Print found in the upper macleay

Unread post by **cavey2** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:06 pm

Hi,this is my first time on the forum but have been lurking for a few years.....its a great site.There was a article in our local paper last week that may be of interest to everyone,sorry i dont have the skills to download it myself but you can check it out at Macleay Argus(google it) and it is located on the home page.

Unread post by **Dion** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 1:49 pm

Hey Cavey2

I think this is what you are referring to, to me it doesn’t look like cat, dog or Yowie.

I’m not sure what its from?

http://www.macleayargus.com.au/news/loc ... 59559.aspx

http://www.macleayargus.com.au/news/loc ... 63377.aspx

Unread post by **cavey2** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 3:45 pm

Yeh chewy,thats it......it is a strange looking print.

Website · Unread post by **SAB 8** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 3:48 pm

Wow - I was in this vicinity last month as well following up a report.

I`m leaning towards a Big Cat print... maybe???? If you read the comments section some guy has put in a report about seeing a Big Cat in the area!

Unread post by **Yowie88** » Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:51 pm

Hummm, I need to study big cat prints further but the toes look too rounded for it to be cat prints.

Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:23 pm

The image on
http://www.macleayargus.com.au/news/loc ... 63377.aspx
Appears to show 4 different lots of prints.
1/A couple of small prints on the lower right hand side.
2/What looks like a "foot pad" shape in the middle
3/3 toes..4th toe ? hidden in the shadow line of a rock.?
4/A couple of indentations between the "foot pad" like shape and the "toes".
It does not appear to be possible that the "toes" could be connected to the main pad shape..
Their would have to be some sort of bizarre arch between the "toes" and the "foot" to get over the section of mud and rocks and leave no mark..between the toes and foot.
Even the "toes" (pretending that this rubber foot was connected to them) dont even line up with the foot pad ...the toes are skewered too far to the left..
I think its just a composite of different tracks..and by a fluke..looks roughly like one rough print.

Unread post by **AL Pitman** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:38 pm

Does it have to take an actual bite from a creature before we accept that they exsist , it looks reasonably convincing to me .... here we go again ..

LOOK OUT THERE'S YOWIES ABOUT ............

Unread post by **Ruby** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:45 pm

What a mess! I'm thinking a collage of prints, as per Mike's suggestion, with some Felis (not Yowie) in the mix.

We've seen a lot of 'hybrid' prints in the last few years, most notably alleged 'yowie' prints that are actually wallaby or 'roo that have landed or moved with their feet close together leaving a rather interesting looking 'foot' print.

R

Unread post by **Rusty2** » Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:34 pm

Hey everyone ,
Didn't want to say anything but as soon saw that particular print , I thought the "toe's" looked back to front .
Believe me I know how dissappointing it can be to find a print then realise that it's a double or multiple print .

Here's a print I thought was some new breed . Talk about excited , what a let down .

Cheer's Rusty2.................

Website · Unread post by **SAB 8** » Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:26 pm

Another article about the mysterious footprint today.

This case seems to have rustled up a bit of interest.... surprising!!!

http://www.macleayargus.com.au/news/loc ... 72225.aspx

Yowiehunters Forum

Print found in the upper macleay

Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay

Re: Print found in the upper macleay