Now, despite the fact that Dr Sykes is said to have "killed off" the whole Bigfoot/Yeti subject with his DNA tests that were very badly reported on a certain UK TV series. In fact, Sykes pointed out that just because he had not received any unknown hominid DNA did not mean there was no unknown hominid.
I am sixty years old. Field naturalist since I was a kid ~I got out there and turned over stones, dug up the garden and more just to see what was there other than snails, worms and beetles. One day, after a heavy Summer downpour, the sky brightened and I looked out to see if there was a rainbow. This was around 1967 in Sevier Street, St Werburgh's, so I was around 10 years old. At the top of the garden was the stone wall that separated our house from Mina Road Park so we got all kinds of things in the garden. Just outside the back door was the coal shed and the outdoor toilet (the houses were old). On this sunny day I saw something moving snappily up the outside wall of the privy. It was in perfect sunlight and less than 10 feet (3m) from me. It was approximately 5~6 inches (12.5~15 cms) in length and the width I could not tell but looked about 1 inch thick (2.5 cms). Why could I not tell the exact thickness? It was covered in thick, furry hairs of a grey~fawn colour. I called to the nearest adult but they were too busy. Only I saw it. Never been able to identify what it was. These old areas were tiny environments of their own before over developing. Unknown species of moth? Butterfly? Who knows.
Yes, I got a lot of stick over the years describing this caterpillar. But I saw it in clear sunlight and I was wide awake. More than once I have had someone state: "I bet you wished you'd swatted it now to prove it was real?" No.
It was alive and could well have been the last of its species. I have no idea. Many people ignore bugs in their garden because "they are just bugs". However, some of those bugs may be from scientifically unknown species or sub~species. Some of the big names in zoology believe that there are more species to be discovered in British gardens (gardens anywhere really) than we think.
In my 50 years (I hate realizing it was that long ago!) as a naturalist I have read about, seen and looked at specimens of "newly discovered" species. Finally recognized by Science. Protected. No. You see, Science likes to chop up and classify from its collective lofty tower and it likes to see paper after paper from specialists on "its" discoveries (you see, whoever finds the new species might get a footnote but unless they are a member of high standing in Science they will be a footnote).
Let's look at something from my own personal fields of study: Canids and Felids.
We know the wolf exists. We know that in a great many areas they were driven to the verge of extinction, or right over that verge. Why? We classed them as Endangered under all the correct international legislation. We protected them and their habitats. Despite what they might claim, farmers lose a sheep occasionally they get compensated. Wolves prefer the hunt and there are plenty of deer, rodents and other foods out there. We re~introduce wolves into old areas. Not a big surprise drop and cursory "Oh, there are wolves back here now. Bye!" All planned in advance and everyone knows.
But now greed and tiny minds get into it. Hunters claiming they have to hunt deer, rabbit and many other species because "they are over running the area" suddenly have the predator that takes care of these animals (Predator and Prey). No. Their fun, and it is fun for these people, is threatened. Suddenly the politician, part of the system supposed to support and protect endangered species is involved. Whether in the pocket of wealthier sponsors or fearing bigger supporters might not support him/her at the next election, now they don't give a crap about some pesky wolf "there are plenty more out there!" (words uttered by the moron who shot the last thylacine no doubt).
A cattle farmer who has never grassed or placed his herd into a certain area before suddenly decides that he is going to. He knows, everyone knows, that it is the home of a wolf pack. A wolf pack that has never caused problems before and yet here is a farmer driving a herd into an established denning area. Where wolves needing to feed young will "threaten" his herd. He calls for the wolves, on whose area HE has encroached for no sensible or logical reason, be culled. And the authorities drop their pants and bend over for him.
Permits are given to hunters to cull some of the wolves in an area (take your pick) because "the population has grown out of control" you really cannot move without tripping over one. They kill 2 or 3 wolves because there is no huge population.
The same applies to wolverine, another animal I have studied. Hunting licenses given to over a hundred hunters to kill more than a hundred in an over populated area ~again, you are falling over wolverine! That is not how wolverine live or have territories. However, the hunt finds and kills....none. All of this massive wolverine population used a "cloaking device" no doubt. Hunters and those associated with them will manipulate and exaggerate numbers and some using methods that seem, to the public, scientific...because they have no idea.
