wind.)--1931: 32
(conservation); 33 (trade in hides; Back’s River Eskimos living
“solely” on Caribou).
“Caribou”: Hoare, 1930: 13 (bucks migrating NE., June, Artillery
Lake to Ford Lake); 14 (10,000+ near Campbell Lake, going SW.,
late July); 16 (bands near Smart Lake, August); 21 (Ford Lake,
early December); 22 (Artillery Lake and Pike’s Portage,
numerous, December; wolf predation); 27 (small bands swimming
lower Thelon River, late June); 31 (swimming Hanbury River,
July); 33 (great numbers of bucks going S. Thelon River, July
22; relation of migrations to insects and storms); 36 (circular
migration about e. end of Great Slave Lake; ne. migration in
spring down Thelon River); 37-38 (relation of migration to
mosquitoes); 52-53 (summation by R. M. Anderson: carrying
capacity of range--60 acres per Caribou; probably total not over
3,000,000).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Kitto, 1930: 87 (food; economy;
numbers and depletion; migrations); 88 (effect of firearms;
segregation of sexes and ages); 89 (wolves; insect pests); 89-90
(conservation measures); 110 (Keewatin, mainland and Southampton
and Coats islands; Churchill, Eskimo Point, and Baker Lake).
“Caribou”: Mallet, 1930: 13 (Eskimo clothing of skins, Kazan
River); 20-23 (great migrant herd, led by a doe, crossing Kazan
River near Yathkyed Lake); 27 (small herds migrating S., Ennadai
Lake, August); 32 (Chipewyan drum of caribou skin); 85 (Eskimos
between Nueltin and Baker lakes living on caribou); 87 (Eskimo
clothing of caribou fur); 89 (Eskimos starving for lack of
caribou); 90 (500 consumed per winter by 20-odd Eskimos); 92
(caribou-skin gloves; tongues as provisions for journey); 95
(Eskimos eating raw frozen caribou in winter and “lukewarm meat”
in summer); 102 (Eskimo tent of skins on Kazan River); 116
(Indians eating caribou on Kasmere River); 131-140 (Eskimo band
succumbing to starvation for lack of caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ Richardson: Jacobi, 1931: 78-80
(description); 80-84 (N. to Baffin Island and other Arctic
islands; E. to Hudson Bay, Southampton Island, and Melville
Peninsula; S. to Churchill River, Reindeer Lake, and Fort
McMurray; W. to Athabaska and Mackenzie Rivers); 140
(phylogeny); 156, 157, 159 (depletion by natives, whalers, and
traders); 186-187 (habitat); 190 (occurrence in herds); 192-210
(migrations: causes, extent, routes, numbers, behavior,
segregation by sex and age, dates, winter quarters); 216
(swimming); 219, 220 (unwariness; curiosity); 223 (food); 232
(reproduction); 236 (molt); 237 (change of antlers); 240-241
(predation by wolves); 244-245 (parasitic flies).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Harper, 1932: 30
(Lake Athabaska; excessive slaughter by Indians; Tazin
Highlands; food; Thainka Lake; junction of Tazin and Taltson
Rivers; avoiding lower Taltson River after fire); 31 (Great
Slave Lake; “near Artillery Lake” [= Stark Lake?]; Indians
spearing hundreds in water; migration; havoc by wolves;
Caribou-eater Chipewyans).
“Caribou”: Jenness, 1932: 47, 48, 58, 59 (caribou in Indian
economy); 51, 58, 75, 406-408, 411, 412, 414, 415 (caribou in
Eskimo economy).
“Cariboo” or “deer”: Munn, 1932: 57 (Artillery Lake); 58 (great
migration of perhaps 2,000,000 between Artillery and Great Slave
lakes; relation to mosquitoes); 168 (Baffin Island); 191-192
(Eskimo sleeping-bags and clothing of caribou skin, Baffin
Island); 210, 214 (Eskimos hunting deer, Southampton Island);
255 (trade in skins from Melville Peninsula); 271 (depletion of
Baffin Island herds); 278 (decimation of caribou in w. Arctic
due to Eskimos trapping white fox instead of sealing in winter).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Sutton and Hamilton,
1932: 33, 35, 36, 81, 82, 84, 85 (predation by wolves,
Southampton Island); 79 (formerly abundant, but no longer); 79,
81 (migration); 80-83, 86-87 (hunting and utilization by
Eskimos); 81 (scatology); 81, 84-86 (reproduction); 81-86
(antler growth and shedding); 83 (standing on hind legs); 84
(food; foot-glands; voice); 84-86 (parasitic and other flies);
87-88 (description); 88 (previous records on Southampton
Island).
_Rangifer tarandus arcticus_. . .: Weyer, 1932: 38 (most
important land animal to Eskimos); 39 (utilization by Eskimos;
food); 40 (fawning period; seasonal fat; migration).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Birket-Smith, 1933: 89 (immense
numbers on Barren Grounds, but recently declining); 90 (gadflies
plaguing caribou); 91-92 (migration); 92 (thousands at Baker
Lake, late July; scourged by mosquitoes); 93 (no longer
migrating from Victoria Island to mainland); 94 (occurrence in
autumn and winter at Repulse Bay); 100 (good hunting near Whale
Point, Roe’s Welcome; use of cairns in hunting by Eskimos); 106
(not many near Eskimo Point); 112 (great migration at Baker Lake
beginning in June); 118 (deer crossings on lower Kazan River);
121 (difficulty of reconciling reindeer culture with presence of
caribou).
