[lesmore49]

Rare monkey spotted by scientific expedition. Believed to be first time in 80 years..

Elusive Amazon Monkey Seen for the First Time in Nearly a Century | Coast to Coast AM

I've always been fascinated by 'discoveries' of either new animals, previously unknown by the scientific community, or when animals thought to be either extinct or possibly extinct are found through scientific exploration.

Some examples:

Ivory Billed Woodpecker:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=...eu3rq9mEriEBNg

Also of course the Coelacanth fish:

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=...q6pjViwmplpgLA

Any rare, thought to be extinct animals you have an interest in ?

[normhead]

Do Eastern Red Wolves count?
Red wolf - Wikipedia

I actually have taken pictures of one.



There are thought to be about 400 of these wolves left, although politics has kept them off the endangered list. I travelled the park for at least 35 years before seeing one up close, and it only happened once. I Know lots who have seen one at a distance, but very few have photos of a member of the species. They are theoretcly protected, but no one's ever been criminally charged for killing one. I've talked to retired MNR officials who claim letting them live is a big mistake and even though the MNR has been told to protect them, old attitudes die hard. They are smaller than Grey Wolves, about the size of my border collies.

Years ago I went to the Slate Islands in Northern Ontario to get images of Wodland Caribou, which are rated as threatened, but not yet endangered.



For the wolf image, I got lucky. The Slate Islands caribou images, I'd take you there for a couple of grand if I was 10 years younger. The price has gone up considerably with the retirement of Captain Doug who used to run a ferry service for you and your canoes.. The new service charges $500 a person for a 13 km ride round trip ride on Lake Superior. It's still easy to get images of them, but they don't come cheap.

Roads negatively impact their health in that they make it easier for wolves to hunt them. On the Slate Island they are protected by 13 km of open water. IN most locations, you'd have to fly in to see them and it would be pot luck when you got there.

having these two, I think I've done pretty good, not having ever hired a guide or gone on a "Photography Expedition." or safari, with others guiding my trips. No "turn up and point you camera where the guide says to" for normhead.

Although you are pretty much guaranteed to see Caribou on the Slates. They graze near the campsites. You are actually in danger of them steppingg on you in your tent . Pasture land is scare and the only place to set your tents is on one of their pastures.



My friend Enid on her first trip with my group. July 16-2008.
Here she is last month after a hike through frontal moraine to an old growth Red Pine. Well into her 70s and still tripping.


I've been tripping with a group of friends, some of whom I played baseball with 40 years ago. We are all starting to feel a little endangered. Some of the current group joinied us because their original group of trippers has either died off or are no longer interested.

[aslyfox]

interesting thread

have they established that wood pecker survives?

if they have, would they tell us?

if you release info that a rare thought to be extinct animal exists there may be those out there that want to find them and to see them

even if you have the best of intentions you could adversely affect the animal's survival

now this does not count running across such an animal accidently ( we should be so lucky )

going to Tanzania, we were told that there was a very rare animal found in one local only.

once there, in a different part of the country we were told by protective rangers that they were protecting a small number of that animal in their "area". That knowledge is supposedly not wide spread to protect the animals and other than the rangers and scientists involved people are actively discouraged from attempting to locate them.

I can imagine something similar with regard to the Florida Panther or similar animal.

who knows.

[normhead]

I can imagine something similar with regard to the Florida Panther or similar animal.

There are known to be Eastern Cougar in our area but so far, this has eluded verification, despite the MNR setting out baits with motion detector triggered cameras, I've talked to enough serious outdoorsmen who have seen one we know they are around. Bit they are so rare as to be thought to be extinct, at least officially. A Panther of Puma (or Eastern Cougar), has a range so large they are only likely to turn up in a specific area once every six months. A Cherokee elder once told me about them. I asked he knew when they were around. " Over a few days 3 or four dogs will disappear off their tethers in peoples back yards." Proof enough for him, apparently not for science though.

