Proceedings ofthe United StatesNational MuseumSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ? WASHINGTON, D.C.Volume 122 1966 Numher 3584THE EXTINCT SEA MINK,WITH TAXONOMIC NOTESBy Richard H. Manville^A century ago, along the coasts of New England, there appears tohave lived a large, distinctive mustelid variously known as the seaor seashore mink, the giant or big mink, bull mink, salt-water mink,shell-heap mink, or ancient mink. It long since has slipped intoobhvion, leaving such a fragmentary record that its true nature islargely a mystery. With the present concern for rare and endangeredspecies similarly threatened with extinction, it seems appropriate tosummarize our knowledge of this former member of the Americanfauna.For the opportunity to examine the Clark specimen I am indebtedto James C. Sullivan of East Winthrop, Maine. Sea mink materialsfrom the Museum of Comparative Zoology were kindly made availableby Barbara Lawrence. Arthur Stupka provided much useful, un-published information. John L. Paradiso assisted ^\ith helpfulsuggestions and by checking my measurements of various specimens.Joseph P. E. Morrison and William C. Schroeder confirmed theidentification of certain items reported in the sea mink's diet. Toall these individuals, I am most grateful for their willing assistance.
> Director, Bird and Mammal Laboratories, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,and Honorary Research Associate, Smithsonian Institution. 1
2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 122General DescriptionAlong the Atlantic coast from Maine to New York are thousands ofshell heaps or kitchen middens, from a few square yards to an acre orso in extent. These middens were produced by Indian encampmentsdating back to pre-Columbian times. They have long excited interest(Wyman, 1868) and many are still being explored (Waters and Mack,1962). In one such shell heap at Brooklin, Hancock Co., Maine?onthe western shore of Bluehill Bay?F. W. True and D. W. Prentissunearthed, in 1897, the fragmentary skull of an unusually large mink.This specimen, no. 115178 in the U. S. National Museum, was de-scribed by Prentiss (1903) as a new species, Lutreola macrodon.The type specimen consists of the maxillae, portions of the nasals,the right zygoma, and the palate to beyond the last molar. All teethare present on the right side, but only the incisors and one premolaron the left. (The right upper canine of the holotype has come looseand has been firmly affixed, inadvertently, on the left side.) All teethare in good condition except the canine, which is broken at the tip.Prentiss described the rostrum as very wide and the nasal apertureand the infraorbital foramina as large. He pointed out that the nasalsascend more abruptly in the type specimen than in Mustela visonmink, its nearest relative; the dentition is similar except for the largersize of the teeth and the more acute angle of the carnassial wdth thelong axis of the skull in macrodon. Compared with M. v. ingens ofAlaska, the largest mink extant, he found macrodon to be decidedlylarger; e.g., the toothrow (anterior incisor to posterior molar) measured28.0 vs. 30.0 mm.Subsequently, many other skeletal remains of macrodon have beenrecovered from old Indian sites along the New England coast. Evi-dently the sea mink served as food for the Indians. Loomis (1911)reported that "every skull has the brain case broken and lost." Manymandibles were scored, as if by a scraping implement used to removethe flesh. Loomis characterized his mink as large and heavily built,with a low sagittal crest and short, wide postorbital processes. Thefrontal region was slightly arched between the orbits. Teeth weretypical of the genus but stouter and heavier; the inner tubercle of theupper carnassial was single and rather small.Norton (1930, p. 28) further described a specimen from GooseIsland, in the collection of the Portland Society of Natural History,as showing "a well pronounced sagittal crest, a rugose parietal, anample foramen magnum and massive occipital condyles. The basi-occipital has a strong knob on each margin which extends forward asa distinct ridge. The audital bulla is low, with a spine 1.5 mm. longat the inner anterior point."