“Caribou”: Ingstad, 1933: 34 (caribou deflected on s. side of
Great Slave Lake by forest fires); 48 (buck on Barren Grounds
harassed by black flies); 85, 110 (E. of Great Slave Lake); 86
(asleep on ice of lakes); 87 (leaping into air before running
off); 88 (varying wariness); 90 (carcass as fox bait near
Artillery Lake); 118, 122 (use of meat and hides by Indians,
Great Slave Lake); 134-135, 324 (spring migration across Great
Slave Lake); 135 (antler velvet eaten by Indians; larvae of
nostril and warble flies); 139 (Indian drum of caribou skin);
156-159 (migration; followed by wolves, ravens, foxes, and
wolverines); 158 (rutting season and behavior); 159 (antler
shedding); 160 (numbers); 161 (migration influenced by grazing
available; fawning on Arctic islands); 162 (separation into
different herd groupings); 162-163 (destruction by Eskimos with
firearms along Arctic coast); 163 (migration deflected by
burning of country); 165-166 (conservation; wolf predation); 167
(dependence of Caribou-eater Indians on this animal); 176, 181
(Stark Lake and vicinity); 186-187 (use of meat by
Caribou-eaters); 204, 216, 218, 220, 222 (upper Thelon River
region); 207 (predation by wolves); 225, 229-231 (Nonacho Lake
area); 247, 253 (dependence of Barren Ground Indians on
caribou); 253-254 (former hunting with spears, bows, dogteams,
barriers, snares); 257-259 (Indian use of meat and hides); 280
(migrating near e. end of Great Slave Lake); 291, 293, 296
(thousands in winter on Barrens E. of Great Slave Lake); 293,
297 (unwariness); 302-304, 306-307 (predation by wolves on
Barren Grounds); 312 (albino caribou).
“Barren land caribou”: Stockwell, 1933: 45 (large herds in
August, Point, Thonokied, and MacKay lakes and Coppermine
River).
“Caribou”: Weeks, 1933: 65 (very plentiful on Maguse River after
August 4).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): R. M. Anderson,
1934a: 81 (utilization of skin and meat; migrations; Melville
Peninsula, Boothia Peninsula, and Baffin Island).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: R. M. Anderson, 1934b: 4062, fig. 9
(map shows range of subsp. arcticus extending N. only to Arctic
coast and over Baffin Island).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Flerov, 1934: 240 (cranial
measurements).
“Caribou”: Godsell, 1934: 273-276 (trade with Eskimos on Arctic
coast resulting in great slaughter of caribou); 276 (importation
of reindeer to Mackenzie Delta region to replace caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Hornby, 1934: 105 (food;
weight; fat; migrations influenced by natives, unfrozen large
lakes, and fires; effects of flies; rutting season and behavior;
antler shedding); 106 (irregular migrations; sexual segregation;
wolf predation); 106-107 (movements, numbers, and dates in
region between Great Slave and Baker lakes); 108 (beneficial
effect of wolves on caribou).
“Caribou”: Wray, 1934: 141 (abundant, Lac de Gras, 1932); 144
(few S. of Mackay Lake).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Degerbøl, 1935: 48-51
(specimens from Baffin Island and Melville Peninsula, including
an albino from Rae Isthmus; descriptions).
“Caribou”: Freuchen, 1935: 93 (abundance of rabbits supposed to
lessen wolf predation on caribou); 99 (wolverine reputed to
attack sleeping caribou); 120 (pursuit by wolves near Wager
Inlet); 121 (followed by wolves, Melville Peninsula; predation
by wolves, Southampton Island); 122 (wolves said not to follow
caribou across streams; wolf methods of hunting caribou); 128
(caribou carcasses consumed by Arctic foxes).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Murie, 1935: 74, 75
(type locality; skull measurements).
“Barren ground caribou”: Alcock, 1936: 9 (Lake Athabaska).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Birket-Smith, 1936: 90 (importance to
Eskimos); 91 (migration; snow pitfalls, baited with urine;
hunting with spears, rows of stone cairns, snares, and bows);
110 (dependence of Caribou Eskimos on Caribou); 111 (frequent
famine and cannibalism among them for lack of Caribou; lookout
knolls for Caribou); 112 (sexual segregation in herds); 115-116
(clothing of caribou skin).
“Caribou”: Soper, 1936: 429 (resorting to Grinnell Glacier,
Baffin Island, to escape mosquitoes).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): R. M. Anderson, 1937:
103 (lower Mackenzie River to Hudson Bay; use of skin and meat;
scarce on coast W. of Bathurst Inlet; concentration between
Bathurst Inlet, Great Slave Lake, and Baker Lake; S. into Wood
Buffalo Park; use of rifles by Central Eskimos resulting in
decrease; apparent intergradation with _R. a. pearyi_ in
northern islands).
