Help me identify this thing

[Stormcrow]

The black raccoon pic I showed a few posts back may have a touch of gray around the face, but that's it. No rings. The feet on your critter are frighteningly raccoonish. That's where I'm keeping my money. A sickly raccoon.

I agree that they're very, very raccoon. I fought with myself for a while about it being a raccoon, but the face just isn't. I can't agree it's a raccoon, I've had too many others look at it and compare too, and there's just too many differences in the body and head. I saw it while it was alive (in the pictures the skin is hanging everywhere and making it look a lot bigger than it was), and the face was entirely fox-like. It will be difficult for me to hold that arguement while I have so few decent pictures, but I know raccoons, and even a sick one... I just don't think it's a raccoon. Raccoons have relatively small ears for their size, the ears were at least twice the size of what I would consider acceptable on a raccoon-sized animal. They're also pointed to a fine tip and have a hefty amount of fur on them.

Of course, it was ill -- I imagine it consumed a huge amount of oil or grease or other automotive fluid which then caused it to die, and it was probably hit while on the road or in the vehicle too. But I don't think that has anything to do with the proportions. Now, I would agree that it was some type of fox, but just not a raccoon, even with the hands being a large factor in deciding specie. Like I said, I saw it alive, and for two solid days I was convinced it was a fox -- and then I saw the hands. Which is why I posted here. If it wasn't for the hands, I would be 100% sure it was a fox or some canine relative.

[+HerNibs]

Baby wolverine.

*not sure if you have those in Kentucky*

Nibs

[Stormcrow]

Nope, no wolverines. They're a lot farther north. It does sort of look like one, though not as bulky or deep in chest; and the ears were a lot bigger too. A lot of animals would fit the description as far as size or body-shape (relatively), if it wasn't for the ears being as large as they are. I'm also iffy about the teeth, because if it was young then it's possible it still only had baby teeth and the adult teeth hadn't grown in yet. It could account for missing teeth and the size of the teeth too, possibly.

[+HerNibs]

Nope, no wolverines. They're a lot farther north. It does sort of look like one, though not as bulky or deep in chest; and the ears were a lot bigger too. A lot of animals would fit the description as far as size or body-shape (relatively), if it wasn't for the ears being as large as they are. I'm also iffy about the teeth, because if it was young then it's possible it still only had baby teeth and the adult teeth hadn't grown in yet. It could account for missing teeth and the size of the teeth too, possibly.

Darn!

Oh, the "ists" that hubby gave the pics to don't know what it is either.

Actually two of them are fighting about it and still are.

I'll let you know if the decide anything.

Nibs

[Stormcrow]

HA! What are they aruging that it is?

(Edit: I will post close-ups of a few things tonight! Give me about an hour and a half to get home and get it done.)

Edited August 26, 2010 by ebonycrow

[+HerNibs]

HA! What are they aruging that it is?

(Edit: I will post close-ups of a few things tonight! Give me about an hour and a half to get home and get it done.)

Not sure what they think it is. Hubby got fed up with them and left.

Nibs

[Stormcrow]

I guess that's one way you can do it!

[JonathanVonErich]

Wow the topic is on fire.

[hurm]

Leaning towards some wierd crossbreed. Deffinitely looks like a skull of a fox but the paws, tail are nothing like that of a traditional fox and that jet black on a fox is either rare or never happens. Im saying a crossbreed of species personally. Extenuating circumstances can be hell for an animals sex drive. Isnt there statistics on how many new species are created or discovered every day that are in the thousands?

[Stormcrow]

Here's some close-ups.

1: Head and teeth, forepaws.

http://i38.tinypic.com/25f680l.png

2: Teeth on the lower jaw. On closer inspection, does it look like the incisors are fused or are a rodent's incisors?

http://i36.tinypic.com/v3lw1k.png

[TinkyBlink]

I personally didnt think they were that gruesome, I didnt notice any maggots, its not injured or bloody, it just looks like it no longer has eyes, but not in a gorey way...

Thanks for the fox paw Nibs, the thing seems to have fingers so you're right it cant be a fox!

[hurm]

Here's some close-ups.

1: Head and teeth, forepaws.

http://i38.tinypic.com/25f680l.png

2: Teeth on the lower jaw. On closer inspection, does it look like the incisors are fused or are a rodent's incisors?

http://i36.tinypic.com/v3lw1k.png

Looks fused but I cant say for sure as there's so many teeth missing already. Fusing would support a wierd crossbreed though, or am I just pulling stupid ish out of my @**?

[Mr.United_Nations]

Im guna say a mutated rat. for some strange reason the teeth adn the head look rat shaped

[hurm]

Im guna say a mutated rat. for some strange reason the teeth adn the head look rat shaped

That is the by far the biggest rat I've ever seen.

[gisbon]

Heyo,

I think when someone mentioned a fox earlier they were Correct.

the facial features are close to the same, along with chest size and length.

Im also from Kentucky, and im pretty sure we have some Black Foxes running around in a recent mutation. More specifically im from South Central, so we might be looking at the same area.