Cat species. Protected, Endangered, Verge Extinction and even, yes, one sighted after a population was thought extinct gets shot. Name your species. Name your country. United States, where big hunters will buy a tame black leopard, crowd around it after it is released from a cage and kill it before it goes ten feet ~great trophy kill (video taped and still online).
Here's another. Foxes. Bear, lynx and wolves were hunted to extinction in the UK. Hunted for sport. In the 18th century (as outlined in my book Red Paper: Canids) the fox was about to join the others in extinction. What happened? Right up until the 1930s thousands of foxes were imported every year and sold at market centres in the UK, especially London, for the purpose of re~populating areas where foxes had been wiped out "otherwise our sport would die". In the 1920s the House of Parliament became embroiled in an argument when it was discovered a well established Hunt had paids for foxes to be caught in Ireland and exported to create a new population to hunt. The Irish Hunt whose area the foxes were taken from complained in the strongest terms.
Gorillas are protected by international/national laws, as are other species, 'big game' hunters still travel to countries where those animals live to kill them and have "photo trophies".
Science...well, it is "disgusted" and demands action is taken but, well, that's it. Most of these scientists are lost if you put them in a cow paddock in the middle of Somerset(I won't name him but it was very funny at the time).
1. What is the species population number of Sasquatch in Canada?
2. What is the species population number of Bigfoot in the United States?
3. Do these hominids breed yearly or is there a lengthier period between breeding seasons?
4. What is the gestation period of these hominids?
5. How long after birth do young hominids of this species become independent and able to forage for themselves?
6. At what age do the females of this species become fertile and capable of breeding?
7. What are the mortality rates amongst newborn or immature/juvenile hominids of this species?
Those are basics. Can Science answer 1) and 2) if it has a corpse? No well then, could Science answer 3) if it had a dead specimen? No. Could Science answer 4) if it had a corpse and if it were a female? No. So, how about 5)~7)? No.
Science can point and say "There. Proof! Aren't We wonderful?" That's it. Write it up, stuff and mount the specimen and then ....well, suddenly all those field biologists who were laughing before will want to become the next Jane Goodall (yet they have no interest in what the lady herself currently has to say on the subject!). And those trophy hunters (realize that this is a mental illness so logic and sense plays no part in it) want that trophy photo or piece of Bigfoot whether an ear, finger or other body part and, sorry, folks, they do not give a crap about Science or legal protection, and they have proven this over and over again ad nauseum.
We are living in the 21st century. The year (currently) 2017. There is absolutely no scientific reason for killing any newly discovered animal species nor to kill to prove their existence. Look at the trail cam photos and footage from expeditions and surveys over the last few years ~a Tiger thought to be extinct still lives in the area but...is it a fake video? Surely one needs to be killed to prove that it is genuine footage and that the tiger species does still live there? Why not? If you are really stuck on that question, well, I'm sure Finding Bigfoot is on TV where you are.
There is a major problem. The "Bigfoot Community", which does not really exist because it is basically groups of followers of certain 'celebrities' or other cliques. The one thing I find fascinating about the You Tube series After Hours With Rictor and Rictor After Dark (at times very rude but very funny) is that it shows the Public what it never sees. The Public can watch Finding Bigfoot and, despite never finding anything in all its years on air (it began in 2011), it is seen as the respectable face of "Bigfooting" even though, when they have handled possible evidence, it has made me cringe because they tend to contaminate....lie down in what you believe might be a "Bigfoot ground nest" and don't even take samples. Entertainment.
You then have the comedy and entertainment side of the subject where 'facts' are made up as they go along in programmes such as Swamp Monsters, Mountain Monsters and Alaska Monsters. But, if you read items online or even in comments on You Tube you will read that people believe these last three shows are deadly serious. Others ask "is this real or fake?" Seriously, if you are in either of those groups...please send me money as I need to feed a British unknown hominid I keep in my shed.
Let me make this clear. I have no problem with these programmes as they all clearly state "for entertainment purposes only" and that kind of tells you "This ain't real".
We then have what are being called the "Woo Woos" ~the fringe Spiritual/paranormal Bigfoot people. And the outright fakes such as SOHA (Southern Oregon Habituation Area). I read as much as I can and watch as much footage as I can on things I look in to. I see no evidence for spiritual or paranormal Bigfoot and I think Dr Johnson and his statements prove what is going on. Bigfoot are entities in all trees no matter where...that is using folklore from other countries but if not outright fakery then this all comes from Dr Johnson's mind.
But even amongst the "Woo Woos" there are factions. So not much community.
