Merged Alien Big Cats in the UK?

learner said:
Now I see it!... That there is a female Black Panther ( about 2 years old) sizing up that horse for dinner. The Horse knows this, hence the long face. ;)
Click to expand...

:D:D:D

What's funny (to me) about that picture is there the horse is, standing there very calmly and serenely gazing around... the horse WOULD NOT do that if there actually WERE a big cat anywhere near by! The horse would be upset and attempting to escape.

And who would think that was anything but a house cat? None of the pictures even seem ambiguous to me, but then, I was not expecting to see a cougar or a lion.
 
"Wildlife trail camera owners in UK think they have "big cat" pictures"

I am the blog creator you are linking to, and for the record, WE DO NOT think these images are of big cats. We do say so on the page you are refering to. The images were placed on the blog to show what the public are sending to us of what they think is a big cat. Not what we think are big cats

I agree that none of them are of what we would normally think of as the big cat, a melanistic leopard or jaguar.

The only one I can safely comment on regarding size is the last image where the cat is seen partially obscured by the grass. This was taken with one of my own cameras and the branch above the cat has been measured by myself, and I can confirm that the cats body length is at least 3 foot with a tail longer than a normal domestic cat would have. It's size means it is not a full grown leopard, so it's identity remains unknown. It could be a juvenile, as there are reports in the area of cats with cubs, or it could be a hybrid of some sort. There are scottish wildcats in the area, as well as feral cats.

All I can say is that a 3 foot body length for a feline is twice the size one would expect from a normal domestic or feral cat.

We will keep looking :)

Big Cats In Britain
 
McHaggis said:
"Wildlife trail camera owners in UK think they have "big cat" pictures"

I am the blog creator you are linking to, and for the record, WE DO NOT think these images are of big cats. We do say so on the page you are refering to. The images were placed on the blog to show what the public are sending to us of what they think is a big cat. Not what we think are big cats

I agree that none of them are of what we would normally think of as the big cat, a melanistic leopard or jaguar.

The only one I can safely comment on regarding size is the last image where the cat is seen partially obscured by the grass. This was taken with one of my own cameras and the branch above the cat has been measured by myself, and I can confirm that the cats body length is at least 3 foot with a tail longer than a normal domestic cat would have. It's size means it is not a full grown leopard, so it's identity remains unknown. It could be a juvenile, as there are reports in the area of cats with cubs, or it could be a hybrid of some sort. There are scottish wildcats in the area, as well as feral cats.

All I can say is that a 3 foot body length for a feline is twice the size one would expect from a normal domestic or feral cat.

We will keep looking :)

Big Cats In Britain
Click to expand...

I take you mean the worst picture of the lot? (in regards to clarity). The one taken in Argyllshire? From the little I can make out it doesn't look out of place to be honest, just like a big domestic cat.

You should drop into one of the bigfoot threads - if you know the exact specs of your camera sure someone could give you an estimate of size....
 
Why would I need to ask someone in a bigfoot forum about estimation of size?

It's my camera, I know the location, (I did put the camera there), I've measured the branch to give an idea of scale. So unless my tape measure is giving me a false measurement, the size of the animal cannot be questioned.

I agree with you on the clarity, the camera was set to take three pictures in quick succession, and the cat only appeared on the first one. Unfortunately the very nature of these cameras is that you rarely get a nice picture perfect profile of an animal. In reality you get plenty of animal backsides and the odd leg as the animal dissappears out of view.


If you click on the image on the blog, you will get a much larger and clearer image. Take a look at the tail. Domestic cat tails are relatively short compared to their bodies, and are shorter in length than their shoulder height from the floor. The tail on this animal is much much longer than would be expected from either a doimestic cat or a feral cat.

What this animal is, I havn't a clue, unlike lots of big cat "researchers" I don't say that's a leopard or puma or lynx everytime they get a sighting. 99.9% of all sightings that have a picture with it, DO NOT show a leopard or puma or lynx, but usually large domestics or one of the larger designer breeds of cats. However occasionally we get pictures like this one, which we cannot dismiss immediately as a known species.

All I can say about this animal is that it is feline and is twice the size of a normal domestic cat. The farm where this image was taken is about a mile away, and is the only habitated building for several miles. There are several feral cats living in the farm buildings all of which are quite thin and of normal size. This animal is certainly not one of those.

The identity of the animal still remains an unanswered question to me.
 
Unfortunately, I can't post images on here until I have made 15 posts, so I have now added a close-up and cropped image of the animal to the blog. It's below the original photo of the Argyll cat.

Your views will be welcome.

Perhaps someone else could get the image from the blog and post it here.
 
Amapola said:
:D:D:D

What's funny (to me) about that picture is there the horse is, standing there very calmly and serenely gazing around... the horse WOULD NOT do that if there actually WERE a big cat anywhere near by! The horse would be upset and attempting to escape.