Also, the feet could simply be a mutation that followed the black coat gene. I wish you had more pictures from before it Decomposed.

[S2F]

Heya Eb, welcome back. This place hasn't been quite the same without you here.

As far as the animal in the pics I have no clue but I'll dig around later and see if I can find out something. Was there a body of water nearby, a lake or stream? I doubt it is a rodent but that is only an opinion. Maybe Mattshark or Cetacea will chime in but I haven't seen them much lately.

[Sakari]

baby racoon

Schkiperkee Puppy....Not sure what happened to the poor thing , it's tail was never removed , they usually are when puppies......We have one....See below.....

Edited August 27, 2010 by Sakari

[Stormcrow]

I didn't post the whole pictures that were cropped, Tinky. The ones with the teeth are the worst, so I just cropped them to show what was most important in that particular picture. I didn't want to cause any unnecessary grief... Because, at least for me, I can't look at them for too very long without feeling nauseous. Maybe I'm just a wuss, who knows. x)

Now, rat is something I didn't consider, but again with the ears, it doesn't seem likely.

Piney also suggested fox -- a Siberian fox, one of the domesticated sorts, that was horribly inbred, that had been abandoned in the area. To me, it still seems... unlikely. Considering the area and factoring in the statistics, what's the likelihood that I'd find someone's abandoned exotic pet? (I have impecable luck at collecting abandoned pets as it is, I don't need to start with the exotic kind.) But, the feet just seem too perfectly formed, but maybe I'm trying to over think it. Even poly cats rarely have "perfect" hands.

@ Gisbon: I'm in London, about how close are you? The problem with the black mutation in foxes (being of the silver phase, or "melanistic") is that they still have a white tail tip and silver hackles. We have seen silver phase red foxes in the area several times, but this was completely solid black without a hint of another hue anywhere in the fur. I agree that if this fur coloration is a totally different genetic mutation, that the hands may factor in to that equation somehow, but I'm not sure how exactly they could be related. I would make a poor geneticist.

Hey Fate! Glad you're still around. Yes, at least, there used to be. It's too grown up for a person to get down in the area, but there used to be a stream below the hill where I found it.

[S2F]

Hey Fate! Glad you're still around. Yes, at least, there used to be. It's too grown up for a person to get down in the area, but there used to be a stream below the hill where I found it.

I only asked because raccoons tend to stick close to bodies of water. I agree however that this isn't a raccoon, at least not a typical bushy tailed, hunch backed variety. I tried looking for some info about Procyonidae, the family that raccoons belong to but I didn't see any lookers there. The head looks similar to a ringtail cat but the tail and coloration aren't even close. I'll see if I can find more.

[UltraThunderMan]

That is the by far the biggest rat I've ever seen.

You haven't seen TMNT.

[Sakari]

I still say a small dog ( possiblly a Schkiperkee as I said , like the one I posted a few back with video....Moto looks different now , so maybe not a puppy..

Edit....

The more I look at that picture , I am almost possitive a Schkiperkee PUPPY , the tail still there and not off yet...For sure a small dog breed , It sure looks like Moto , well if he were in that position.( glad he is not)....

Edited August 27, 2010 by Sakari

[Stormcrow]

It's not a dog, I'm sorry. The hands just do not allow for it to be a dog: http://i33.tinypic.com/2d55j6.jpg I'd love it if it were that simple, but a Schipperke doesn't have fingers.

Edited August 27, 2010 by ebonycrow

[Sakari]

It's not a dog, I'm sorry. The hands just do not allow for it to be a dog: http://i33.tinypic.com/2d55j6.jpg I'd love it if it were that simple, but a Schipperke doesn't have fingers.

That is what I get for not looking at all of the pictures....A baby racoon?.....

Raccoons occasionally have pelage which is melanistic (all black), or albinistic (all white).

Each hand and foot has five fingers and toes.

Can not find a better picture right now......

Edited August 27, 2010 by Sakari

[Stormcrow]

That is what I get for not looking at all of the pictures....A baby racoon?.....

Coloration and body/head shape are off for a raccoon, along with the ears being too large and canine teeth too small (though the teeth are debatable if it is a young individual). As far as body shape and size goes though, while alive it looked exactly like a fox in every respect -- except for the hands and coloration.

Melanistic raccoons (kind of like melanistic foxes) still have a light patch in the area of the face near the eyes. Like with melanistic jaguars, no creature is completely, solid black. Melanism is caused by an over abundance of melanin, but unlike albinism (which turns an animal entirely white) it doesn't turn the animal entirely black.

Melanistic jaguar: http://s2.hubimg.com/u/160993_f260.jpg

Squirrel: http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/Blacksquirrelrev.jpg

Fox (or "silver phase"):

Deer: http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/black_whitetail.jpg

Raccoon: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Woowoo1/Image013.jpg

Edited August 27, 2010 by ebonycrow

[Sakari]

Ok , now I want to know what it is.....No time left tonight , or this weekend to research.....Arghhhhhh