[aslyfox]

There are known to be Eastern Cougar in our area but so far, this has eluded verification, despite the MNR setting out baits with motion detector triggered cameras, I've talked to enough serious outdoorsmen who have seen one we know they are around. Bit they are so rare as to be thought to be extinct, at least officially. A Panther of Puma (or Eastern Cougar), has a range so large they are only likely to turn up in a specific area once every six months. A Cherokee elder once told me about them. I asked he knew when they were around. " Over a few days 3 or four dogs will disappear off their tethers in peoples back yards." Proof enough for him, apparently not for science though.

Cougars ( Mountain Lions ) have been confirmed here in Kansas but are to believed to be transitory

this of course would be a rare animal sighting


Although people often report seeing them, mountain lions are only occasionally confirmed in Kansas. The first confirmed mountain lion in Kansas in modern times was shot and killed in 2007 in Barber County in south-central Kansas. Prior to 2007, the last mountain lion documented in Kansas was killed in 1904 in Ellis County.The 19th and latest confirmation occurred in November 2016 in Wabaunsee County [ the county just west of mine ] when a mountain lion was treed by a coon hound and photographed by the hunters.


Biologists believe most verified sightings are of transient young males coming from established populations in nearby states. It is not uncommon for young males to travel great distances looking for home ranges. Mountain lions occur in Colorado within 75 miles of the border of southwest Kansas and have been documented with increasing frequency in the Oklahoma panhandle. They have also been dispersing from the Black Hills of South Dakota into several Midwestern states. So far, the animals appear to be passing through Kansas, rather than staying and establishing home ranges. KDWPT has no evidence of a breeding population in the state. . . .

Wildlife Sightings / Wildlife & Habitats / KDWPT - KDWPT

[thazooo]

There are known to be Eastern Cougar in our area but so far, this has eluded verification, despite the MNR setting out baits with motion detector triggered cameras, I've talked to enough serious outdoorsmen who have seen one we know they are around. Bit they are so rare as to be thought to be extinct, at least officially. A Panther of Puma (or Eastern Cougar), has a range so large they are only likely to turn up in a specific area once every six months. A Cherokee elder once told me about them. I asked he knew when they were around. " Over a few days 3 or four dogs will disappear off their tethers in peoples back yards." Proof enough for him, apparently not for science though.

We have similar. The Pearl River in the Georgetown area. I've always heard the stories of Panther, Old Timers and current age. I've never had the privilege to see or hear one. My son has. Around sunset one crossed the road in front of him. Bigger than a Bobcat, dark in color, long tail. Ran into a 100 year woods.
We rented our house down there to a couple. Gotta call one evening from them. Something was 'screaming' in the woods. Un-nerved the wife so bad she wanted to leave It lasted a couple of nights and then left. Been 4 years since and no further sightings.
Asked the Game Warden about it and of course they don't exist.
Yet...............

[normhead]

Our game wardens say the same thing... but there is Trent University study trying to capture images and get genetic samples by placing motion cameras and barbed wire near baits to try and collect hair and pictures. If you look at something that truly doesn't exist, like say Bigfoot, you won't find serious researchers trying to find them. I once came across such a station. Some researcher no doubt has somewhere in his archives an image of my inquisitive face peering into the camera... but i saw the barbed wire and refused to give him a sample of my hair for genetic testing. Who knows what weird stuff might be suggested were that to happen? I can see the headlines now " Eastern Cougars and Normhead genetically are 100% identical." I always wanted to be in the headlines.

In a similar line of thought, scientists in British Columbia put GPS devices on Cougars and Grizzlies and were able to determine that hikers etc. were passing within 60 feet of resting animals. The simple fact is, most animals have no interest in being seen by humans. The one thing common to wild animal attacks is that, the people involved actually get to see the animal, whereas according to date collected by the National Parks, 99.9% of the time, humans with their limited sense of smell, poor hearing and inability to see through trees and rocks, have no frigging clue what is 60 feet away from them. We aren't the best species when it comes to knowing what's around us. We can't even fly to get an arial view of the situation. We are truly the last species that should be looking for something. We have less chance of finding what's in front of our noses than almost anything but earth worms.