“Caribou”: Godsell, 1937: 288 (caribou migrating between
mainland and Arctic islands exterminated by Eskimos with
ammunition supplied by traders); 289 (reindeer imported to mouth
of Mackenzie to replace vanished caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Henriksen, 1937: 25 (larvae of
_Cephenomyia trompe_ L. from nasal passage, Baker Lake, May 2);
26 (larvae of _Oedemagena tarandi_ collected from caribou in
May, Gore Bay, Lyon Inlet, and Melville Peninsula).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. . .: R. M. Anderson, 1938: 400
(perhaps no great reduction in numbers, but some shifting of
range from human encroachments and fire; wintering S. to n.
Manitoba and Saskatchewan and ne. Alberta; estimate of
3,000,000).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: Hamilton, 1939: 109 (hoofs; function
of fat); 244-247 (migrations); 246, 352, 359 (importance to
Indians and Eskimos); 247 (influence of mosquitoes on movements;
sexual segregation); 301 (distribution determined by insect
pests); 359 (immense herd in ne. Saskatchewan).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ Richardson: Murie, 1939: 239
(Mackenzie River to Hudson Bay and Baffin Island, including some
of the Arctic islands; diagnosis); 244 (antlers; pelage;
migration; rut in September and October); 245 (food; ankle
click; voice; gait; senses; insect pests; Wolves and other
predators); 245-246 (danger from introduction of Reindeer); 246
(adaptation to environment).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Clarke, 1940: 5, 7 (dependence
of Indians and Eskimos on caribou); 8-9 (Rum Lake country a
wintering ground; Eskimos from Back’s River to Wager Inlet and
Baker Lake dependent on winter caribou; likewise those at
Beverly, Aberdeen, and Schultz lakes); 11 (great winter herd S.
and W. of Bathurst Inlet); 65 (fluctuations; current abundance
in Hanbury-Thelon region and scarcity at Baker Lake); 70
(parasites; diseases); 84 (economic importance); 85-86
(migrating southward in late July in Thelon Game Sanctuary and
at Tourgis Lake, in early August at Hanbury, Artillery,
Clinton-Colden, and Aylmer lakes, and from early August to late
September at Taltson River and Thekulthili and Nonacho lakes; in
autumn near Lac de Gras and on upper Back’s River; in autumn and
winter at Reliance and Snowdrift); 87-90 (at least 100,000
migrating N. in early July at Hanbury and Thelon rivers,
including does with month-old fawns); 89, 90 (molt); 91
(previous records in Thelon Sanctuary region); 92-93 (near Lake
Athabaska and Slave River and at Hill Island Lake in early
August; Wood Buffalo Park in winter; the various groups and
their movements defined); 93-95 (early ideas of migrations); 95
(fallacies; sexual segregation; antlers; influence of flies);
96-97 (details of migratory movements; retrograde autumnal
movement); 98 (extermination of bands formerly migrating from
mainland to Victoria and King William islands); 98-100
(irregular migrations; influences--such as wide open waters,
overgrazing, and fires--affecting migrations); 101-104 (carrying
capacity of range; numbers estimated at 3,000,000; increase and
decrease); 104-106 (accidents); 106-107 (effects of fire and
overgrazing; food); 107-110 (wolves and other predators); 110
(hunting and its effects); 112 (importance to natives).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): G. M. Allen, 1942:
297 (mainstay of Eskimos and Indians); 297-298 (description);
298-299 (Hudson Bay to Mackenzie River, N. to Banks and Victoria
Islands, Boothia, Southampton and Baffin Islands, S. to
Churchill River, Reindeer Lake, and ne. Alberta; migratory
habit; shift of range due to human crowding and destruction of
winter forage by fire); 299 (increased slaughter in winter
range; reduction on Southampton Island).
“Caribou”: Manning, 1942: 28 (rapidly reduced on Southampton
Island after establishment of a post in 1924); 29 (insufficient
skins for Eskimo clothing); 29 (wolves, for lack of caribou,
became extinct on Southampton by 1937).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Soper, 1942: 143 (in
1932-33, E. of Fort Smith, S. to 30th base line; along N. shore
of Lake Athabaska to Fond du Lac; W. of Slave River, between
Lobstick Creek and Grand Detour and into Wood Buffalo Park;
Tethul River to Tsu Lake and Taltson River; in 1933-34, crossing
Slave River from E. in vicinity of Caribou and Stony Islands and
Buffalo Landing, and feeding on goose grass [= _Equisetum, fide_
Raup, 1933: 39]).
“Caribou”: Downes, 1943: 203 (Windy Lake, late July); 215
(1925-26 and 1938-39 bad years for caribou on upper Kazan River;
consequent mortality among Eskimos); 221 (Red River, July 28);
224, 249, 250 (Simons’ Lake); 226 (grunting; shaking heads on
account of flies; buck with winter pelage); 227 (butchering
operation); 228 (use of antlers and hoofs; feeding on dwarf
birch; protecting carcasses from gulls); 236-237 (antics of a
buck); 253 (Red River); 255 (warble and nostril flies); 256
(does beginning to appear; swimming ability); 256-257 (snuffing,
snorting, and coughing); 258-260 (estimates of numbers); 260
(change of migration routes through human activities and forest
fires); 261-262 (effect of natives and wolves); pl. following p.