And who would think that was anything but a house cat? None of the pictures even seem ambiguous to me, but then, I was not expecting to see a cougar or a lion.
Click to expand...
I certainly agree with you, it certainly isn't a Big Cat, (like a leopard), and we too wonder why people keep thinking they are seeing and photographing one, and then sending them to us or to the press.

They obviously think they are seeing something out of the ordinary, it's not as though people don't know what a domestic cat looks like. But one point I would like to make, is that although these photographs do not show Big Cats, they all do show big cats. This one is no exception. Luckily in this case, the witness had also previously photographed a fox on the same position on the wall. So we have this as a comparison shot.

Again, I can't post the comparison photo here, yet, but follow the links and you'll find it, or perhaps someone else could post it here.

The comparison photo confirms the animal is not a leopard os such like, but does show an animal slightly smaller than the fox, which would put it at the upper limits of known sizes of domestic/feral cats. And certainly not something someone would expect to see everyday. Which may explain the witnesses reaction to seeing the animal
 
McHaggis said:
Why would I need to ask someone in a bigfoot forum about estimation of size?

It's my camera, I know the location, (I did put the camera there), I've measured the branch to give an idea of scale. So unless my tape measure is giving me a false measurement, the size of the animal cannot be questioned.
Click to expand...

I was more thinking of independant verification, because lets face it all we have is your word for it. I am not saying you are telling porkies but you are an obvious believer and in the absence of a) a corpse b) clear photography that can be verified c) animal kills etc d) fur / droppings e)tracks etc thats all anyone else has - your word. You could have been mistaken, it happens.


I agree with you on the clarity, the camera was set to take three pictures in quick succession, and the cat only appeared on the first one. Unfortunately the very nature of these cameras is that you rarely get a nice picture perfect profile of an animal. In reality you get plenty of animal backsides and the odd leg as the animal dissappears out of view.
Click to expand...

I can see that could be a problem, although if we are talking about leopards etc from what I've heard from documentary makers is you are lucky to even get that!


If you click on the image on the blog, you will get a much larger and clearer image. Take a look at the tail. Domestic cat tails are relatively short compared to their bodies, and are shorter in length than their shoulder height from the floor. The tail on this animal is much much longer than would be expected from either a doimestic cat or a feral cat.
Click to expand...

Not being an expert in cats I don't have much to offer.

What this animal is, I havn't a clue, unlike lots of big cat "researchers" I don't say that's a leopard or puma or lynx everytime they get a sighting. 99.9% of all sightings that have a picture with it, DO NOT show a leopard or puma or lynx, but usually large domestics or one of the larger designer breeds of cats. However occasionally we get pictures like this one, which we cannot dismiss immediately as a known species.
Click to expand...

Now this is where we disagree, in the absence of the above that I typed out before I would immediatley put the photo down to meh an odd photo.

All I can say about this animal is that it is feline and is twice the size of a normal domestic cat. The farm where this image was taken is about a mile away, and is the only habitated building for several miles. There are several feral cats living in the farm buildings all of which are quite thin and of normal size. This animal is certainly not one of those.

The identity of the animal still remains an unanswered question to me.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, just don't expect others to agree without independant verification.

p.s I would love there to be big cats out there, I just fear we are too an inhabitated island for them to exist without clear evidence of them being here.
 
McHaggis said:
Unfortunately, I can't post images on here until I have made 15 posts, so I have now added a close-up and cropped image of the animal to the blog. It's below the original photo of the Argyll cat.

Your views will be welcome.

Perhaps someone else could get the image from the blog and post it here.
Click to expand...

Original

bcat250510.jpg


Cropped Image

zoomcat.JPG
 
Thanks Delscottio for putting up the pics.

You comment that I could be mistaken is a very valid one, IF it was of a sighting of a cat that I had with my own eyes. Memory and size perception are notoriously bad in these sort of cases, and often the mind will play tricks on itself. Thinking the animal was larger than it really was. Hence the reason we get reports of 4 foot long cats, accompanied with pictures of cats wchich turn out to be less than 2 foot when we investigate the site and take comparison photographs.

But in this case, the memory nor size perception play any part in this. We have a picture taken of a cat, we have a branch above the cat. The branch was measured. From this measurement between noticeable points on the branch, (in this case at the joins where smaller branches are connected to the main branch), and size estimation could be made. I have had many pictures of feral cats on my cameras over the years, and these were dismissed immediately, even though some of them were over 2 feet in body length with 15" tails. This is something different.


Just to clarify my position regarding the existance of big cats in the UK. I am a believer only in the respect that I have seen a puma crossing the road in front of my car in Scotland. For every other report that comes my way, I am an extreme sceptic. (often at odds with the majority of my fellow researchers). I will always ask for proof, and to date I have seen very little in the way of proof. This leads me to conclude a couple of things. The numbers of real big cats, (leopards pumas etc) that are living wild in the entire UK probably number no more than 20 or 30, however we do have probably hundreds of these giant feral/hybrids black cats, which account for the majority of sightings. Where these originate from, I have yet to see definitive evidence.

