Posted by Andy Astbury on March 16, 2007 at 3:54 PM
Rob - the top one is, IMHO, a dog, the foot is too long and the claws are too long and pointed, the main pad isn't big enough in relation to the other pads to be fox, and the side pads are not far enough out.
Fox prints are much squarer with very short blunt claw marks comming straight off the toe pad print.
As for the second print it's a bit OoF but it was walking towards the camera this time yes??
And it looks like two prints overlapping, and I can't see claw marks on either - so can't rightly say on ID..
As far as I am aware there are no dog's that have access to this part of the river. You have to cross two fairly big meadows that are strictly private land and a railway line, it is surrounded by fencing also. The farmer does not have a dog, and as far as I am aware, I am the only one who has access to that part of the river, because it is where my Barn Owl box is.
The second print image I think is the right way as posted. There is another set of prints that look the same that do slighty cross, but the way it is posted is the correct way up I think?
If you are sure the first set is a dog, I don't know how the hell it got there!!
Regards
Rob
Posted by Paul Thomas on March 16, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Top one looks like a fox to me. The other photo shows two prints, one over the other. I'd guess that's fox too.
I would agree about it not being a fox, the interdigital pad is simply to big - even in soft mud, there is also not enough space ( nor hair impressions) between digital pads.
Second is too confused, but could be a domestic cat, running, lack of claws and overlay being the only real reason for saying this.
1# could be a big "dog" fox, fore paw, though the rotation of the toes and the 3 lobed look to the rear pad look Domestic Dog
2# looks like a transposed front and read foot.
See if you can get
Mammals of Great Britain, Their Tracks, Trails and Signs by M J Lawrence and R W Brown.
Its a good book.
Posted by Andy Astbury on March 16, 2007 at 5:32 PM
Well Rob, if I saw the top print I know I'd be looking for a dog.
As for the second print, like Tom, I did think perhaps a domestic moggy especially with the apparent lack of claw marks, but the pad pattern as I can make it out does look a bit odd for a cat.
Transposed front and rear tracks are made by cats usually - not dogs or foxes.
In the top print the animal is walking away from the camera Rob but in the second pic the heel pad is at the top of both prints.
You'll have to invest in one of those Trail Cameras - then you'll know for sure
Domestic cat is possible for the second print as the farm has a few cats!! Although never seen them anywhere near the river.
Just found this website http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Prints/Fox/fox.htm it's interesting to see the difference between Dog and Fox. Still not sure though. I have seen a Fox walking along the river edge a few weeks back and it is the same area where these prints are, but my prints don't look like any I have seen in reference of a Fox. Neither are definatley not an Otter?? And I certainly hope it's not a Mink.
Andy, the second pic could be cat due to no claw marks but cats have straight toes with no rotation, and the hind pad is four lobed not 3 in dogs.
The top right print seems to be a front dog paw though the shot lacks distinct shadow.
Rob for an approximate otter paw print, place you hand palm down with your fingers apart on a flat surface, now bring you wrist up but with you fingers flat still.
Notice your finger tips press in and the edge of your palm. the print it like this, its wider than it is long.
Posted by Andy Astbury on March 16, 2007 at 7:14 PM
Rob - it's not a mink - believe me!! Wrong shape, wrong pad layout and there would be claw marks on the toes.
How big are these prints - pity you didn't pop a coin or something in the shots to give some sense of scale.
Looking at the greenery in the shots would I be right in thinking the prints in the 2nd image are smaller than that in the first??
Hi Rob,
After consulting my animal tracks & signs book, i am covinced the first is a dog. If you draw a line across the leading edge of the two outermost pads, you will see that the rear edge of two innermost pads,lie behind the line.The two innermost would lie in front of this line if it was a fox print.
Not a scooby about the second!
regards Rob.
Andy, the second set are smaller than the first, I am actually thinking that they may be from a Rabbit? As there are hundreds over there. I did intend on putting down a coin but forgot to pick up my wallet (always a good excuse ). I won't even bother on trying to start the ID on all the bird tracks in the mud
Discussion
12 repliesThese are the two sets of prints I am stumped on. Taken with a P/S so no critique please
I think the first one maybe a Fox
But the second I have no clue at all.
Looking forward to some help hopefully
Regards
Rob
Fox prints are much squarer with very short blunt claw marks comming straight off the toe pad print.
As for the second print it's a bit OoF but it was walking towards the camera this time yes??
And it looks like two prints overlapping, and I can't see claw marks on either - so can't rightly say on ID..
Regards
Andy
As far as I am aware there are no dog's that have access to this part of the river. You have to cross two fairly big meadows that are strictly private land and a railway line, it is surrounded by fencing also. The farmer does not have a dog, and as far as I am aware, I am the only one who has access to that part of the river, because it is where my Barn Owl box is.
The second print image I think is the right way as posted. There is another set of prints that look the same that do slighty cross, but the way it is posted is the correct way up I think?
If you are sure the first set is a dog, I don't know how the hell it got there!!
Regards
Rob
Paul
I would agree about it not being a fox, the interdigital pad is simply to big - even in soft mud, there is also not enough space ( nor hair impressions) between digital pads.
Second is too confused, but could be a domestic cat, running, lack of claws and overlay being the only real reason for saying this.
2# looks like a transposed front and read foot.
See if you can get
Mammals of Great Britain, Their Tracks, Trails and Signs by M J Lawrence and R W Brown.
Its a good book.
As for the second print, like Tom, I did think perhaps a domestic moggy especially with the apparent lack of claw marks, but the pad pattern as I can make it out does look a bit odd for a cat.
Transposed front and rear tracks are made by cats usually - not dogs or foxes.
In the top print the animal is walking away from the camera Rob but in the second pic the heel pad is at the top of both prints.
You'll have to invest in one of those Trail Cameras - then you'll know for sure
Best Regards
Andy
Domestic cat is possible for the second print as the farm has a few cats!! Although never seen them anywhere near the river.
Just found this website http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Prints/Fox/fox.htm it's interesting to see the difference between Dog and Fox. Still not sure though. I have seen a Fox walking along the river edge a few weeks back and it is the same area where these prints are, but my prints don't look like any I have seen in reference of a Fox. Neither are definatley not an Otter?? And I certainly hope it's not a Mink.
Regards
Rob
The top right print seems to be a front dog paw though the shot lacks distinct shadow.
Rob for an approximate otter paw print, place you hand palm down with your fingers apart on a flat surface, now bring you wrist up but with you fingers flat still.
Notice your finger tips press in and the edge of your palm. the print it like this, its wider than it is long.
How big are these prints - pity you didn't pop a coin or something in the shots to give some sense of scale.
Looking at the greenery in the shots would I be right in thinking the prints in the 2nd image are smaller than that in the first??
Best Regards
Andy
After consulting my animal tracks & signs book, i am covinced the first is a dog. If you draw a line across the leading edge of the two outermost pads, you will see that the rear edge of two innermost pads,lie behind the line.The two innermost would lie in front of this line if it was a fox print.
Not a scooby about the second!
regards Rob.
Thanks for your replies.
Andy, the second set are smaller than the first, I am actually thinking that they may be from a Rabbit? As there are hundreds over there. I did intend on putting down a coin but forgot to pick up my wallet (always a good excuse
Regards
Rob