NO. 3584 EXTINCT SEA MINK?MANVILLE 3DistributionDifferent authors have ascribed to the sea mink a probable rangealong the Atlantic seaboard from southwestern Nova Scotia to thecoast of Connecticut. It probably is now impossible to documentrecords from all of this area, but certainly the sea mink once occurredalong most of the coasts of Maine and Massachusetts.Near the type-locality, Moorehead (1922) reported remains of
"the large mink" from Boynton's shell heap at Lamoine, near thehead of Frenchman's Bay. His specimens were examined by G. M.Allen, who later (1942, pp. 181-183) reported remains of the "seamink" from sites as distant as "Casco Bay in the south, and north-eastward to Mount Desert and Frenchman's Bay, and Roques Island,Washington County, Maine." Loomis (1911), on the basis of frag-ments from no less than 45 individuals on Flagg Island, near SouthHarpswell on Casco Bay, described the mink as Lutreola luson antiques.A year later, Loomis and Young (1912) reported remains of 53 indi-viduals from Flagg Island, 3 from Sawyer's Island near Boothbay, 2from Seward Island in Frenchman's Bay, and 1 from Winter Harbor.Hollister (1913, p. 478) examined the mandible of a specimen fromLower Babson Island, Maine. Summarizing the distributional datathen available, Norton (1930, p. 27) listed the range as between"Great Diamond Island, Casco Bay, on the west, and Roque's Islandin Washington County on the east," and probably also on the shoresof New Brunswick. He noted that a skin, probably of this species,was handled at Campobello Island, near the mouth of the Bay ofFundy, in 1894. Norton also pointed out, with supporting evidence,that specimens from Crouch's Cove on Goose Island in Casco Bay,reported by Wyman (1868) as Putorius vison, probably representedthe sea mink.Long ago, Gilpin (1867, p. 12) reported from Nova Scotia largeskins which may have come from the sea mink. Some measured asmuch as 32.5 inches in total length; this may have been due in part tostretching. Skins of AI. v. mink from the Maine coast seldom exceed23 inches in length.More recently, Waters and Ray (1961) unearthed remains ofmacrodon from an archeological site at Assawampsett Pond in Middle-boro, Plymouth Co., Mass. The bones were in excellent condition,although fu-e blackened. Radio-carbon dating indicated their age inthe order of 4,300 ?300 years. This site is now 12 miles from thenearest salt water. The authors speculated that the animals mayhave reached there via the Taunton or Mattapoisett Rivers, or mayhave been transported by Indians from Narragansett or BuzzardsBay. The next year, Waters and Mack (1962) reported further re-
4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 122
mains from Conant's Hill on the Weweantic River. This is a tidalriver about 2 miles inland from Buzzards Bay and 15 miles from theearlier site at Middleboro. In Connecticut, Goodwin (1935, p. 70)suggested that the sea mink "might well have been found in the saltmarshes and rivers along the coast of the state." In Rhode Island,Cronan and Brooks (1962, p. 104) consider the former occurrence ofthe sea mink as possible but speculative. Anderson (1947, p. 192)reported that it was "traditionally said to have been commonlytrapped along the coast of the Bay of Fundy in southern New Bruns-wick" and may have "formerly occm'red on the southwestern coastof Nova Scotia." Recent HistoryThe formal description of macrodon as a distinct species promptedManly Hardy (1903) of Brewer, Maine, to write a short account ofthe sea mink. From about 1835, Hardy's father had been a fur buyerand had handled most of the fiu^s from Penobscot to Frenchman'sBays. Manly Hardy himself continued this trade, and over 50,000mink skins passed through his hands. He recognized as distinct anunusually large mink, especially from Swan's and Marshall's Islands,whose skins he received from the Indians of the Penobscot and JerichoBay regions until about 1860. The fur of this mink was much coarserand of a more reddish color than in the inland form. It was usuallyextremely fat and possessed a very strong, pecidiar, fishlike odor. Inthe early days, because of its large size, it brought a higher price andwas persistently sought. Few were trapped; instead they werehunted with dogs. Some men piu-sued them from island to island,investigating any small ledge where a mink