Cryptozoology

[Gaspode]

Some posts moved to AAH.

Back on topic please.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode

 

[kitakaze]

A little something for the fortean addicts...

Do you believe?

 

[William Parcher]

Taken from another thread here...

You did use cougar, and that is of course Puma concolor (of any subspecies).

I use cougar because panther is a misnomer.

The whole of the evidence for USA jaguarundi outside of South Texas is limited to sighting reports, yes? But you are speaking of folks who don't even say they are seeing a jaguarundi. These people say "cougar" and you say it could have been jaguarundi instead, yes?

Yes and yes, with the caveat that there is at least some potential track evidence to go along with the sightings. The reasons that I believe that jaguarundis may be responsible are in no particular order...
1- Jaguarundis once inhabited a much larger portion of the South than their currently known habitat (as did the cougar), so we known that at least at one point they were there.
2- Jaguarundis actually display a gray or black phase unlike the cougar, meaning that the jaguarundi could actually account for the sighting of a "black panther".
3- Being considerably smaller than the cougar jaguarundis would have less environmental impact, be more likely to avoid detection, and need less range in order to operate.
4- The size differential between jaguarundis and cougars isn't so great that it couldn't fit in the margin of error for an eyewitness.
5- What I witnessed was nearly within touching distance and was clearly not a cougar, "panther", jaguar, or other big cat. At the time I didn't know what a jaguarundi was and wrote it off as being a "black panther". It wasn't until later that I found out that there was an animal that actually matched what I saw.

 

[William Parcher]

1- Jaguarundis once inhabited a much larger portion of the South than their currently known habitat (as did the cougar), so we known that at least at one point they were there.

I'm curious about this. Do you have any online references? I remember reading that it was once thought that Arizona was historic range for jaguarundi, but now it is thought not - or at least there is no physical evidence for it.

 

[William Parcher]

Uh oh. The IUCN is now saying that they are probably/possibly extinct in the USA and that includes Texas.

It is probably extinct in the US (south Texas) (Sunquist and Sunquist 2002, A. Caso pers. comm. 2007).

Possibly extinct: United States (Texas)

 

[Bitter Monk]

Uh oh. The IUCN is now saying that they are probably/possibly extinct in the USA and that includes Texas.

If the IUCN is correct that would be sad news. Not because of my own pet hypothesis, but because they are a beautiful species regardless of where they do or don't exist. I did find some literature mentioning their adapting to different terrains which at least gives hope for their continued survival.

As to their prior habitat this http://www.nwf.org/cats/catsSouthwest.cfm NWF page shows their historic range extending into the Southwest. I was able to find references to ocelots historically ranging as far as Louisiana (another interesting possibility for the so called "panther").

Here's hoping that no matter where they are the jaguarundis keep on keeping on.

 

[William Parcher]

As to their prior habitat this http://www.nwf.org/cats/catsSouthwest.cfm NWF page shows their historic range extending into the Southwest. I was able to find references to ocelots historically ranging as far as Louisiana (another interesting possibility for the so called "panther").

I'm skeptical of that map because it makes no distinctions between the three species of "Border Cats". It's as if all three had identical historical ranges. I'm gonna go ahead and say that I doubt it, or that there is no evidence for it.

Also notice the perfectly straight lines at the north and east borders of the split ranges. What is that all about? Are those enormous cat-proof fences from days of old? I think we should look further for something scientific concerning the historical American range of the jaguarundi.

I did find this interesting article from Texas Parks & Wildlife...

Rarest Cat of All

With no confirmed sightings since 1986, the jaguarundi may have fled to thornier pastures in Mexico...

Reports of jaguarundi spottings crop up with some regularity in Texas. But the similarity in size and appearance to a house cat, rather than its population density, is the most likely reason for the frequency of sightings. Proof is in much of the Yeti-style snapshots and shaky videos that capture, in the final analysis, only fleet-footed Fluffys. However, a jaguarundi sighting usually doesn't involve just any old house cat. Rather, it is a house cat gone wild.

"We had a videotape sent to us from a hunting lease a few years ago that the person described as being taken in an area at least 50 miles from any houses," TPWD mammalogist John Young recalls of one jaguarundi alert. "The cat in the videotape was a house cat that was running wild. Wild house cats do not look the same as our pets. They are much more muscular, and walk and act differently, giving them a different appearance."