IN true evolutionary style, we've been genetically programmed to see, only what we might be able to catch and eat.

Apparently knowing a Grizzly or Cougar is resting 60 feet from the path we are walking on is not important, from an evolutionary perspective. In fact, given our habit of freaking out for practically no reason. maybe it's an evolutionary advantage to not know.

---

Last edited by normhead; 08-28-2017 at 08:21 AM.

[aslyfox]

Our game wardens say the same thing... but there is Trent University study trying to capture images and get genetic samples by placing motion cameras and barbed wire near baits to try and collect hair and pictures. If you look at something that truly doesn't exist, like say Bigfoot, you won't find serious researchers trying to find them. I once came across such a station. Some researcher no doubt has somewhere in his archives an image of my inquisitive face peering into the camera... but i saw the barbed wire and refused to give him a sample of my hair for genetic testing. Who knows what weird stuff might be suggested were that to happen? I can see the headlines now " Eastern Cougars and Normhead genetically are 100% identical." I always wanted to be in the headlines.

In a similar line of thought, scientists in British Columbia put GPS devices on Cougars and Grizzlies and were able to determine that hikers etc. were passing within 60 feet of resting animals. The simple fact is, most animals have no interest in being seen by humans. The one thing common to wild animal attacks is that, the people involved actually get to see the animal, whereas according to date collected by the National Parks, 99.9% of the time, humans with their limited sense of smell, poor hearing and inability to see through trees and rocks, have no frigging clue what is 60 feet away from them. We aren't the best species when it comes to knowing what's around us. We can't even fly to get an arial view of the situation. We are truly the last species that should be looking for something. We have less chance of finding what's in front of our noses than almost anything but earth worms.

IN true evolutionary style, we've been genetically programmed to see, only what we might be able to catch and eat.

Apparently knowing a Grizzly or Cougar is resting 60 feet from the path we are walking on is not important, from an evolutionary perspective. In fact, given our habit of freaking out for practically no reason. maybe it's an evolutionary advantage to not know.

If you are being hunted by a predator, I don't think you see it until the last minute or so,

There are exceptions, there always will be

A surprise encounter might be the most dangerous which is why when hiking in " bear " territory you are advised to make noise

Bad on getting good pictures perhaps but getting between mom and the kiddies might be avoided

[normhead]

If you are being hunted by a predator, I don't think you see it until the last minute or so,

So what's the point in worrying?There are exceptions, there always will be

But according to this research, they are exceedingly rare.Plane crashes are exceedingly rare. Is it worth worrying every time you get on a plane?

A surprise encounter might be the most dangerous which is why when hiking in " bear " territory you are advised to make noise

Even surprise encounters rarely prove to be problematic. Tess has come between a mother and cubs. Aside from some loud snorting, there wasn't an issue, because she got out of the way.

There's a difference between advising caution and grossly over-estimating the danger. The simple fact is, even people who should know better because they live in rural environments tend to over-estimate the dangers for their own reasons. Ranchers tend to exaggerate the dangers wildlife present, sometimes because they've lost animals, but more often just because having to accommodate the wildlife who's range they've appropriated is bad for business. City folks are just gullible for the most part.

Three photographers in hiking in our neighbourhood were surrounded by a pack of wolves circling their group. They ran around for a minute or two and left. The photographers were thrilled, "honoured" was the word they used.It was too dark for images but they remain to this day grateful for the experience.

A similar experience happens to some city slickers out for a hike, they claim the wolves were trying to kill their dog and start a petition calling for the return of the wolf bounty.

Same experience, different interpretations. Humans tend to be dumb as poop in such situations, don't encourage them.