might live.They carried their dogs with them, and, besides guns, shovels, pick-axes andcrow-bars, took a good supply of pepper and brimstone. If they took refuge inholes or cracks of the ledges, they were usually dislodged by working with shovelsand crow-bars, and the dogs caught them when they came out. If they were increvices of the rocks where they could not be got at and their eyes could be seento shine, they were shot and pulled out by means of an iron rod with a screw atthe end. If they could not be seen, they were usually driven out by firing incharges of pepper. If this failed, then they were smoked with brimstone, in whichcase they either came out or were suffocated in their holes (Hardy, 1903).In a short time these practices exterminated the sea mink.Mansueti (1954) reports that La\vrie Holmes, well-known conser-vationist of Mount Desert Island, recalled seeing mink traps made oflaths, as well as the deadfall variety, in use during the late 1890salong the shore of the outer island near Northeast Harbor.To Arthur Stupka, Naturalist at Acadia National Park on MountDesert Island from 1932 to 1935, I am indebted for unpublished notes
NO- 3584 EXTINCT SEA MINK?MANVILLE 5and correspondence on the sea mink. They include material fromMrs. Fannie Hardy Eckstorm, the daughter of Manly Hardy, whowas custodian of her grandfather's and father's business records from1835 to 1890. She was well acquainted with the large "seashore"mink and recalled seeing it when she was a child in the 1870s. TheAbnaki Indians called it "mousebeysoo," meaning "wet thing."Mink skins commanded their highest price?about $10.00 for the topquality?at the close of the Civil War, and this, Mrs. Eckstormbelieved, led to the animal's extermination.Mrs. Eckstorm wrote further, in 1935, as follows:There is the question whether all mink that lived nloug the shore were the bigsea mink. Were there two kinds there? I do not remember it, if there were. . . .I had a very practical acquaintance with birds for many years, while my fatherwas collecting his series, and I often observed the tendency of restricted islandforms, or those peculiar to the sea-coast, to run larger and darker than the inshoresub-species. . . . Why should these mink all be redder and larger, if there weretwo species on the same territory? The variation was constant. . . . My ownopinion is that there were not two species of mink on our coast, but an extra-large sub-species most highly developed on Swan's and Marshall's Islands. . . .My father laughed at the inferences drawn from a single skull. ... As to theirbeing styled "species ?Man-ofZon," "big-toothed, "of course an animal twice as largoas another of the same sort would have a bigger skull and bigger teeth! This isonly an individual difference. I see no reason for making a species out of thismink, though it was a stable variety. Father could tell some eight or ten differentlocal forms of mink and he thought several entitled to as good specific standing asthe seashore mink.Other material provided by Stupka relates to an interview in 1934with Captain Kodney Sadler of Bar Harbor. He recalled seeing the
"bull mink" as late as perhaps 1920, swimming from one island toanother in the Sorrento region. It made its home on the ocean front,among the rocks of the seawall piled up by the surf. Its den alwayshad two entrances. An adult and four young, which Sadler estimatedto be 3 or 4 weeks old (8-10 inches long), were seen along the beachof Sister's Island in August. This was "40 odd years ago." The youngwere very attractive, lighter in color than the dark brown adult.The bull mink were said to feed almost entirely on fish; the mostcommon remains about their dens \\ere of toad sculpin (probablyMyoxocephalus ododecemspinosiis) and horned pout (probably Macro-zoarces americanus). Mansueti (1954) stated they had been reportedin association with the banded snail, Cepaea (Helix) hortensis, on theouter islands. Probably mussels and other shellfish also contributed totheir diet.Allen (1942, p. 181) subscribes to the view that, in earlier times,only the large sea mink occurred in the eastern part of the Gulf ofMaine, probably ranging as far as southern Nova Scotia. Evidently22S-9C8?66 2
6 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 122