 

[Bitter Monk]

I'm skeptical of that map because it makes no distinctions between the three species of "Border Cats". It's as if all three had identical historical ranges. I'm gonna go ahead and say that I doubt it, or that there is no evidence for it.

Yeah the map itself isn't superb by any stretch. You have to read the text to see the difference in species range.

Jaguars have been documented historically in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and southern Louisiana, but today, the jaguar has been virtually eliminated from the U.S., and it is gone or missing from approximately half its range.

Historically, ocelots in the U.S. roamed the forests and scrub habitat of Texas, Arizona, and possibly Louisiana and Arkansas.

Historically, jaguarundis inhabited much of Central and South America and parts of the southwestern U.S.

The quoted text you provided about the domestic cats gone wild is interesting. When I was in GITMO there were feral cats on the leeward side of the base, including a female that was raising a litter under our duty trailer.

 

[Bitter Monk]

I guess for the sake of disclosure I should share more information regarding the sighting I mentioned.

What I witnessed was nearly within touching distance and was clearly not a cougar, "panther", jaguar, or other big cat. At the time I didn't know what a jaguarundi was and wrote it off as being a "black panther". It wasn't until later that I found out that there was an animal that actually matched what I saw.

When I was 14 we were rabbit hunting in Greene County, GA. We were hunting an area that was mixed swamp, overgrown fields, and forest. Our dogs had been on a long run about midday. I was alone along one of the fields when the dogs started to cut across a patch of woods across the field I was next to. Towards the middle of this field was a small mound. I decided to head towards this mound to see if I could get a shot. As I headed towards this little mound the dogs broke out of the field and started running in my direction so I started running trying to get to the top of this mound before the dogs passed me by. Just as I started to top the mound a larger than a house cat cat came barreling up over the mound from the opposite side. As soon as I saw the cat I put on the breaks so to speak. The cat immediately changed direction and shot off to its left but not before coming within just a few feet of me. Before I could even level my shotgun it had shot down the side of the mound and was lost in the tall grass.

In the short amount of time I had to observe it I could see a cat that I would estimate was close to three feet long. The shoulder height was harder to estimate because the cat was in a full run but it was clearly larger than any house cat. The three things that stuck out distinctly to me was the color, which appeared to be nearly solid black, the ears, which seemed close to the head, and the tail that seemed amazingly long in comparison to the body. The last thing I saw was this long tail whipping through the air as its body disappeared into the grass on the side of the mound.

 

[William Parcher]

You have to read the text to see the difference in species range.

Yeah I see that, but I still do not like the non-specificity.

and parts of the southwestern U.S.

Like what parts? There has to be records of fossils, bones, parts, etc. to qualify as confirmed historic range. I'm presuming this stuff is in scientific records somewhere.

I found this from Nevada-Arizona Academy of Science.

RANGE: Historic: South Texas, the east and west coasts of Mexico, southern Mexico, and Central and South America. There is no historical evidence that jaguarundis occurred in Arizona.

More... no photos or specimens ever from Arizona or Sonora.

This is one reason why I do not like that blended "Border Cats" map. It has you thinking that jaguarundi once lived in Arizona.

 

[William Parcher]

Interesting story. I couldn't say that what you saw was a jaguarundi. They are very out of place in Georgia. Are you (and any others) thinking that these cats are breeding there and other nearby states (FL/MS/AL/LA)? There is no roadkill nor any other biological evidence for a single individual, let alone a breeding population. You do think the jaguarundi is the cause for some cougar/panther reports in the south?

 

[Bitter Monk]

Interesting story. I couldn't say that what you saw was a jaguarundi.

To be completely honest neither can I. The only things I do know are that it was not a house cat, and the jaguarundi is a close match for it.

They are very out of place in Georgia.

You won't find me arguing that point. They would be very out of place if they were documented there.

Are you (and any others) thinking that these cats are breeding there and other nearby states (FL/MS/AL/LA)?

In order for them to be that far from their known range, and knowing they aren't a migratory species, they would have to be breeding locally if in fact they were found in any of those states (assuming of course it wasn't a lone escaped exotic).

There is no roadkill nor any other biological evidence for a single individual, let alone a breeding population. You do think the jaguarundi is the cause for some cougar/panther reports in the south?