296 (Kasmere River).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Manning, 1943a: 47 (recent
depletion by Eskimos); 49-52 (w. Baffin Island; Koukdjuak and
Hantzsch rivers; Bowman, Taverner, Wordie, and Harbour bays;
Tweedsmuir Islands; Baird Peninsula; Lake Nettilling; Cumberland
Sound; Fury and Hecla Strait); 50 (summer and winter droppings;
exterminated from most of Foxe Peninsula); 51 (estimated
population in central western Baffin Island 10,000); 51-52
(migratory movements); 52 (sexual segregation and herding;
females bearing young at end of second year); 52-53 (antler
growth and shedding); 53 (molt; development of warble flies, and
their scarcity in fawns; accumulation of fat); 55 (annual kill
by wolves on w. Baffin Island estimated at 2,000 animals over
one year of age).
“Caribou”: Manning, 1943b: 103 (former migration--now
ceased--from the S. to Melville Peninsula, where the animals are
now scarce; still numerous on Baffin Island N. of Fury and Hecla
Strait; fairly numerous, Repulse Bay to Chesterfield Inlet;
dearth of skins for Eskimo clothing; numerous herds about
Piling, Baffin Island).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. . .: Porsild, 1943: 383 (food);
386 (warble and nostril flies “apparently do not travel very
far”; sparsely covered grazing areas suitable for caribou but
not for reindeer); 389 (migration affected by rotational grazing
and seasonal and local abundance of mosquitoes or flies;
wariness varying with size of herd; caribou disappear before
expanding reindeer culture).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Soper, 1944: 274-250
(great reduction in southern coastal region of Baffin Island;
few left on Foxe Peninsula; Hantzsch and Soper rivers; Bowman,
Amadjuak, and Frobisher bays; Lake Harbour; Nettilling Lake; Big
Island; Grinnell Glacier; Cockburn Land); 248 (measurements);
248-249 (migrations); 248-250 (utilization by Eskimos).
“Caribou”: [U.S.] War Department, 1944: 40 (Canadian mainland
and Arctic islands); 77 (importance as food).
“Barren ground caribou”: Wright, 1944: 185 (late summer skins
for clothing; high value of the meat; reduction in numbers); 186
(migration routes changed by overgrazing, fires, and excessive
hunting; numbers); 187 (annual consumption in Keewatin not less
than 22,000; decrease on Boothia and Melville peninsulas;
locally plentiful in w. Baffin Island; scarce on King William
Island; none on Adelaide Peninsula; great decrease on
Southampton Island); 188 (small herds on Coats Island; varying
numbers on Baffin Island, where skins are imported for clothing;
a herd on Bylot Island); 189 (scarce at Arctic Bay and on
Brodeur Peninsula); 190 (migration on Baffin Island); 191
(Baffin population estimated at 25,000); 193 (tables of numbers
taken annually on Baffin Island and in Keewatin); 195 (smaller
caribou on Boothia Peninsula and on Somerset and Prince of Wales
islands).
“Caribou”: Young, 1944: 236-238, 243 (predation by wolves in the
Barren Grounds, including Southampton Island and Artillery
Lake).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Gavin, 1945: 227-228
(recent increase at Perry River and Bathurst Inlet; partly
resident on mainland but also migratory, a few crossing to
Victoria Island); 228 (many fawning on small coastal islands and
Kent Peninsula; many succumbing to mosquitoes; damage by larvae
of warble fly).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): R. M. Anderson, 1947:
178 (type locality; Mackenzie and Keewatin, from Hudson Bay and
Melville Peninsula W. to lower Mackenzie Valley, and N. to s.
fringe of islands N. of the mainland Arctic coast; migrating S.
to Churchill River or beyond, Reindeer Lake, Lake Athabaska, and
occasionally the Wood Buffalo Park in ne. Alberta).
_Rangifer arcticus_. . .: R. M. Anderson, 1948: 15 (decrease;
shift of range attributed to fire or overgrazing; need of
protection; killing from planes; Northwest Territories; northern
Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta).
_Rangifer arcticus_ (Richardson): Manning, 1948: 26-28 (Eyrie,
Big Sand, Neck, Sandhill, Malaher, Boundary, Boulder, South
Henik, Camp, Carr, Alder, Victory, Ninety-seven, Twin, and Baker
lakes; Tha-anne and Kazan rivers; W. of Padlei; Christopher
Island; Chesterfield Inlet; Tavani; most numerous in the more
southerly and westerly of these localities in Manitoba and
Keewatin; heavy grazing on lichens where the caribou had been
numerous; migration; trails).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ Richardson: Rand, 1948a: 211-212
(diagnosis); 212 (Northwest Territories, wandering southward in
winter as far as Fort McMurray (formerly) and Wood Buffalo Park;
food; habitat).
_Rangifer arcticus_ Richardson: Rand, 1948b: 149 (numerous at
Burnt Wood River, W. of Nelson House, winter of 1944-45, and in
Herb Lake area, Manitoba, winters of 1944-45 and 1945-46;
hundreds killed by Indians).