it was supplanted, within the last century, by the smaller southern race,M. V. mink, which also has a propensity for seacoasts.The various early accounts of the sea mink prompted Seton (1921)to call attention to the possibility of still obtaining a specimen. "Itwas the custom in the small hotels of the region," he wrote, "to havemounted any local animal of unusual interest in point of size, etc.These rarities were kept in glass cases as parlor ornaments or as bar-room accessories." As a result of Seton's plea, an unusually largemounted mink specimen was located at Lubec, in extreme easternMaine near the Bay of Fundy, in the possession of Clarence H. Clark.A Supposed Sea Mink SpecimenClarence H. Clark?businessman, politician, historian, and countycommissioner of Washington County?had over the years built upa considerable private collection of the fauna and flora of easternMaine, housed in the upper part of his residence at Lubec. Includedwas a very large, light brown (and much faded) mounted specimenalleged to be the sea mink. Norton (1930, p. 27) first brought it to theattention of the scientific public. He saw the specimen in 1924 andwas told by Clark that it was taken at Campobello Island, NewBrunswick, in 1894.^ This mink, mounted on a wooden base, wasprepared in the old-fashioned way, with the skull and leg bones inplace. The mouth is slightly open, permitting examination of theforward teeth. This and other items in the Clark collection weredescribed in giowng terms by Keene (1929), who published a pictureof the mink and was at pains to point out that it was "beyond price"and was sought by many of the nation's museums; however, Clark didnot wish to part with it.In 1935, Good^vin published a photograph (his plate IV, b) of thespecimen, from Clarence Clark, depicting it as the sea-mink. Stupka,in the early 1930s, examined and photographed the same mount,and his picture was subsequently published by Leopold (1936).Mau's and Parks (1964) offered still another photograph, by thePortland Society of Natural History.^ Mansueti (1954) presentedhis own drawing of the sea mink, posed beside the smaller northeasternmink of today.By 1964, the Clark collection had come into the possession ofJames C. Sullivan, then of Dennysville, Maine. He was anxious to
2 Goodwin (1935, p. 70), in discussing the same specimen, says that Clarkreported it taken "by a neighbor of his near the Bay of Fundy about 1874."This may have referred to the Joncsport specimen of "about 1880" mentionedby Norton (1930, p. 31).
' It should be pointed out that the measurements given by Mairs and Parksare not those of the Clark specimen under discussion but rather are the "probabledimensions" of M. macrodon as computed by Seton (1929, vol. 2, p. 562).
NO. 3584 EXTINCT SEA MINK?MANVILLE 7dispose of the whole lot and felt that he could sell the mink specimenfor a sizeable sum. When we were approached at the NationalMuseum on this matter, we agreed to examine the specimen to verifyits identification before negotiating fiu'ther regarding its acquisition.The lengendary specmien, which for safekeeping had been in storage atWaltham, Mass., reached us early in May 1965. Unfortunately,no data whatsoever accompanied it. It was examined wdth muchinterest and closely scrutinized by our staff and later by other, visitingscientists. In all, no less than 20 mammalogists expressed theiropinions on it. The mink was subsequently returned to Mr. Sullivan,now residing at East Winthrop, Maine.The Clark specmien (pi. 1) is indeed a large mink and in all prob-ability was an adult male. The fur is coarse in texture and lightreddish tan in color. The tail and hind feet are darkest, and the rest(particularly the right side and head) are much faded. Between theforelegs is a whitish patch about 50 x 15 mm in area; smaller whitespots are present on the left forearm and medially in the inguinalregion. Measurements of the mounted specimen are approximatelyas follows: total length 720, tail 210, hind foot 70 mm. In table 1,
Table 1.?Skin measurements (mm) of various minks
8 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUMMustela macrodon was described from skull fragments only, and itsdistinguishing traits relate to the large teeth, particularly the uppercanines. In table 2, tooth measurements of the Clark specimen aresimilarly compared with those of other minks in the national coUec-Table 2.
?