This is why I referred to potential evidence of their existance. I fully recognize that outside of sighting reports like my own there really isn't much else to go on. I do however stand by my belief that the jaguarundi (or possibly another known species of Central American cat) makes for a more suitable candidate for "black panther" reports than the cougar.

 

[William Parcher]

I do however stand by my belief that the jaguarundi (or possibly another known species of Central American cat) makes for a more suitable candidate for "black panther" reports than the cougar.

The other C/A cats besides jaguarundi and cougar are spotted (ocelot, jaguar, margay).

"Black Panther" eyewitness reports are ubiquitous throughout the US east of the Miss River. These come from far more states than those I listed. You really don't think the jaguarundi is causing BP reports from Virginia do you?

I have even more suitable candidates for all those areas including GA...

1. Housecat
2. Canid
3. Fabrication (folk tradition)

 

[Bitter Monk]

The other C/A cats besides jaguarundi and cougar are spotted (ocelot, jaguar, margay).

Jaguars can be melanistic. There are also melanistic bobcats. Either would be a better candidate for the "black panther" than the cougar.

"Black Panther" eyewitness reports are ubiquitous throughout the US east of the Miss River. These come from far more states than those I listed. You really don't think the jaguarundi is causing BP reports from Virginia do you?

You're quite right about the range of reports. In fact it isn't even ubiquitous to just the areas you've mentioned. For the purpose of my hypothesis I see the jaguarundi as black panther candidate being limited to those areas of the southern US possessing suitable habitat. Understand however that I'm not suggesting that all "black panther" sightings are of jaguarundis. I'm also not arguing that all "black panther" sightings are real. However being a known animal capable of exhibiting a coloration that could be mistaken for black, and given that there are areas of reports that would be suitable habitat in my mind makes it a better candidate than the cougar. In an area like Virgina I would think a melanistic bobcat would be the more likely culprit assuming it wasn't one of the three choices you listed below.

I have even more suitable candidates for all those areas including GA...

1. Housecat
2. Canid
3. Fabrication (folk tradition)

Well of course those are more suitable until legitimate evidence comes forward. Bear in mind I never took the stance that there were unquestionably populations of jaguarundis spread through the southern states. I simply shared my own experience and provided a potential hypothesis for some of the reports of "black panthers".

 

[William Parcher]

Jaguars can be melanistic. There are also melanistic bobcats. Either would be a better candidate for the "black panther" than the cougar.

Of course there are melanistic jaguars. But the closest population of wild jaguars (Mex) do not exhibit melanism. Mel bobcats are very rare and seem to be limited to Florida.

I am still going to contend that the BEST candidates for black panthers are housecats, dogs or fabrication. Mel jaguar, mel bobcat or jaguarundi are going to fall into my category of special pleading or extremely unlikely. The reason I call those special pleading is because they excuse "good folks" of making "very foolish" mis-id errors of housecat or dog... or even "worse" that folks would just go ahead and make things up for fun or tradition.

You're quite right about the range of reports. In fact it isn't even ubiquitous to just the areas you've mentioned. For the purpose of my hypothesis I see the jaguarundi as black panther candidate being limited to those areas of the southern US possessing suitable habitat. Understand however that I'm not suggesting that all "black panther" sightings are of jaguarundis. I'm also not arguing that all "black panther" sightings are real. However being a known animal capable of exhibiting a coloration that could be mistaken for black, and given that there are areas of reports that would be suitable habitat in my mind makes it a better candidate than the cougar. In an area like Virgina I would think a melanistic bobcat would be the more likely culprit assuming it wasn't one of the three choices you listed below.

If you look at presented photo or video evidence of "black panthers" or "black cougars" you see black housecats. (A young black jaguar escaped captivity last year and was videotaped on a front porch clawing at the door before it was captured.) Importantly, there is no good evidence that the animals responsible for BP, BC or even normal cougar actually are these animals. The evidence suggests that folks are wrong or fibbing. I don't know why that is so difficult for some people to accept. It may be that Bigfooters are especially quick to defend folks and their eyewitness testimonies because of their own personal belief (Bigfoot is out there too).

I simply shared my own experience and provided a potential hypothesis for some of the reports of "black panthers".

I'll try to bring this back to the original point (from the other thread)...

Note that folk tales never start with "The following is not true and never actually happened..."

No, they start with "Oh my God you're never going to believe this..."

