The assumption that the size of a female beaver skin would be larger I suspect is just that...as from what I can determine the size seems similar, though some of the charasteristics for hat making (a main use of these furs in the early period) may differ.

Do we know that fur trappers and traders of the day did not have different commonly used local industry terms for male and female beavers (as industries often do), and as the site I linked earlier (which is also listed in other internet sites) indicate...I suspect most here cannot certify that this was not the case. I have noted that there is often many different common terms used locally for the same species, beyond official terms.

The early colonial fur trade (French, British and Dutch) was mainly northern controlled until the Jay Treaty, I would expect a significant influence on this industry from that direction.

It is also not out of the realm of possibility that the term buck came from common colonial influence, or from separate sources, as the word is used in many different situations. Has anyone cited good evidence that deerskins was the source in both nations, beyond assumptions and local folklore?

As it interests me, I will email the Canadian heritage site and ask for the source of their information. If they cannot provide it, I will ask that they take the information down.