We have a winner!
We have a winner!
I must say, I love mountain lion threads. Other than the couple that involve a picture with a game warden holding a dead lion, most all of them get debunked. I think it reflects how most mountain lion sightings are bogus to begin with. Very few turn out to be legit, but you sure hear about a bunch of sightings. As dennis said, just because a LEO saw it, doesn't even make it true. No slight towards the OP in this thread. At least you had pictures and some kind of proof of what you saw, unlike most stories that people claim are true, yet lack any evidence. I can't believe that newspapers print stories that lack any kind of evidence. There was one in the Purcell Register a while back that was of the same caliber.
I called both tony woodruff and chad strang to see if they'd be interested in checking them out for verification. neither answered, left a msg with tony. waited around for about 4hrs without a call back & headed home. i didnt have a plaster kit or tape measure with me at the time.
i do try my best at due diligence, both my dad (retired us army corp of engineers park ranger & biologist) & a good hunting buddy of mine identified them as cat tracks. i've never in my life seen a dog track as large as the ones i photographed. (remember 2 sets of prints from the very beginning) for reference the width of my boot is 4 3/8'' wide. the largest of the tracks passed my boot edge on both sides.
the general consensus on here is that the tracks are very large toe clipped dogs and i can accept that theory. what is undisputable(at least in my mind since i was there) however is one of those dogs had foot pads with outward spreading toes almost 5 inches wide. i've never owned a large dog, is that normal?
i have updated the original post on my site to reflect the contributions of okshooters community.
Last edited:
Big dog in mud like what was in the picture, sure. Next time you take pics of something like that, throw down something beside it for size reference, like a dollar bill or credit card. If you have a constant, you can get a relatively accurate measurement in the picture. Posting something on this or any other forum is like being in a courtroom. It isn't what you know, it is what you can prove. Especially with mt lions, there are a lot of skeptics in here, like myself. I absolutely believe 100% that they exist in Oklahoma, yet I believe about 1% of the sightings and stories.
I agree With Roos. At least you did take pics. Kudu's to you for that.
I was told by a GW that a large majority of the calls they get are about mountian lion sightings. If they responded to each, they couldn't get much work done. Thats kind of why I advocate getting a plaster cast of the print, then its size and identifying charactaristics are preserved forever.
I've followed lots of big bird dogs in soft mud while chasing pheasant and quail. They can leave large prints where the toes splay out
added a nice pdf on my site i found "Mountain Lion Identification Course" from the Montana Fish & Wildlife service. nice little writeup.
says the left to left or right to right stride length on an adult is greater than 40 inches, the photograph with the 29'' arrow shows 27'' between left & right indicating a 54'' stride.
these are the tracks greater than 4'' wide. i can barely make out 3 lobes in the rear of the pad on both prints as well, especially the rear print that also shows a leading 2nd from the left toe.
i hate to beat a dead horse & open myself up for further embarrassment - but for the specific tracks i've left up on my OP i have a hard time buying the dog theory. i've added outline overlays with the original pictures. click the pictures & view full size to see the overlay lines, they're pretty thin as to not obscure the image. compare to the original images without the overlay lines & you'll see what im talking about.
says the left to left or right to right stride length on an adult is greater than 40 inches, the photograph with the 29'' arrow shows 27'' between left & right indicating a 54'' stride.
these are the tracks greater than 4'' wide. i can barely make out 3 lobes in the rear of the pad on both prints as well, especially the rear print that also shows a leading 2nd from the left toe.
i hate to beat a dead horse & open myself up for further embarrassment - but for the specific tracks i've left up on my OP i have a hard time buying the dog theory. i've added outline overlays with the original pictures. click the pictures & view full size to see the overlay lines, they're pretty thin as to not obscure the image. compare to the original images without the overlay lines & you'll see what im talking about.
I see no reason you would be embarrassed. You have provided evidence of what you thought you saw, with further research on why you think that. If I had an opinion on your case, I would say inconclusive. From all the other hoop-la we've all heard about mt lions, this is closer to being legit as any. Lexington is at least near a river, which are known travel corridors for mt lions.
Ok, you may or may not have noticed in this thread I've not given an opinion of what the tracks may be.
You have done your homework, and some of your facts could go either way. Looking at the pics on this computer, just doesn't give me enough definition of detail to say one way or another. For the record, I elk hunt in NM, and have seen mountain lion tracks in the snow, following a set of mule deer tracks. There are enough cats in that area, that there is a hunting season for them.
Here is another way you can see if your tracks can be verified. I have subscribed to the Outdoor Oklahoma Magazine for 30 some years. Recently there was an article about a mountain lion hit by a vehicle on HWY 81, North of Minco. The accident was reported and the cat was picked up by the ODW for study.
Eric Bartholomew is the furbearer boiolgist for the ODW, and conducted the study. He aged the cat at somewhere between 12-20 months old.
To date there has been no confirmed reproduction of the ML, so for now, the cats are considered to be wanderers, and use rivers as pathways through the state.
This is a quote from the article in the Outdoor Oklahoma Magazine: "The only way we get information is when people report it. If people send us trail camera photos and we can confirm the location, thats great informa
You have done your homework, and some of your facts could go either way. Looking at the pics on this computer, just doesn't give me enough definition of detail to say one way or another. For the record, I elk hunt in NM, and have seen mountain lion tracks in the snow, following a set of mule deer tracks. There are enough cats in that area, that there is a hunting season for them.
Here is another way you can see if your tracks can be verified. I have subscribed to the Outdoor Oklahoma Magazine for 30 some years. Recently there was an article about a mountain lion hit by a vehicle on HWY 81, North of Minco. The accident was reported and the cat was picked up by the ODW for study.
Eric Bartholomew is the furbearer boiolgist for the ODW, and conducted the study. He aged the cat at somewhere between 12-20 months old.
To date there has been no confirmed reproduction of the ML, so for now, the cats are considered to be wanderers, and use rivers as pathways through the state.
This is a quote from the article in the Outdoor Oklahoma Magazine: "The only way we get information is when people report it. If people send us trail camera photos and we can confirm the location, thats great informa
I don't know what happened to the rest of my post above, but the gist of it was to call Eric, the fur bearer biologist at 405-385-1791. The article said he needed the publics input to help them track Mountain Lions in the state. Let us know what you find out