Regarding evidence, corpses have been found of Lynx and Puma, and we know of one black leopard corpse removed from MOD land, (we are still trying to get more info through the FOI act, but it is a nightmare to do so, and we keep getting stalling tactics. I am a veteran of finding info through the FOI, (freedom of information), having sent well over 1000 requests to date).

We do have access to external organisations if and when we get evidence. We use the services of South African and American game trackers for prints, access to DNA testing, and we have worked with Dr Andrew Kitchener in Edinburgh (one of the worlds leading authorities on wild cats), in relation to thinks like the Kellas cats. We have the professional expertise available, we just need the evidence now.
 
Bell said:
From this photo I cannot tell if the cat is walking directly under the branch or is closer to the camera.
Click to expand...
Bell, the cat is actually slightly behind the branch. There is a small animal trackway just behind the branch which leads down to a small stream, (this was the reason the camera was placed there in the first place), which is why the animal appears to be going slightly downhill. The cat is probably about 12"-18" behind the branch
 
McHaggis said:
Bell, the cat is actually slightly behind the branch. There is a small animal trackway just behind the branch which leads down to a small stream, (this was the reason the camera was placed there in the first place), which is why the animal appears to be going slightly downhill. The cat is probably about 12"-18" behind the branch
Click to expand...

Evidence? It certainly doesn't seem to be possible to tell that from the photograph. Just because there's a track there doesn't mean the cat is using it. My cats, and pretty much every other cat I've ever seen, often wander around in long grass regardless of the presence of tracks. This simply looks like a regular cat that happens to be closer to the camera than you think.
 
I understand what you are saying. but I have viewed the 812kb image in very close detail. I certainly wouldn't have released the image if I thought it was just a regular cat.

There are tall grasses in front of the cat which can actually be seen touching the branch.

I have been on site, I have viewed the image on site, and I am fully convinced that the cat is slightly behind the branch.

But as I've said, I appreciate everyones views, although I may not agree with them all :)
 
sphenisc said:
The grass appears to be Yorkshire Fog Holcus lanatus, which grows to ~60cm. If you've got better pictures of the grass the identification can be confirmed.

http://www.dgsgardening.btinternet.co.uk/yorkfog.htm
Click to expand...
I looked up the grass you were suggesting, but it isn't that.

What I will say is that on my last visit to the location the grass is well above the branch now, in fact well over my waist height, so more than 36" high. Also the branch is now much lower as the weight of its branches and leaves has caused it to bend lower to the ground.

If the animal was to walk the same path today and I had the camera in the same position, it would be impossible to see due to all the growth of the plants in the area.
 
McHaggis said:
I understand what you are saying. but I have viewed the 812kb image in very close detail.
Click to expand...
Any chance of posting the original somewhere with the EXIF data intact (i.e. an untreated copy of the original)?

There's not much that can be gleaned from the 43kb image.

Oh, and how far away is the tree limb, tree trunk and the game trail from the camera?
 
Last edited:
McHaggis said:
Thanks Delscottio for putting up the pics.
Click to expand...

No problem.

You comment that I could be mistaken is a very valid one, IF it was of a sighting of a cat that I had with my own eyes. Memory and size perception are notoriously bad in these sort of cases, and often the mind will play tricks on itself. Thinking the animal was larger than it really was. Hence the reason we get reports of 4 foot long cats, accompanied with pictures of cats wchich turn out to be less than 2 foot when we investigate the site and take comparison photographs.

But in this case, the memory nor size perception play any part in this. We have a picture taken of a cat, we have a branch above the cat. The branch was measured. From this measurement between noticeable points on the branch, (in this case at the joins where smaller branches are connected to the main branch), and size estimation could be made. I have had many pictures of feral cats on my cameras over the years, and these were dismissed immediately, even though some of them were over 2 feet in body length with 15" tails. This is something different.
Click to expand...

The problem is what you say is in the picture I can't see. The tail doesn't look abnormal - just a vey unscientific measurement on my screen doesn't say anything other than "normal".


snip

Regarding evidence, corpses have been found of Lynx and Puma, and we know of one black leopard corpse removed from MOD land, (we are still trying to get more info through the FOI act, but it is a nightmare to do so, and we keep getting stalling tactics. I am a veteran of finding info through the FOI, (freedom of information), having sent well over 1000 requests to date).
Click to expand...

Keep us updated with that I would be interested. How do you know of this corpse btw?

We do have access to external organisations if and when we get evidence. We use the services of South African and American game trackers for prints, access to DNA testing, and we have worked with Dr Andrew Kitchener in Edinburgh (one of the worlds leading authorities on wild cats), in relation to thinks like the Kellas cats. We have the professional expertise available, we just need the evidence now.
Click to expand...

Good luck.
 
Last edited:
McHaggis, sorry for the split in post but coming back to the FOI request, why would the MOD stall? Are you suggesting a cover up or normal MOD procedures? Why would they not release the information if there was a risk to human life? I can't think of a reason not to release the information especally when it would boost the local economy from the tourism - I would be up there like a shot if there were big cats wandering around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom