OCR Text |
Show 472 MR. E. R. ALSTON ON THE BRITISH MARTENS. [June 3, Passing over the older writers, who merely copied the accounts of Gesner and Aldrovandus, we may come at once to Pennant, who describes Mustela foina as "The Martin," distinguishing "The Yellow-breasted Martin" as a distinct species, of which he says that it "is found in Great Britain; but is much less common in England than the former; it is sometimes taken in the counties of Merioneth and Caernarvon, where it is distinguished from the other kind by the name of bela goed, or Wood Martin, it being supposed entirely to inhabit the woods, the bela graig to dwell only among the rocks. Though this is so rare in these parts, yet in Scotland it is the only kind ; where it inhabits the fir forests, building its nest at the top of the trees " '. Pennant was followed by subsequent writers without much additional information being supplied. Thus Bingley states that the " Common Martin" is " not very uncommon in many of the southern parts of Great Britain and Ireland ;" while " Pine Martins are sometimes, though rarely, observed in the wooded and thinly inhabited districts of Wales and Scotland, and two or three of the northern counties of England " 2. Fleming gives the habitat of Martes fagorum as "In woods and rocks in the south of Scotland and England;" that of 31. abietum, " in the wooded districts of Wales and Scotland;" but adds that " the characters of these two species are ill-defined"3. The Rev. L. Jenyns in his excellent ' Manual' considered that 3Iustela foina was " more generally diffused " than 31. martes, which, be says, " inhabits the fir-woods of Scotland : occurs also sparingly in the west of England" *. Edward T. Bennett, then Secretary of this Society, discussed the question of the distinction of the Beech and Pine Martens in 1835, evidently inclining to the belief that they were specifically identical, and referring two British specimens then in the Society's Museum to the former and two others to the latter race 5. What was the ultimate fate of these examples I know not; but it is to be remarked that no exact localities are mentioned, and that the supposed " Beech Martens" had " dirty-white breasts :" not improbably they were faded specimens. Two years later appeared the first edition of Mr. Bell's standard work, in which he gave separate figures and descriptions of the two Martens, but " with the precaution of a protest against being considered as decidedly supporting the opinion that they are essentially different." No new information was here given as to the supposed distribution of the animals in this country 6. In Scotland, however, the elder Macgillivray had better opportunities for observation, and a comparison of specimens convinced him of " the indivisibility of the species." Young specimens, he says, have yellow throats, and 1 Brit. Zoology, 1768, i. p. 81. 2 Mem. Brit. Quad. (1809), pp. 164, 3 Hist. Brit. Anim. (1828), pp. 14, 15. 4 Man. Brit. Vert. An. (1835), p. 11. 5 Gard. and Menag. of the Zool. Soc. (1835), i. pp. 227-240 e Brit. Quadr. 1st ed. (1837), pp. 107-176. |