The South is rich with folk tales and lore of boogers, haints, et al. It really goes beyond just the realm of weaving yarns and into the very fabric of the culture. You can't drive very far in the southern Appalachians without coming across a "Booger Holler" or "Booger Mountain". That said, and having grown up in that culture, there is still a line between lore and what some would refer to as "local knowledge". The same person that might spin a fantastic yarn about a wampus cat could turn around and provide a very matter of fact accounting of seeing an out of place cougar in the same manner as if they were describing a particularly large buck they had observed.

It's about the line that you mention between "lore" and "local knowledge". You cite the Wampus Cat as lore, and the Cougar as local knowledge. If cougars are not living in a place where they are claimed.... then how does this qualify as any kind of legitimate knowledge held by the local folks? Exactly what is it that they know?

 

[Bitter Monk]

I am still going to contend that the BEST candidates for black panthers are housecats, dogs or fabrication. Mel jaguar, mel bobcat or jaguarundi are going to fall into my category of special pleading or extremely unlikely. The reason I call those special pleading is because they excuse "good folks" of making "very foolish" mis-id errors of housecat or dog... or even "worse" that folks would just go ahead and make things up for fun or tradition.

And again, I'll agree that of course those are the best candidates barring physical evidence. A person should be skeptical of any claim barring evidence in support of the claim, and in this respect you're absolutely right to do so.

If you look at presented photo or video evidence of "black panthers" or "black cougars" you see black housecats. (A young black jaguar escaped captivity last year and was videotaped on a front porch clawing at the door before it was captured.)

Do you have a link? I'd be really interested in reading about the jaguar or seeing the video.

Importantly, there is no good evidence that the animals responsible for BP, BC or even normal cougar actually are these animals. The evidence suggests that folks are wrong or fibbing.

I haven't argued against the lack of evidence from the beginning. I'm sure you're used to having to beat this issue home with some people but I can assure you I'm not one of them.

I don't know why that is so difficult for some people to accept. It may be that Bigfooters are especially quick to defend folks and their eyewitness testimonies because of their own personal belief (Bigfoot is out there too).

I'm going to see if I can get this across the right way because I'm really not trying to win this discussion because I know lacking verifiable proof there is no winning for my side. I do accept that in the absence of evidence skepticism towards any claim should be the rule and not the exception. I've never seen a ghost. I've never seen an alien. I'm highly skeptical towards both barring evidence to the contrary. However, I have had an instance where I saw a black cat that was clearly not a house cat or a dog. Because of this experience I have to consider that at least some reported BP sightings are real. In doing so I have to consider potential candidates for possible BP sightings, and have come to the personal conclusion that at least in some instances the jaguarundi is a more viable candidate than the cougar.

Now bear in mind I know that my own personal experience carries exactly zero weight in the debate. I have no evidence to support my claim and would never expect or plead for someone to use my experience as support for the possibility of jaguarundis or any other cat being the source of legitimate BP sightings.

I'll try to bring this back to the original point (from the other thread)...

I hope I'm not derailing this conversation. Contrary to what you might think this is one of the best discussions I've had on any forum in quite a while and I'm really enjoying it.

It's about the line that you mention between "lore" and "local knowledge". You cite the Wampus Cat as lore, and the Cougar as local knowledge. If cougars are not living in a place where they are claimed.... then how does this qualify as any kind of legitimate knowledge held by the local folks? Exactly what is it that they know?

To put it simply just because an area has a tradition of tales, it doesn't mean that there isn't the possibility that at least some are not tall. I don't expect you to agree, but I hope you at least give me credit for the pun.

 

[William Parcher]

Do you have a link? I'd be really interested in reading about the jaguar or seeing the video.

I got ahead of myself when I called it a mel jaguar. I'm pretty sure it's a mel leopard. Escaped or released, and it was declawed. It was shot and killed by a sheriff's deputy.

Here is an article with the video.

AFAIK, it's the only genuine outside-of-captivity "black panther" documented in America in who-knows-how-long. It probably wasn't on the loose for very long at all.

ETA: Cryptomundo on the story. I'm posting as I find these things... so there could still be an article out there that confirms the species. I'm still looking.

 

[William Parcher]

Here we go, it was melanistic leopard.

From article linked at above...

"We can tell quite a bit about these animal's origins by examining their bodies," said Beringer. "The fact that the leopard from Neosho had no claws tells us it was a captive animal. It was in excellent physical condition, with plenty of body fat, but it had nothing in its stomach. That is another sign that it was escaped or released from captivity. A wild cat would be able to get food for itself."