“Caribou”: Yule, 1948: 287 (a losing battle for survival; not
half as many as a few years previously); 288 (considerable herds
between Churchill and Gillam, but fewer to the westward;
excessive kill; consumption by dogs and wolves; disaster
confronting Indians and Eskimos through diminishing supply of
caribou).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. . .: Banfield, 1949: 477
(economy); 478 (Mackenzie and Keewatin; numbers less than
previous estimate of 3,000,000; S. in winter to nw. Ontario,
central Manitoba, n. Saskatchewan, ne. Alberta, Wood Buffalo
Park, and Norman Wells; small bands remaining on Boothia and
Adelaide peninsulas, S. of Pelly Bay, on Somerset, Prince of
Wales, and Russell islands, and at Daly Bay; believed extirpated
on King William Island; Melville Peninsula); 481 (near Wager
Bay; fairly plentiful along Arctic coast from Back’s River to
Horton River, in Perry River district, and on Kent Peninsula,
where a few cross to Victoria Island; population on Southampton
Island estimated at 300, on Coats Island at 1,000 and on Baffin
Island at 25,000; apparently extirpated on Bylot Island in 1941;
Eskimo pressure on Baffin Island herds). (Fig. 1 suggests n.
limit at s. Victoria Island and Prince of Wales and Somerset
islands.)
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. . .: Harper, 1949: 226 (Kazan
River; Eskimos starving for lack of caribou); 226-230, 239-240
(migration and its pattern); 226 (wintering S. to Churchill and
Nelson rivers; Nueltin Lake); 226, 228 (habitat; trails);
226-227, 229-230 (locomotion); 227 (daily periods of rest); 228,
229, 230 (pelage and molt); 228 (insect pests); 228, 229
(organization of herds); 229 (antlers); 229-230 (disposition);
230 (grunting; shaking water off; foot-glands; food); 230-231
(utilization of hides and meat); 230-231, 239 (the wolf a
beneficial predator); 231, 239 (numbers); 239 (civilized man the
chief enemy; menace of reindeer culture).
“Caribou”: Hoffman, 1949: 12 (herds of 50,000 in Mackenzie
region spotted by aircraft; Indians and Eskimos thus directed to
them; caribou hides shipped to Eskimos along Arctic coast, who
are thus giving up seal-hunting).
_Rangifer arcticus_ agg.: Polunin, 1949: 24 (contemplated
introduction of Reindeer to replace Caribou); 72 (Frobisher
Bay); 227, 230 (reported increase in NE. of Southampton Island);
230 (Eskimos on Southampton Island learning conservation
methods); 233, 238, 262, 264 (Christopher Island, Baker Lake).
“Caribou”: Porsild, 1950: 54 (relatively plentiful, 1949, Banks
and Victoria islands).
“Barren-ground caribou”: Banfield, 1951a: 1 (importance in
northern economy); 3 (physical environment); 4 (former and
present distribution); 4-5 (winter ranges); 5 (influences of
fire on distribution); 6 (summer ranges; retrograde autumnal
movement); 9 (estimated mainland population 670,000); 9-12
(migration); 10 (retrograde autumnal movement; rutting in
October or November); 11 (influences of excessive hunting and
fires on migration); 12-15 (changes in range and status); 13
(estimated population of 1,750,000 in 1900); 14-15 (destruction
by whalers and natives); 15-17 (description; pelage and molt);
15 (weight); 17-18 (antler growth and change); 18 (tooth wear
with age); 19 (body form; foot-prints; foot-click); 19-20
(food); 21 (locomotion; swimming); 22 (voice; senses;
disposition); 23-24 (group behavior); 24-26 (sexual
segregation); 26 (rutting behavior); 27 (fawning behavior;
warning behavior); 27-29 (influence of food, weather, and flies
on migration); 30 (vital statistics; growth); 31 (sexual
maturity); 31-33 (warble flies); 33 (nostril flies, mosquitoes,
and black flies); 33-35 (internal parasites); 35 (bacterial
diseases); 35-36 (accidents); 36-37 (relations to other
animals); 37-41 (relations to wolves; annual loss from wolf
predation estimated at no more than 5 percent); 41 (wolverine
only a scavenger); 42 (few kills by barren-ground grizzlies or
golden eagles); 42-43 (effect of firearms and wastage by
natives); 43-44 (caches); 44-45 (meat used as human food, dog
feed, and fox bait); 46-47 (hides used for clothing, upholstery,
tents, moccasins, etc.); 47 (use of sinew, antlers, and fat);
47-50 (human population in caribou range; annual kill estimated
at 93,000 as a minimum).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_ (Richardson): Banfield, 1951b:
120 (Mackenzie; wintering in forest, summering on tundra;
specimens).
“Caribou”: Scott, 1951: 17 (Musk Ox Lake, Mackenzie); 19 (near
Beechey Lake); 37, 41, 83, 87, 88, 175, 214, 216 (Perry River,
Keewatin); 127 (use by Eskimos); 179, 180 (doe with fawn, July
21); 199 (several thousand, July 27); 234 (Baker Lake).
“Caribou”: Tweedsmuir, 1951: 18 (reduction on Baffin Island); 37
(Salisbury Island); 111 (gone from Foxe Land).