And "Bigfooters" sabotaging each others field work doesn't help. Or if a Bigfooter claims to have found some evidence or even an area frequented by an unknown hominid they get name calling. That or every 'Bigfoot investigator' in the country swamp an area. Proving that they have no real idea. Again, I will give examples.
"Birders", "Twitchers" ~dedicated ornithologists. They hear that a rare bird or rare visitor to the UK has taken up a nest in a certain tiny wood or corner of a field. Do they set up cameras pointed toward the nest to collect footage? No. They want to tick the bird on their list. Seriously. These supposed dedicated bird watchers will scare the bird off and then they will call the birder who spotted it a liar or say he could not identify a seagull.
I know of one farmer in Norfolk who took a photo of a rare avian visitor. It seemed to be nesting in a tree in the corner of a field. It was still there after three days so he announced the birds presence and posted the photos on a blog. At 4 a.m. the next morning he grabbed a wooden club from a hallway as he saw lights outside and heard a commotion and feared thieves were raiding his farm. He opened his front door to be blinded by a torch shone at him and a voice shout "Cut it out ~you'll scare it off!" He looked and counted at least 25 people and they were at the base of the tree smoking and 'talking quietly' with cameras ready. Apparently they had parked their cars on a pathway and moved 'quietly' across the farm, private property. They even told the farmer in no uncertain terms how stupid he was and that he needed to tidy up his yard as a couple of them had almost fallen into machinery.
The police were called and trespassers removed. The bird was not seen again. An extreme case but there are similarities with Bigfooters. And say someone who knows birds talks to another person who is supposed to know birds and is called an idiot? Happened to me. At the last place I lived we had all types of birds ~small species, pigeons, jackdaws, barn owls and even sparrowhawks "dropping by". When I looked out one sunny day I had to do a double take. Attracted by the pigeons, no doubt, on the post of my wire fence sat a peregrine falcon and I called my sister to also check it out. It was less than 10 feet (3m) away and spent a minute on the fence before flying off as I got my camera ready. We were only about 3 miles from the Avon Gorge and Bristol's Clifton Supension Bridge were these falcons live.
I mentioned this to a "veteran naturalist" who only lived around a mile from me. "No, you probably mistook a sparrow hawk for a peregrine"...! Now, I have been within 3 feet (90cms) of a sparrowhawk over its kill. I've photographed them and even had one at the property in question that used to fly by and flip up the pony tail I had at the time (before realizing it was a sad thing to have). I also keep a bird guide next to my window and on the occasion in question when my sister asked what bird it was I flipped the book open to a large illustration of a peregrine falcon. No. I was mistaken. just like hawks will not go into hedges to hunt and yet I have seen them do so on five separate occasions when the sparrows fly into hedges.
I never realized I had a badger coming to my garden. I hear a noise and, in the dark, look out and there it is. Drinking from the water trough. Next day I find two tracks. I mentioned this to another naturalist but it appears I was mistaken. "Sure you were not dreaming?" I was asked as I visualized kicking a certain fellow naturalist in the arse. I gathered a fair bit of info on badgers were badgers should not be. I never shared that.
So, perhaps if I had shot the badger I would have my evidence? If I had shot that peregrine falcon I would have had my evidence. A corpse.
A corpse proves something is there. It does not do a great deal else because, as I have learnt, the "expert" (X equals the Unknown and "spurt" is a drip under pressure) will say "Must have been the last of its species" and you will respond "But where there is one ~there must be others?" and the mocking chortle followed by "Oh, I doubt it. You'd need to prove that!"
I wrote a paper Non Native Species And Sasquatch Evidence Gathering: Attempting To Gather Scientific Evidence For Species Existence Using Non-Lethal Methodology. I published it on this blog back in 2015 (originally written in 2009) after a deafening silence from Bigfoot groups in the US and Canada I sent a copy to. If you called yourself a Naturalist, Zoologist or Scientist and believe that in this day and age the only way you can "prove it is to kill it" you are a disgrace and lazy.
Naturalists are usually always looked down as amateurs though there are some very famous naturalists but they have "Sir" or "Lord" in front of their names or are big TV personalities. Naturalists tend to be dedicated but unpaid individuals but they supply most of the raw data and field work and even conclusions that the paid professionals, the Zoologists, use and make their name from. In the UK there are no real university departments of Natural History because it "isn't sexy enough to attract money" as several actual zoologists told me. Departments of biology have trouble enough getting money. So the naturalist has to do the work in their spare time or even during their holiday periods. So, whereas people may write or say "Noted Naturalist Terry Hooper" it just means I have a reputation and I am unfunded. Poor!
Have I tried getting zoologists to cooperate on projects, even if only advisory? Yes. Most will tell you that if you come up with results they will look at them for you but they could not possibly get involved in the work or publicly as they "have to think about their jobs and funding". So, while I had the top DNA man and his assistant willing to do tests on hair and fecal matter for evidence of, in this case, large non native cats, for free and police wildlife officers were ready to gather any samples the professional zoologists sat back waiting the results so that they could, officially, announce any discovery because even with the top DNA man/lab involved no results were legitimate until "the professional scientist says so" (I was told that).
In the end we got any number of "British Big cat" enthusiasts going out and bypassing me to send samples direct to the lab as "coming from Big cat". On several occasions I had phone calls from police forces stating a Big cat enthusiast had gathered fecal matter. It was described to me and then photos sent ~lots of fruit and hair. Fox. Material never went to a lab willing to give up many thousands of pounds worth of time and analysis. Other samples were cow hair and sheep wool ~taken by investigators from wire...around cow and sheep fields. Sheep droppings that looked like sheep droppings and were found where there were plenty of free roaming sheep. Shades of Dr Sykes' work. That said, DNA of large non native cats was found. There have even been bodies to which came the response "Well, there is the British mystery cat. Dead. End of story".
Another point. I had reports from police officers, naturalists and several zoologists who had observed non native cats at very close proximity in very clear conditions. One zoologist was a very senior man whose credentials made him about reproach and he had studied pumas in Canada. So, when he sees a puma cross the road and stop in front of him, about 10 feet (3m) from him at look directly at him (he had stopped his car to avoid hitting the animal) for 20~30 seconds before moving off and that zoologist leaves the car and measures objects (road barrier etc) to gauge a more accurate size of the animal you think "irrefutable". No. Some biologist teaching night classes then says the senior zoologist did not see a puma and the ill educated followers of cryptozoology (who cares about cryptozoology and what it says?) believe the biologist (who was terrified at the prospect of my giving the zoologist his telephone number to discuss the matter!). Another zoologist, familiar with puma, was on holiday in Scotland and fishing. He sat by the river and watched as a "Juvenile male puma" came from bushes and stole the fish he had caught and ran off with it. Like another Canadian zoologist who was driving through Scotland and almost hit a puma that ran across the road, the fishing zoologist said "Bloody cougar!"...then, it seems, both men realized they were in Scotland and "there are no pumas in Scotland, right?"
Zoology goes by reports. Someone sights a badger, deer or other animal with young it is noted and this goes on the record to show new young that year and estimate age, etc.. Accepted. No question. It is known as anecdotal evidence and you build a picture from it. You present several hundred reports of a similar nature from verified genuine observers of large felids...not accepted. Why? Here is the joke. It shows how dim these people of "Science" are when it suits them:
"If these cats were out there lots of people would be seeing them. Some of them would be killed by cars or shot. You'd find deer or other animals they had killed."
But that evidence, as well as evidence pertaining to dentition of a large cat involved by an noted expert was presented. Police forces know these cats are out there otherwise why were they calling me in from 1977 to 2007 and why were senior police officers discussing how to react to sightings? Farmers and the National Farmers Union know these cats are out there. They have all seen the evidence and even HM Government Department for Environment Farming and Rural affairs (DEFRA) know these cats are out there and one of its people actually showed me a desk draw full of plaster casts of lynx, puma and even leopard tracks from the UK (before realizing who I was!). hunters and even rural 'pest control' shooters, estate owners and game keepers know these cats are out there.
Leave them alone and do nothing unless they create a problem. Forget the hoaxers: no human in the UK has EVER been injured in any way by a wild living large cat ~there is too much food out there for them.
So all the evidence needed. Along with a Zoological garden and zoologists I once planned to trap, tranquilize, get samples from then re~release a puma on a farm where it passed through on a daily route. Everything supervised so that no harm came to the animal but a tracker was to be placed on it. What happened? We were loaded and ready to travel and a snitchy biologist informed DEFRA: both I and everyone involved were told in very clear language that if we captured any such cat it was to be shot in the cage or transported to a zoological facility with a licence to keep it in a safe enclosure but it must not under any circumstance be released after capture as any damage it caused to livestock would be attributable to us. Licences were threatened to be revoked and it was made very clear to me that I would be arrested, questioned and papers seized.