The pads of the cat's paws were worn smooth, a condition commonly associated with living on a concrete floor.

 

[William Parcher]

And again, I'll agree that of course those are the best candidates barring physical evidence. A person should be skeptical of any claim barring evidence in support of the claim, and in this respect you're absolutely right to do so.

It isn't simply that those are the best candidates - it's that those are what we get when folks do present some sort of evidence. A photo or video of housecat. Pawprint of canid or bobcat. Etc. These common candidates are so consistently the cause of reports that we have no good reason to think that any given report is anything else (such as genuine cougar/jag/leopard/jaguarundi).

My skepticism isn't limited to this specific. I'm skeptical that "common folk" know what they are talking about when they make claims of unusual local animals. That is general and prejudicial but it's difficult to argue otherwise when it is so consistently true.

I'm going to see if I can get this across the right way because I'm really not trying to win this discussion because I know lacking verifiable proof there is no winning for my side.

There's really no winning for "my side" either. I can't prove that Bigfoot, Big Cats, or even Jaguarundis are not out there.

I'm highly skeptical towards both barring evidence to the contrary. However, I have had an instance where I saw a black cat that was clearly not a house cat or a dog. Because of this experience I have to consider that at least some reported BP sightings are real. In doing so I have to consider potential candidates for possible BP sightings, and have come to the personal conclusion that at least in some instances the jaguarundi is a more viable candidate than the cougar.

But a "black panther" sighting is not real if the animal was actually a jaguarundi. It's a misidentification. I know what you are trying to say, but I need to make my point. What would be more ideal is if folks who saw a jaguarundi would say something like "I saw a dark cat that wasn't any housecat. It also wasn't large enough or shaped like a cougar, leopard, or jaguar. What do you think it could have been?" Instead we get "I saw a black panther." Or saw a black cougar.

I hope I'm not derailing this conversation. Contrary to what you might think this is one of the best discussions I've had on any forum in quite a while and I'm really enjoying it.

No, if anything I was the one who willingly took this away from Bigfoot and into folk culture and theory. I like researching animals and cryptozoology is a keen interest as well. I am highly skeptical of folk cryptozoological claims because I think I understand human nature as well as the animal kingdom.

To put it simply just because an area has a tradition of tales, it doesn't mean that there isn't the possibility that at least some are not tall. I don't expect you to agree, but I hope you at least give me credit for the pun.

I understand that. But you cited the Wampus Cat as pure fiction folk tale. How do you know that the legend isn't based on some real animal? Bigfooters consistently argue that the various Native American wildman legends are based on the real creature we call Bigfoot. If Bigfoot is not a folktale - then why can't the Wampus Cat be not a folktale?

 

[Bitter Monk]

I got ahead of myself when I called it a mel jaguar. I'm pretty sure it's a mel leopard. Escaped or released, and it was declawed. It was shot and killed by a sheriff's deputy.

Here is an article with the video.

AFAIK, it's the only genuine outside-of-captivity "black panther" documented in America in who-knows-how-long. It probably wasn't on the loose for very long at all.

Thanks for the link. I thought the closing sentence was interesting.

No one in the area has reported it missing, but animal control officials said it could have roamed as much as 100 miles from its home.

Of course there's absolutely no way to prove that either way but if the animal had ranged over a distance before being killed it might actually explain a few sightings.

I pretty much agree with everything else you posted but I would like to address these two points.

But a "black panther" sighting is not real if the animal was actually a jaguarundi. It's a misidentification. I know what you are trying to say, but I need to make my point. What would be more ideal is if folks who saw a jaguarundi would say something like "I saw a dark cat that wasn't any housecat. It also wasn't large enough or shaped like a cougar, leopard, or jaguar. What do you think it could have been?" Instead we get "I saw a black panther." Or saw a black cougar.

I understand that. But you cited the Wampus Cat as pure fiction folk tale. How do you know that the legend isn't based on some real animal? Bigfooters consistently argue that the various Native American wildman legends are based on the real creature we call Bigfoot. If Bigfoot is not a folktale - then why can't the Wampus Cat be not a folktale?

In regards to the first part I absolutely agree. In regards to the second, at least where I grew up, the Wampus Cat was known to be a creation like a snipe hunt or Santa Claus. That's why I separated it into the folk tale category.