“Caribou”: Anonymous, 1952: 261 (decline in numbers from
1,750,000 in 1900 to 670,000 in 1952); 263, 265, 267 (wolves
harrying herds); 264 (annual kill estimated at 100,000; natural
enemies account for 68,000 more); 267 (summer and winter ranges
mapped).
_Rangifer arcticus arcticus_. . .: Mochi and Carter, 1953:
pl. 9, fig. 3, and accompanying text (description;
distribution).
“Caribou”: Harper, 1953: 28 (caribou bodies in Nueltin Lake
region fed upon by Rough-legged Hawks, Ravens, and Herring
Gulls); 40 (lack of Caribou leading to large consumption of
Ptarmigan as dog feed); 41 (Caribou preferred to Ptarmigan as
Eskimo food); 60 (Long-tailed Jaegers feeding on caribou
bodies); 62, 63 (depredations by Herring Gulls on caribou
bodies); 64 (Ring-billed Gulls feeding on caribou bodies); 72
(Canada Jays as substitute for dog feed when caribou are
lacking; these birds as scavengers on caribou bodies); 74
(Ravens and Canada Jays as scavengers); 76 (Ravens feeding upon
caribou bodies and following Wolves in expectation of a caribou
kill).
“Caribou”: Barnett, 1954: 96 (migration; fawning; numbers); 103
(migration); 104 (warble fly; antlers); 106 (lichens as food).
INDEX
The principal items selected for inclusion in this index are: names of
animals other than Richardson’s Barren Ground Caribou (_Rangifer
arcticus arcticus_); names of plants; names of institutions; and names
of authors and other persons.
The index does not cover the bibliographical references in smaller type
inserted at the end of each section, from pages 38 to 119; nor does it
cover the two large sections devoted wholly to bibliography (pp.
120-160).
_Aedes_, 45
_fitchii_, 70
_nearcticus_, 70
_Agrostis scabra_, 42
Alder, 98
_Alectoria_, 44
Allen, J. A., 116
_Alopex lagopus innuitus_, 63
American Committee for International Wild Life Protection,
reverse of title-page
American Museum of Natural History, 6, 117
American Society of Mammalogists, 77
Amundsen, Roald, 49
Anderson, R. M., 40, 43, 75, 78, 116, 117
Anonymous, 40, 47
Anoteelik, 6, 26, 27, 35 (fig.), 56 (fig.), 60, 85, 95
Arctic Institute of North America, 5, inside of back cover
_Arctostaphylos alpina_, 33 (fig.)
Armstrong, Alex, 117
Bailey, Alfred M., and Russell W. Hendee, 72
Banfield, A. W. F., 5, 10, 40, 58, 63, 66, 71, 76, 78, 107, 117, 118
Bear(s), Black, 42, 48, 62
Bergman, Arvid M., 72
_Betula glandulosa_, 33 (fig.), 98
Birch, dwarf, 16, 17, 22, 24, 41, 98, 99
Birket-Smith, Kaj, 76, 117
Bison, 85
Blanchet, G. H., 49, 117
Blowfly(ies), 29, 51, 52
Boas, Franz, 112
Bourassa, John M., 12
Buchanan, Angus, 7, 68, 86
Buchholz, Carl, 38
“Bulldog” (Tabanidae), 45
_Buteo lagopus sancti-johannis_, 68
Cabot, William B., 99
Calf, bovine, 104
_Canis_,
_lupus arctos_, 63
_lupus bernardi_, 63
_lupus hudsonicus_, 63, 64
_lupus mackenzii_, 63
_lupus manningi_, 63
_lupus occidentalis_, 63
_Carex chordorrhiza_, 55 (fig.)
Caribou,
Grant’s, 74
Labrador Barren Ground, 118
Newfoundland, 63, 66, 97
Peary’s, 43
(Western) Woodland, 7-9, 12, 45, 46, 70, 78, 112, 94 (fig.), 119
_Cephenemyia_, 45, 46, 72, 73, 96
_nasalis_, 72
_trompe_, 72, 73
_Cervus elaphus elaphus_, 50
Chambers, Joe, 11, 66, 85
Chipewyans, Caribou-eater, 47, 49, 52, 58, 62, 69
Christian, Edgar, 59
_Cladonia_, 33 (fig.), 44, 98
Clarke, C. H. D., 38, 40, 41, 47, 67, 78, 117
_Corvus corax principalis_, 68
Cow, domestic, 113
Critchell-Bullock, James C., 67
Crowberry, 16, 98
Deer,
European Red, 50
“Indian,” 8
Mule, 77
White-tailed, 46, 77, 78, 83-85, 87, 100, 102, 103
Degerbøl, Magnus, 112
Dix, W. L., 44, 98
Dobbs, Arthur, 8
Dogs, (Husky), 15, 17, 19, 21, 47-52, 59, 60, 62, 85