Over a 'non existent' large cat in the UK. Never trust an academic. I could write a book on why not.
Killing a Bigfoot tells us nothing other than that it is there. What we need are qualified naturalists, people who know the flora and fauna of their areas, fully equipped with all the DNA/sample gathering equipment and materials they need, to go out and do field studies. In areas of high activity to set up trail cams of HD quality that criss~cross active areas and even set up 24/7 remote cameras with feed recorded and monitored. Here is the problem: that takes money. It takes time. Going out into forests and broadcasting alleged Bigfoot calls or making them, hitting trees with sticks for a couple nights or few days: pointless. If these calls or wood~knocks are genuine then what do they mean? "Run ~humans are here!"? No one knows. Do not mimic alleged Bigfoot calls! We have no idea what the wood~knocks mean either ~a challenge? A warning? Just do not.
Bigfooters tend to want to keep their nights out and locations secret from other Bigfooters. So, two groups of Bigfooters in a forested valley not knowing about one another. Group A tries to use calls....Group B hears a Bigfoot call! It answers with a call of its own...Group A receives a 'response'!! Same with wood~knocks.
Yes, Science laughs at the Bigfoot 'community' because it acts unscientifically and at times it deserves to be laughed at and mocked. You get a Bigfooter who sincerely pleads for silly differences and arguments to be put aside and for everyone to work together to prove Bigfoot exists and to get it some form of protection. "Let's do it scientifically!" Name~calling and more follows.
It has always been this way: Rene Dahinden, John Green and others reacted irrationally when Tom Slick, who was footing the bills, put Peter Byrne in charge of his Bigfoot project. Each one was "miffed" because he should have been put in charge not Byrne.
There is no reason why, if teams of naturalists could get the backing, that Bigfooters could not contribute personal knowledge of an area or inform any team of increased activity in a specific area that could be focussed on.
I still find it hard to believe that activity at Snellgrove ~including stone throwing in one recorded incident~ did not result in cameras set up around the area as well as other evidence gathering equipment. The owner certainly seemed to want to find out what was causing the damage at his cabin and scaring off people. No one bothered?
Habituation is foolhardy. We know nothing, no real hard knowledge, about the species or how it acts or anything else other than anecdotal evidence. That can be built on. However, putting out food to entice an unknown creature, hominid or not, to approach humans is foolish.
Lori Simmons claims that the "Big Guy" can be communicated with at a certain tree. She places food offerings there and has made sound recordings. In one, Adam Davies ("I've heard tigers in the wild") is heard to say that the growl heard is exactly the same as when he approached the tree in question previously. I have had this playing at full volume of headphones and it is just about audible.
I have also listened carefully to other Simmons recordings. Note someone says that "it sounded like a breath or(?) moan". Bear. Blowing and clacking their teeth and other vocalizations are recorded and some clear enough that the clacking teeth and even, on one recording, of warning sound left no doubt. If you have hours of time to waste wearing headphones and listening to these recordings then do and then check out the North American Bear Centre's Vocalizations and Body Language page:
I'm the felid and canid man but even I could identify the vocalizations. I have no doubt that Simmons is sincere and feels this to be a connection with her late father but she is in a very dangerous position in doing what she does.
Naturalists of even minimum field experience should be able to tell a bear vocalization from that of an unknown species and that is why HQ audio recording devices are also needed. Cameras and recorders not just in the hands of the people involved but set up around camp.
It is lazy and Unscientific to just say "bring us a dead one". Gather the evidence scientifically, and it will take time unless a team got very lucky, then attempt to study feeding habits and habitat because that tells you a great deal and data already gathered may be very valuable to naturalist teams. Imagine the financial pay~back for a financial backer if, other than Bigfoot tracks or vocalizations, a team got good clear footage or images of an unknown hominid. Obviously, these would need to be looked at by others experts to see what they could ascertain but a team of naturalists are not attention seeking, unprofessional TV celebrities out for "the big score". TV syndication use, periodical usage fees as well as the chance to go down in history as the man/woman who finance the "great discovery" ~a lot to gain.
I did formulate a plan many years ago but if you do not have the financial backing...well, it has to be down to field work and that could be of two weeks at a time. This is why Snellgrove seemed to be the perfect spot ~a place to set up and even monitor cameras and audio equipment while being in a more "secure" place than a tent. Pay and I'll spend a month there.
