Feeds:

Archive for September, 2010

A very tame grizzly bear

Take the last line to heart: Do not try this at home!

Source.

Read Full Post »

Did Columbus kill a crocodile on his first voyage to the New World?


The remains of an American crocodile have been found on "Ysabela" (Fortune Island or Long Cay) in the Bahamas that date to Columbus's time. Columbus could have killed a small American crocodile there in 1492.

Check it out.

Long Cay has a large saltwater pond in its center, which is probably where Columbus killed it.

American crocs live in the very salty Lago Enriquillo in the Dominican Republic, and they would have no problem living in a salt pond.

The Atlantic Ocean has no sea snakes.

So an American crocodile makes sense.

They are found in Florida and in other parts of the West Indies.

And they could have easily lived in the Bahamas.

The size of these animals means they were both juveniles.

Perhaps the natives of the Bahamas were keeping them as pets.

Or maybe a female American croc laid eggs on Ysabela and the juveniles wound up thriving there. It was just a one time thing.

But the people hunted them until they disappeared.

Read Full Post »

Badger and Coyote hunt together

Check it out.

Does anyone notice the parallel between this partnership and the partnership that Schleidt and Shalter suggest existed between ancient hunter-gatherer man and wolves?

Granted, coyotes are not wolves, and people are not American badgers.

However, it does show that members of the genus Canis are capable of working together with other predators– even predators with whom they are in direct competition.

Read Full Post »

Identify the species

The answer.

Read Full Post »

Tyler the Swamp Dog

I have just been alerted to this TV show.

And I think he may have found the miracle food to increase canine longevity: zebra cakes.

Source.

That dog looks like he is having almost too much fun.

Read Full Post »

The Wolf of Ansbach

Wolves very rarely prey upon people. However, under certain conditions, wolves will consider humans a prey source.

Although we can find modern and historical examples of wolves preying upon humans, some of the historical examples include so much local prejudice and folklore that one might start questioning the credibility of the account.

Take the case of the wolf of Ansbach.

Modern-day Ansbach is a city in Bavaria, but in the seventeenth century, Ansbach was the main city of a principality within the Holy Roman Empire (the thing that was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire and included most of the lands in which German is spoken today.)

In 1685, wolf began to prey upon lifestock.

And then it started to hunt both women and children.

Nobody knows how many peasants from Ansbach were victims of the wolf, but it was enough for it to be a major hazard.

Now, the rumor among the peasantry was that the wolf was the reincarnation of  cruel Bürgermeister.

From that rumor, the maneating wolf became a werewolf.

Hunters pursued the wolf. Anyone who killed such a menace would have become a hero, for not only would he have killed the living wolf that had been killing women, children, and livestock, he would have exacted revenge upon the Bürgermeister for his various atrocities against the people.

One day, the hounds chased the wolf until it couldn’t run anymore, and it jumped into an uncovered well to escape.

Of course, that wasn’t such a smart move.

The hunters found the wolf in the well and dispatched him.

As as happened so many times when such a predator is killed, the body of the wolf was paraded down the streets of Ansbach and displayed in the market place.

But because everyone believed that this was no mere wolf,  its carcass was not treated in the way one might expect.

The muzzle was cut off, and the body was dressed in human clothing.  A wig was placed upon its head. A mask covered its face. A beard was placed upon its chin.

The animal became the hated Bürgermeister.

And to exact full revenge upon that tyrant, the clothed and disfigured wolf was hanged from a gibbet for all to see.

They had been unable to overthrow the tyrant while he lived, but in executing this wolf, they were able to symbolically overthrow him.

It is a very unusual story.

It is certain that there was a maneating wolf in the Principality of Ansbach, which had once been ruled by a tyrannical Bürgermeister.

In the lore of peasants, the two beings had to be the same, for both menaced the people of the principality at roughly the same time.

Perhaps some of the people believed it.

Or more likely, it is possible that in killing the wolf and displaying his body in this way, the people were better able to cope with the hardships they experienced under such tyrannical rule.

Or maybe the new Bürgermeister wanted some symbol to show that the reign of his predecessor was finally over. Trust your new ruler. I’m not like him.

Whatever it was,  the real animal’s mythic and symbolic status exceeded his real attacks upon the people.

With wolves, such embellishment is not unusual. It is almost de rigueur. The wolves of the Old West that preyed upon the cattle herds and spent years evading traps, bullets, and poison developed a similar legendary status.  (See the Custer Wolf).

These stories tell us so much more about our species than about theirs.

They are predators. They kill because it is their nature.

We are humans.

We believe ourselves to be separate from the other animals.

We also believe that we are above nature.