Downes, P. G., 18, 51, 52, 69, 106
Dugmore, A. Radclyffe, 97, 112
Dyar, Harrison G., 70
_Eleocharis baldwinii_, 42
Ellis, Hazel R., 12
_Empetrum nigrum_, 33 (figs.), 98
Eskimo(s), 5, 6, 19, 29, 34 (figs.), 35 (figs.), 47, 49-52,
56 (figs.), 57-60, 74-76, 79, 99, 114
“Eskimo candle(s),” 60, 114
“Eskimo Charlie,” 52
Fish, 47, 48, 59, 60
Fisher, Alexander, 103
Fleas, 73
Flerov, Constantine C., 110
Fly(ies), 14, 23, 27, 41, 43, 69, 85
black, 20, 23-28, 45, 46, 69, 70
“deer,” 70
nostril, 37, 45, 46, 72, 73, 96
warble, 37, 45, 46, 52, 56 (figs.), 57, 70-72, 96
Fox(es), 47, 48, 51, 62, 66, 68
Arctic, 48, 62, 63, 78
Red, 63
Franklin, Sir John, 46
Gallagher, Don, 12
Gavin, Angus, 64, 69, 117
Gibson, R. A., 6
Godsell, Philip H., 117
Goldman, Edward A., 63, 64
Goodwin, George G., 117
Grant, Madison, 118
Grass(es), 98, 99
Gull(s),
Herring, 51, 68
Ring-billed, 68
Hanbury, David T., 47, 49
Hares, Arctic, 69
Harper, Francis, 44, 51, 52, 58, 69, 74, 77
Hawk(s), Rough-legged, 48, 51, 68
Hearne, Samuel, 5, 7-9, 57, 102
Hewitt, C. Gordon, 75
Hoare, W. H. B., 47, 59
Hornby, John, 59
Horse, 96
Hudson’s Bay Company, 58
Indian(s), 5, 47, 48, 50, 52, 57, 75, 114
Chipewyan. _See_ Chipewyans, Caribou-eater
Cree, 58, 94 (fig.)
Ingebrigtsen, John, 11, 79, 107
Ingstad, Helge, 41, 49, 112
Insects, 20, 37, 43, 45, 46
Jackson, Hartley H. T., 77
Jacobi, Arnold, 7, 69, 71, 72, 74, 98, 102, 103, 105, 107, 112, 113
Jaeger, Long-tailed, 68
Jay(s), Canada, 48, 51, 68
Jenness, Diamond, 85
Johansen, Frits, 71, 73
_Juncus tenuis_, 42
Katello, 19, 49, 56 (fig.)
Lamont, Arthur H., 10
Lantis, Margaret, 74
_Larus_
_argentatus smithsonianus_, 68
_delawarensis_, 68
_Ledum decumbens_, 33 (fig.)
Lemmings (_Dicrostonyx_), 48, 69
_Lepus arcticus andersoni_, 69
Lice (or louse), 73, 74
Lichens, 37, 38, 44, 45, 51, 98, 99
reindeer, 24, 44, 99
_Linognathus tarandi_, 74
_Loiseleuria procumbens_, 33 (fig.)
Lyon, George F., 86
MacFarlane, Roderick, 112
MacIver, Angus, 38
McLean, John, 9
McLeod, Duncan A., 10
Malaher, G. W., 6, 10, 12, 43, 44
Mallet, Thierry, 41
Malloch, J. R., 45, 46
Manning, T. H., 58, 75
Millais, J. G., 15, 63
Mink, 69
Mites, 73
Moose, 45, 78, 85, 100, 113
Morrow, William C., 6
Mosquito(es), 23, 25, 45, 46, 69, 70, 99
Moss(es), 24, 51, 60
Murie, Olaus J., 105-107
Mushrooms, 99, 113
Muskox, 85
National Science Foundation, reverse of title-page, 6
Natvig, L. Reinhardt, 72
_Oedemagena_, 45, 46, 96
_tarandi_, 52, 70, 71, 73
Office of Naval Research, 6
Padleimiut, 50
Palmer, Ralph S., 6
Parkman, Francis, 52
Parry, William Edward, 103
Peary, R. E., 106
Perez-Llano, George A., 98
_Perisoreus canadensis canadensis_, 68
_Picea mariana_, 33 (fig.), 92 (fig.)
Pike, Warburton, 9, 44
Planchek?, Charles, 52
Pocock, R. I., 112
Poole, Earl L., cover
Porsild, A. E., 73, 76, 77
Preble, Edward A., 7, 9, 12, 40, 96
Ptarmigan, Willow, 44
_Rangifer_
_arcticus caboti_, 99, 118
_arcticus granti_, 74
_caribou sylvestris_, 12, 94 (fig.), 119
_pearyi_, 40, 43, 63, 103, 106, 118
_tarandus_, 5
Rausch, Robert, 77
Raven(s), 48, 51, 68
Reindeer, 7, 66, 69, 74, 76-78, 110
Lapland, Norway, or Norwegian, 5, 71, 72, 74, 75, 80, 87, 97,
103, 105, 112
Siberian, 74, 75, 77
Richardson, Sir John, 5, 7-9, 44, 46, 69, 103
Rita, 6, 34 (fig.), 35 (fig.), 56 (fig.)
Ross, Bernard R., 46
Russell, Frank, 112
Sabrosky, C. W., 73
_Salix planifolia_, 98
Schweder,
Charles, 6, 12, 13, 17-19, 27-29, 31, 32, 37, 44, 45, 48-51,
56 (fig.), 58, 59, 62-64, 66, 68, 69, 71, 73, 79-81, 83, 85,
86, 88, 95, 97-108, 111-114
Fred, Jr., 6, 12, 18-20, 24-27, 29-32, 34 (figs.), 43, 58,
64-66, 69-71, 73, 79, 80, 82, 84, 86, 100-104, 106, 107
Mike, 6, 26, 31, 34-35 (figs.)