If you are truly concerned about human wildlife interactions, start training people in appropriate behaviours when they are in the wild. Most human animal interactions are defined by human mis-interpretation of typical animal behaviour.

Here in Ontario there have been maybe 3 or 4 fatalities due to rogue bears in 100 years. Every year 3 or 4 people die in accidents driving through the park. There are problems that are more imaginary than real. A bear attack happens on average once every 25 years. and there are real problems that happen every year. The human mind's ability to focus on the negligible and ignore the obvious is trulye remarkable. Lobbying for auto safety in the park is a dead end. making up stories about the likely hood of bear attacks seems to convey a certain "respectability."

In 100 year, in Ontario, with endless bear encounters every year, 4 dead. Two in one attack, so 3 attacks, one every 33 years. That's one every 12000 days based on a population of thousands of bears and 15 million people. And this despite people leaving open food containers in bear country on a regular basis and many who essentially make every mistake they can to attract a bear to their camp or cabin.

Meanwhile thousands die on our highways every year. The simple conclusion is, death in auto accidents is to be expected, but death by wildlife is somehow more un-acceptable. Why? Because for some people any excuse to go out and shoot something is a good excuse. And if what you really want to do is shoot anything that moves, any excuse will do.

There should be a license for people heading out into wilderness like a drivers license. They should have to pass a test. This human thinking about eliminating all threats but other humans is just wrong. Eliminate other humans first. They are much more dangerous. In Ontario, hunters out hunting game have killed way more people than bears ever will. Let's keep in mind who the real dangers are. I wear bright orange outerwear and make lots of noise in hunting season, and not because of the bears. And 90% of the year, hunters are out hunting something in our woods. There is only one month of the year that has no hunting season, when i can walk in the woods without a danger of being shot. This risk is assumed just so people can kill things.

The human perception of what is dangerous and what is not is a study in illogical extremes.

[aslyfox]

But according to this research, they are exceedingly rare.Plane crashes are exceedingly rare. Is it worth worrying every time you get on a plane?



Even surprise encounters rarely prove to be problematic. Tess has come between a mother and cubs. Aside from some loud snorting, there wasn't an issue, because she got out of the way.

There's a difference between advising caution and grossly over-estimating the danger. The simple fact is, even people who should know better because they live in rural environments tend to over-estimate the dangers for their own reasons. Ranchers tend to exaggerate the dangers wildlife present, sometimes because they've lost animals, but more often just because having to accommodate the wildlife who's range they've appropriated is bad for business. City folks are just gullible for the most part.

Three photographers in hiking in our neighbourhood were surrounded by a pack of wolves circling their group. They ran around for a minute or two and left. The photographers were thrilled, "honoured" was the word they used.It was too dark for images but they remain to this day grateful for the experience.

A similar experience happens to some city slickers out for a hike, they claim the wolves were trying to kill their dog and start a petition calling for the return of the wolf bounty.

Same experience, different interpretations. Humans tend to be dumb as poop in such situations, don't encourage them.

If you are truly concerned about human wildlife interactions, start training people in appropriate behaviours when they are in the wild. Most human animal interactions are defined by human mis-interpretation of typical animal behaviour.

Here in Ontario there have been maybe 3 or 4 fatalities due to rogue bears in 100 years. Every year 3 or 4 people die in accidents driving through the park. There are problems that are more imaginary than real. A bear attack happens on average once every 25 years. and there are real problems that happen every year. The human mind's ability to focus on the negligible and ignore the obvious is true remarkable. Lobbying for auto safety in the park is a dead end. making up stories about the likely hood of bear attacks seems to convey a certain "respectability."

In 100 year, in Ontario, with endless bear encounters every year, 4 dead. Two in one attack, so 3 attacks, one every 33 years. That's one every 12000 days based on a population of thousands of bears and 15 million people. And this despite people leaving open food containers in bear country on a regular basis and many who essentially make every mistake they can to attract a bear to their camp or cabin.