Animals that attack us or our livestock are an affront to that worldview.

And they must be destroyed.

To destroy them, we must cast the predator as an evil person.

The Custer wolf becomes the ranging desperado. The wolf of Ansbach becomes the evil tyrant.

To kill the wolf is to kill evil.

In killing evil, man is redeemed.

Man regains control.

The delusion of being separate from and in control over the rest of creation regains currency.

But the wolf itself is no more evil than the man who hunts deer or butchers pigs.

It is a part of nature. It is subject to the real forces of ecology and economy.

But man must feel he is separate from it.

It is a comforting delusion, but it is one that is as dangerous as it is beguiling.

To maim a dead wolf and dress him as a man shows us for what we are.

It  really says very little about the wolf.

***

I think now we should have a discussion on something a little more important and bigger than our crazed symbolism about wolves.  When do wolves attack people?

I found this piece by Valerius Geist on when wolves become dangerous to people, and I think it is very good for framing a discussion on the wolf and its relation to man.

They aren’t particularly dangerous to people.

But one should remember that all wolves are individuals. All wolf packs have different “cultures.” All ecosystems teach wolves different things.

Some wolves might consider people a food source under certain conditions.

Dogs kill people. Many Indians in the Caribbean and Latin America were actually dispatched by heavy greyhounds and mastiffs of the conquistadors, who occasionally killed Indians just to feed their bloodthirsty dogs.

So why is it so hard to accept that wolves sometimes kill people?

Animals that kill people should be killed.

However, we should not use the reality of predation in the way we historically have.

We should not use an act of wolf predation upon stock or people as an excuse to extirpate the whole species.

That’s folly. And it should be condemned.

But the longer we say that wolves never attack people, the more desperate and denialist we sound.

We sound like we’re bullshitting.

And when we’re dealing with animals as complex and intelligent as wolves, we need to be careful about our absolutes.

Only when we deal with the real organism can we work to conserve it.

The wolf is neither evil incarnate nor some kind of wild golden retriever that lives on mice.

It is a being.

It is complex.

It is incapable of being fully under our control.

It is incapable of being reduced to our prejudices.

That’s really what makes them so fascinating.

Read Full Post »

The Mystery Squirrel

Our mystery squirrel is one of those strange creatures.

Everything about it is counterintuitive.

I remember being taught that the best way to tell the difference between fox and Eastern gray squirrels is that gray squirrel have white banding on their tails that makes them look gray. Fox squirrels– at least those in West Virginia and the northern and central parts of their range– tend to have orange-gold banding on the hairs of their tails. Their tails are usually much fuller than those of the gray squirrels, and they are usually at least 25 percent larger.

Of course, all of that applies for normal phases of gray squirrel.

Eastern gray squirrels are a bit like red foxes, American black bears, and gray wolves. Not all individuals are the color that their names would indicate.

Eastern gray squirrels come in three distinct phases: normal gray, melanistic (black), and albino. I’ve seen variations on all of these colors. I have heard of normal grays with solid white tails, and I knew a very light-colored normal gray squirrel in Buckhannon, West Virginia.  It was almost the color of a Siamese cat.

It is not unusual for gray squirrels to have a red tinge to their coats. This is particularly true for melanistic individuals. (Another one here).

Our mystery squirrel is one of these melanistic Eastern gray squirrels that has a lot of red coloration on its tail.   Such squirrels are not incredibly common, but when one turns up, people think they are looking at fox squirrel or perhaps some new species that has not yet been documented.

The first melanistic gray squirrel I ever saw had a red tail, and it looked very similar to this one.  Most of the melanistic ones I’ve seen since have been solid black or had only a slight reddishness to them.

It is certainly true that fox squirrels vary in coloration, and there are solid black fox squirrels (which is why their scientific name is Sciurus niger). Where I live, it is nearly impossible to mistake a fox squirrel for a gray, because fox squirrels come in only the orange-tailed and agouti coloration. Gray squirrels are come in gray and black. The fact that the fox squirrels are so much larger means that it is so hard to mistake the two species.

However, if you have just a photo of a squirrel with no size reference, the best way to tell them apart is look at their heads.

Fox squirrels have longer heads than grays do.  They have an almost Roman-nosed appearance (Look at the head. Ignore the color.)

Eastern grays are shorted headed. They have more delicate and “cuter” features than fox squirrels do.

Of course, I’ve seen so many different fox and Eastern gray squirrels that I can tell them apart very easily.

In the real world, the size difference alone is all one needs to tell them apart.

In photos, just look at the head.

It is amazing how much these two very common squirrels vary in appearance.

Gray squirrels are not always gray, just as black bears are not always black.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Follow