Tooth measurements (mm) of various minks
EXTINCT SEA MINK?MANVILLETaxonomic StatusThe status of the extinct sea mink, Mustela macrodon, itself seemsin need of reappraisal. Known only from fragmentary skeletalremains, its supposed external measurements are largely a matter ofconjecture. Certainly it must have been a large mmk, but figureson its "probable dimensions" (Seton, 1929, vol. 2, p. 562) wouldappear to have been exaggerated. I feel it more reasonable toconsider it as perhaps 25 per cent larger than M. v. mink of todayand 15 per cent larger than the present M. v. ingens. In this Iconcur with Loomis (1911), who considered antiqjius {=macrodon)as "all of 25 per cent larger" than liUreocephalus {=mink), with dueallowance for adult females being normally about 20 per cent smallerthan adult males in each species.
II5I78 6530 188351Figure 2.?Palatal views of teeth in three minks, drawn to approximately the same scale:115178, holotype of M. macrodon; 6530, holotype of M. v. ingens, Alaska; 188351, M. v.mink, Connecticut.
In figure 2 are sketches of the upper dentition of M. macrodonand of two subspecies of present minks. The macrodon specimen isfragmentary and considerably worn; yet, aside from its size andgenerally massive character, I perceive in it no highly significantdifferences when compared with the other two specimens. Thetraits mentioned by Prentiss (1903), Hollister (1913), and Norton(1930)?wide rostrum, large infraorbital foramen, low audital bullae,rugose parietal, basioccipital with strong knob?appear to me to berelatively minor in nature, and not of the magnitude generallyconsidered as distinguishing species. This was the opinion of Loomis(1911), whose materials, in all probability, represented macrodon.Loomis and Norton were not altogether in agreement as to thenature of the sagittal crest, which probably varied with the age oftheir specimens.As attested by Hardy (1903), a number of recognizably differentforms of mink occurred along the New England coast a century ago.
10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 122Many of the differences were probably attributable to individual orsexual variation. One of these forms, more distinct than othersbecause of its large size, was pursued avidly for its pelt. Its seashorehabitat rendered it relatively easy to capture. Overly zealoushunting, and possibly other factors of which we are imaware, led toits diminution and, ultimately, to its complete replacement by other,smaller forms of mmk.All the evidence indicates to me that the sea mink is most real-istically considered as a subspecies, now extinct, of the prevalentmink, Mnstela vwon, of today. This view is strengthened if, as seemspossible, the Clark specimen was indeed an intergrade between twoother forms of mink. Accordingly, the sea mink should properly beknown as follows. Mnstela vison macrodon (Prentiss)Putorius vison Wyman, 1868, Amer. Nat., vol. 1, p. 574, January.Liitreola macrodon Prentiss, 1903, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., vol. 26, p. 887, July 6.Putorius macrodon Trouossart, 1904, Catalogus mamm.alium, Suppl., vol. 1, p. 206.Lxitreola vison antiquus Loomis, 1911, Amcr. Journ. Sci., vol. 31, p. 228, March.Mustela macrodon Miller, 1912, U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 79, p. 101, Dec. 31.Type-locality: Shell heaps at Brooklin, Bluehill Bay, HancockCo., Maine.Range: Known only from skeletal remains; coast of New Englandfrom Penobscot and Casco Bays south to Middleboro, PlymouthCo., Mass.; possibly north to Campobello Island, New Brunswick,and south to the salt marshes and rivers of coastal Connecticut.Presumably extinct since about 1860 or somewhat later.Specimens examined: 57 fragmentary crania and mandibles ofMnstela macrodon, all from MAINE. Hancock County: Babson'sLanding, 1 (USNM); Black Island, 4 (USNM); Brooklin, 2 (in-cluding the holotype, USNM); Campbeirs Island, 5 (USNM);Conary's Cove, 8 (USNM) ; Eggemoggin Reach, 1 (USNM) ; Freethy'sBluff, 2 (USNM); Frenchman's Bay, 1 (MCZ); Harbor Island, 5(MCZ) ; Kane's Pomt, 1 (USNM) ; Lower Babson Island, 3 (USNM)