Meanwhile thousands die on our highways every year. The simple conclusion is, death in auto accidents is to be expected, but death by wildlife is somehow more important. Why? Because for some people any excuse to go out and shoot something is a good excuse. And if what you really want to do is shoot anything that moves, any excuse will do.

There should be license for people heading out into wilderness like a drivers license. They should've to pass test. This human thinking about eliminating all threats but other humans is just wrong. Eliminate other humans first. They are much more dangerous. IN Ontario, hunters out hunting game have killed way more people than bears ever will. Let's keep in mind who the real dangers are. I were bright orange outerwear and make lots of noise in hunting season, and not because of the bear. And 90% of the year, hunters are out hunting something in our woods. There is only one month of the year that has no hunting season, when i can walk in the woods without a danger of being shot. This risk is assumed just so people can kill things.

You have misunderstood my comment

The most dangerous thing we do statistically speaking, I have been told is, in no particular order,

Get out of bed

Step in or out of shower/bath

Drive an automobile, motorcycle or be a passenger

Dealing with wildlife is way down on the list

_____________

Being injured by wildlife is, I Agee, extremely

____________

" so what is the point of worrying " I don't recall writing that ????

[normhead]

You have misunderstood my comment

The most dangerous thing we do statistically speaking, I have been told is, in no particular order,

Get out of bed

Step in or out of shower/bath

Drive an automobile, motorcycle or be a passenger

Dealing with wildlife is way down on the list

_____________

Being injured by wildlife is, I Agee, extremely


____________

" so what is the point of worrying " I don't recall writing that ????

I have never figured out myself how to educate folks about precautions to take in bear or wolf country, without getting extreme. It's like pedophiles and psychopaths, rogue humans. You don't want to be suspicious of everybody, that's not a healthy attitude, but, how do you explain the dangers with a balanced not too negative, not too positive approach? Not only have I never figured it out, I've never seen anyone else do it either. Way to many, wildlife stories are like bogyman stories. They are told by people who know better, but can't resist repeating a story that has good shock value. Unfortunately wildlife suffer because of those attitudes those stories create.

[savoche]

I think the only believed-to-be-extinct species I have seen in the wild is the Greater Bamboo Lemur. It was rediscovered by Dr. Pat Wright in, I think, 1986. We met Dr. Wright, quite by chance, in Ranomafana National Park where she had found the lemur. She also discovered the previously undescribed Golden Bamboo Lemur in the same area. A very friendly and informative lady. We were also incredibly lucky to hear the call of the Golden Bamboo Lemur - an extremely rare occurance according to Dr. Wright, and we would have had no idea what it was hadn't she been there to tell us. I'm still upset I didn't have my sound recorder ready

Both species are still highly threatened due to habitat loss. There are just a few hundred left of each.

Greater bamboo lemur, Ranomafana NP, Madagascar

[aslyfox]

I . . . Unfortunately wildlife suffer because of those attitudes those stories create.

true, sad but true

---------- Post added 08-28-17 at 13:11 ----------

. . . due to habitat loss. . . .

in many cases habitat loss is the biggest problem with animal species' survival

I remember growing up in rural east central Illinois and watching farmers taking out fences as they stopped raising or fattening livestock and then mowing from ditch to ditch and the county/state began to mow the road side ditch.

resulting in habitat loss for ground nesting birds, both song birds and/or game birds, and those which might just use the tall grass/brush as shelter.

An area known at one time for excellent pheasant hunting " killed " off.

[normhead]

true, sad but true

---------- Post added 08-28-17 at 13:11 ----------



in many cases habitat loss is the biggest problem with animal species' survival

I remember growing up in rural east central Illinois and watching farmers taking out fences as they stopped raising or fattening livestock and then mowing from ditch to ditch and the county/state began to mow the road side ditch.

resulting in habitat loss for ground nesting birds, both song birds and/or game birds, and those which might just use the tall grass/brush as shelter.