So, you can argue the pros and cons of killing an unknown hominid but it comes down to being a bad idea.
This post has gotten long enough so I will include my now old post. It might give a few ideas.
Non Native Species And Sasquatch Evidence Gathering
Attempting To Gather Scientific Evidence For Species Existence Using Non-Lethal Methodology.
There are also tracks and hairs consistent with the Puma [Puma concolor] and lynx species [Lynx lynx]. There are many very credible witnesses who have seen cats at close proximity [0-20m] and some of these were trained naturalists and one senior lecturer in zoology at a university who was also an expert wildlife consultant. It is fair to say that there is also good photographic and video footage of non-native species.
We also have photographic records of large cat [puma] attack on horses and a large number of photographs of sheep, deer and other prey animals bearing all the signs of typical large cat kills. Recordings of puma calls even.
Despite this, some experts say they still want a body as “proof” –a totally pointless exercise unless it is out of curiosity [Red Paper: Felids -unpublish]
"In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence."
On Gathering Hard Evidence Of Sasquatch
Wild living creatures are not going to be fooled by some hide or even people using "scent hide" sprays. The 'charge' seems almost similar to some Sasquatch approaches to tents -they know someone is inside and it might well just be a "brushing against the tent" to us but to Sasquatch it could mean "Hey -I'm out here. My area."
If we accept that Sasquatch exists then we have to accept that it has spent many thousands of years adapting to its environment and being able to know when something is "off" in its habitat. We have stories of bow-hunters covered from head to toe with camouflage in elevated seats that Sasquatch approach and even sniff out. There are even cases of Sasquatch turning to look at 'hidden' hunters.
I think those looking for Sasquatch need to change their mindsets. Do not hide your scent. Let any Sasquatch become familiar with it and take it from there.
If camping in a known Sasquatch area and if it is believed one is active at the time then a trail cam or two could be set up around the camp. Putting out bait such as fish, meat or fruit is probably not a good idea if you are in a flimsy tent and in bear country. Note also that bears seem attracted to the petroleum in the plastic casing and have been known to smash trail-cams by tooth and claw. This is rather like bears being attracted to the formaldehyde in refrigerators because it smells ant-nest like.
Snelgrove Lake and the cabin located there seems to be one such case. Stone throwing, pounding on the cabin exterior and even, when no one is there, breaking in and trashing the interior. This raises several possible avenues for investigation and research.
Firstly, of course, there is the idea of hiring the cabin for a year and record and monitor any possible Sasquatch activity. A good plan of action for a year would be needed, though it should be adaptable.
Secondly, there is evidence gathering with no cabin base but outside of fishing season so that humans cannot mess evidence up. In 2002 I was asked by police wildlife crimes officers to draw up some guidelines on gathering evidence of large, non-native cats. The following is based on these guidelines and though it refers to large cats it can be applied to Sasquatch.
It should be noted that there are good photographs of casts showing details of large felid tracks.
Since the mid-1990s, many people have jumped from investigating unidentified flying objects (UFOs) to delving into the paranormal. When those subjects prove boring these individuals suddenly find a new interest in “UK Big Cats” –it tends to get them into the newspapers and even onto local television more because it is not so fantastical as, say, UFOs. “Cryptozoology” is the current new craze.
I have spoken to these people quite often and it is amazing just how little they know and several even noted that they were looking into why “Big Cats” were not seen in the Winter and had a theory that they might hibernate!
But even those slightly more credible individuals were unwilling to supply casts or photographic evidence pertaining to exotic felids. The same attitude applied: it was “their” evidence.
There were, up until 1998, some thirty plaster casts of tracks held by private individuals that were quite clearly diagnostic of exotic felid ranging from lynx (Lynx sp.), puma (Puma concolor) and leopard (Panthera pardus). These have all been clearly shown in press photographs. Such casts would provide good, solid evidence of exotic felids but even the offer to buy some of these casts has been turned down. Others have vanished along with the no-longer-interested investigators.
We have enough evidence in the form of reports from observers and enough has been done to establish geographical territories and note prey animals. This needs to be backed up by hard evidence. Hard evidence that it might be possible to gather from known areas frequented by these felid.
MAP 1 shows a rough idea of ‘Corryn Gwall Farm’ which allows us to show how evidence might be gathered