;
Naskeag Point, 6 (USNM); Penobscot, 2 (MCZ); Stonington, DeerIsle, 6 (USNM) ; Tibbitt's Cove, 1 (USNM). Knox County: GreatSpruce Head Island, 1 (MCZ) ; Port Clyde, 8 (MCZ). Also, numerousspecimens of Mustela vison. SummaryReviewed is what we know of the natural history of the sea mink,Mustela macrodon, which inhabited the New England coasts untilabout 1880. Its probable earlier distribution is sketched, and reasonsfor its extinction are discussed. The only alleged skin extant, a
NO. 3584 EXTINCT SEA MINK?MANVILLE 11mounted specimen, is shown to be that of a large Alustela vison, pos-sibly M. V. mink, or even an intergrade between M. v. mink and M.macrodon. The sea mink itself is reduced to subspecific rank, asMustela vison macrodon (Prentiss).Literature CitedAllen, Glover M.1942. Extinct and vanishing mammals of the western hemisphere. Amer.Comm. Int. Wild Life Prot., Spec. Publ. 11, 620 pp.Anderson, Rudolph Martin1947. Catalogue of Canadian Recent mammals. Nat. Mas. Canada,Bull. 102, 238 pp.Cronan, John M., and Brooks, Albert1962. The mammals of Rhode Island. Rhode Island Div. Fish and Game,Wildl. Pamphlet 6, 133 pp.Gilpin, J. Bernard1867. On the Mammalia of Nova Scotia, No. III. Trans. Nova ScotianInst. Nat. Sci., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 8-16.Goodwin, George Gilbert1935. The mammals of Connecticut. Connecticut Geol. and Nat. Hist.Surv., Bull. 53, 221 pp.Hardy, Manly1903. The extinct mink from the Maine shell heaps. Forest and Stream,vol. 61, no. 7, p. 125.HoLLiSTER, Ned1913. A synopsis of the American minks. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., vol. 44,pp. 471-480.Keene, Fred W.1929. Clarence H. Clark of Lubec is possessor of only known specimen ofextinct sea mink. Portland [Maine] Sunday Telegram and PressHerald, May 26, p. 7.Leopold, Aldo1936. Threatened species. Amer. Forests, vol. 42, pp. 116-119.LooMis, F. B.1911. A new mink from the shell heaps of INIaine. Amer. Journ. Sci.,vol. 31, pp. 227-229.LooMis, F. B., and Young, D. B.1912. On the shell heaps of Maine. Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. 34, pp. 17-42.Mairs, Donald F., and Parks, Richard B.1964. Once common . . . now gone. Maine Fish and Game, vol. 6,no. 1, pp. 22-24.Mansueti, Romeo1954. Mystery mink. Nature Mag., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 185-186.Moorehead, Warren K.1922. A report on the archaeology of Maine. Andover, Mass.: TheAndover Press, 272 pp.Norton, Arthur H.1930. The mammals of Portland, Maine, and vicinity. Proc. PortlandSoc. Nat. Hist., vol. 4, pp. 1-151.
12 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 122Prentiss, Daniel Webster1903. Description of an extinct mink from the shell-heaps of the Mainecoast. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., vol. 26, pp. 887-888.Seton, Ernest Thompson1921. The sea mink, Mustela macrodon (Prentiss). Journ. Mamm., vol.2, p. 168.1929. Lives of game animals. Garden City, N.Y. : Doubleday, Doran &Co., vol. 2, pp. 561-564.Waters, Joseph H., and Mack, Charles W.1962. Second find of sea mink in southeastern Massachusetts. Journ.Mamm., vol. 43, pp. 429-430.Waters, Joseph H., and Ray, Clayton E.1961. Former range of the sea mink. Journ. Mamm., vol. 42, pp. 380-383.Wyman, Jeffries1868. An account of some Kjoekkenmoeddings, or shell-heaps, in Maineand Massachusetts. Amer. Nat., vol. 1, pp. 561-584.
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING 0FFICE:l9eg