Sedge(s), 17, 42, 55 (fig.), 98, 99
Seton, Ernest Thompson, 5, 40, 64, 73, 75, 80, 81, 87, 88, 97, 98,
100, 101, 103, 104, 107, 111-113, 116, 118, 119
Simpson, Thomas, 8
_Simulium_, 45
_venustum_, 70
Soper, J. Dewey, 58, 75
Spruce, 24, 41, 42, 51, 60, 108
black, 55 (fig.), 92 (fig.), 108
Stefánsson, Vilhjálmur, 49, 63, 84, 86, 105, 117
_Stercorarius longicaudus_, 68
Stewart, Norman H., 46
Stone, A. J., 97
Stone, Dr. Alan, 70
Sutton, George M., and William J. Hamilton, Jr., 107, 117, 118
_Tabanus_, 45
Tamarack, 24, 41, 42, 108
Thompson, David, 8
Ticks, 73
Turner, L. M., 118
Tweedsmuir, Lord, 118
Twinn, C. R., 45
Tyrrell,
James W., 12, 78, 81
J. Burr, 44, 78, 81, 118
United States Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, 70, 73
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 6
United States National Museum, 6, 118
_Usnea_, 44
_Ursus americanus_, 62
_Vulpes fulva_, 63
Washburn, Dr. A. L., 6
Weasels, 48, 69
Weber, Neal A., 69, 71, 74
Wherry, Dr. Edgar T., 42
Whitney, Caspar, 112
Wildlife Management Institute, reverse of title-page
Willow, 41, 60, 98, 108
Wirth, Dr. W. W., 73
Wolf(ves),
Keewatin Tundra, 11, 16, 20, 28, 37, 38, 41, 42, 48, 50, 63-68,
80, 81, 83, 84, 86, 102, 104
Alaska, 76
Newfoundland, 66
Wolverine(s), 48, 69, 83
Wright, J. G., 118
* * * * *
* * * *
* * * * *
Errors and Inconsistencies
Inconsistent capitalization is unchanged, as is the variable spelling of
“Dog Rib” : “Dog-rib” : “Dogrib”.
In references and bibliographies, irregular spellings such as “rain
deer” or “cariboo”, and variant forms of scientific names, are assumed
to be reproduced from their original sources.
_Spelling_
August 29 was ... in mid-afternoon [afternon]
References on relations to ... Stefánsson [Stefansson], 1913a
The numbers of rubbing trees ... on the outskirts [outskirits]
_Rangifer Graenlandicus_, _R. Groënlandicus_, _R. articus_
[_all spellings unchanged_]
_Punctuation and Typography_
September 13 was ... brisk, northerly; [brisk, northerly:]
Amundsen, 1908; Preble, 1908; [1908:]
J. B. Tyrrell, 1894: 441; Dix, 1951: 287 [1894;]
Hoare, 1930: 22; Clarke, 1940 [22,]
J. W. Tyrrell, 1924 (1902): 28, 37; Hanbury, 1904 [1924 (1902);]
“stone men” (Harper, 1949: 231, fig.).
[_sentence-final period missing_]
Birket-Smith, 1929 (1): 9, 47, 52-53 ... [1929 (1);]
Harper, 1932: 30, 31; Jenness, 1932 [30, 31,]
Clarke, 1940: 5-9, 84, 110, 112; G. M. Allen, 1942 [112,]
Kennicott, in Anonymous, 1869: 166 [1869;]
R. M. Anderson, 1913a: 5, 6; 1913b: 504 [5, 6,]
R. M. Anderson, 1913b: 516; Stefánsson, 1913a [516:]
recent notes by Banfield (1951a: 31-32, fig. 17)
[_open parenthesis missing_]
Seton, 1929, +3+: 109-111; Critchell-Bullock, 1930 [1929:]
Murie, 1939: 245; Clarke, 1940 [1939;]
R. M. Anderson, 1913b: 502; Hornaday, 1914 [502:]
J. W. Tyrrell, 1908: pls. facing pp. 80, 81 [pls facing]
J. B. Tyrrell, 1892: 128 [1892:128]
J. A. Allen, 1910: 8 [_period after A invisible_]
1908a. The Peary caribou (_Rangifer pearyi_ Allen).
[_final i in “pearyi” not italicized_]
1928. Field book of North American mammals. New York--London
[New York-London]
J. A. Allen, 1910: 8; Seton, 1929 [1910: 8,]
London: xv + 783 [London xv]
_Canadian Geog. Jour._ +24+ (1) [_number 24 both bold and italic_]
“Reindeer and caribou (Rangifer caribou)”: W. J. McLean, 1901: 5
[_anomalous roman (non-italic) type in original_]
_“Caribou”_: Stefánsson, 1913a [_anomalous italics unchanged_]
162-163 (destruction by Eskimos [162-163 destruction]
Barrens E. of Great Slave Lake); [Lake;]
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Barren Ground Caribou of Keewatin" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.