An area known at one time for excellent pheasant hunting " killed " off.

What's even worse is when they name a community "deer meadow" and then change the habitat the deer lived on so drastically the deer can't live there anymore. Humans tend to memorialize what they had, more than treasure what they still have. Most communities (and I've seen this) would rather build a road that wipes out the habitat for an endangered species of turtles than not build said road. No doubt they would have named the road "Turtle Road" if not stopped by the MNR. It would seem, these communities only want to be autonomous, so they can more easily avoid doing the right thing. To a small community, destroying the habitat of an endangered species for 10 construction jobs and two permanent jobs makes economic sense.If there's only 40 jobs in your whole community 2 more is big increase. And those turtles aren't worth a cent.

[lesmore49]

About 20 years ago in mid October, my family (me, wife, two kids) were out boating in a lake which was formed apparently by a meteorite. The area is in the far eastern part of the province and part of the Canadian Shield. Every year at the end of the boating season, we would take our Old Town square stern canoe out to check out the fall colours and give the little Evinrude outboard a last run to clear the carburetor of gas, as I like to run my small engines dry of fuel, before storage.

We were about 75-100 feet from shore and near a relatively open spot and what should we see but a Wolverine. Very exciting for us,as although we have spent a lot of time outdoors over the years, none of us before or since, have ever seen a Wolverine in the wild before. They do exist in this part of the province but are a very uncommon animal. We were relieved that we had lake between us and this animal and had not encountered it on trail. Earlier that year I had spoken with a local trapper and asked him about different wild animals in this area. He had mentioned that there were a very few Wolverine, but the did inhabit this part of the province .

I've seen lots of deer...whitetail/Mule, Pronghorn, Black Bears, gray wolves, coyotes, Moose, Fisher, Marten, Badger, etc...but I've yet to see a Canada Lynx, Bobcat or Cougar in the wild. Canada Lynx and Bobcat are not uncommon. After many years of looking, a few years ago I came across a few Great Gray Owls. Very large and impressive. Quite fortunate on my part to finally see a few examples.

Our conservation department has indicated for years that Cougars had been extirpated in this province, but regular sightings continue and now with the advent of the game camera, photographs are capturing these elusive big cats.

The provincial DNR indicates that Cougar presence is a result of young males wandering up from the Dakotas, which are directly south. However a credible, amateur local naturalist has indicated that he has seen a female cougar with young, well into the province.

A large gray wolf was trapped 25 miles outside of the outskirts of a major city here, a few years ago. If my memory is correct, the size was 154 lbs and 7' 9" from tip of nose to tip of tail, as measured I believe by DNR staff. The animal was caught in a large provincial park after complaints about missing pets, stock going missing.

We have a lot of wolves in the central and northern areas of the province. Feral pigs, with some European wild boar (escapees from game farms) don't seem to be a huge issue here (I could be wrong)...and some think it's because of predation by wolves.

One has to be careful though when it comes to misidentifying common wild animals as some other animal. I made the mistake myself, one very early morning in the spring. I was cruising slowly around a number of lakes on side roads, looking for ice free lake area to cast. A bit of a distance away, I saw what appeared to be a very tiny male African Lion..with heavy mane. I was excited and also baffled a bit...what I saw was a dark figure, a shadow of sorts...due to the early morning lighting. Fortunately I got close enough to ID the 'mystery animal' just before it disappeared into the bush.

It was a red fox that had captured a Ruffed Grouse. The Grouse's tail feathers were spread in a fan...the grouse was in the mouth of the fox and the fox was walking sideways when I spotted it and had turned to look at me, grouse in mouth. The grouse fantail looked like a mane in the poor light and how the fox was carrying his breakfast.

It appeared from my distance and in the poor light to be a mini African Lion male. Now I know enough about nature that there wasn't any Lion so small, nor that the likelihood of seeing an African Lion in the Canadian Shield was extremely unlikely.