Need Help Identifying several types of tracks

Discussion in 'Nature' started by 50orsohours, Dec 3, 2017.

  1. I’ll just post these photos and hopefully some of you experts can tell us what we are looking at. Thanks in advance. All from Eastern Oregon

    AD3CBC0F-8FB9-4011-B9B9-4D47508A6CE2. EA5E6897-8C65-4926-99B5-009AFEE90AA3. 7D8AC9CF-7605-4BA2-B21E-F7A593E55AFE. 6DD68DAC-DD20-4F96-8BDE-ECA99BFCEB98. AB899D6A-85FB-47DE-97D8-80E1A2EB6B5D. B47B7DA2-D9A3-4763-AA11-8F1609967169. 5BC43821-EEA2-48E9-9B8E-D2F9478E4CDB. 55D5F005-6E6E-46CB-B7BE-D6B272117957. D11CB9C8-929E-4CA7-A3FB-82717CA12BCB. 8B2F2358-20AD-4B08-BA66-7FEB5B3A6F9C.
  2. Bilby... careful, they hunt in packs...
    • Funny Funny x 3
  3. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler Subscribing Member

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    #3 with the shoe seems to me like a fox or small coyote or something like that.

    I'm guessing a lot of the others could be rabbits... Cottontails often keep their front legs together when sitting; might explain the tripod formation?
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Giiba

    Giiba Something to someone somewhere

    Aug 19, 2016
    New Westminster, BC
    My thoughts:
    1 - hare
    2 - hare
    3 - canine (coyote?)
    4 - marten
    5 - maybe a small rodent?
    6 - classic canine wandering
    7 - hare
    8 - hare
    9 - classic hare foraging
    10 - running hare
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Thank you guys! This helps a lot
  6. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    3 looks like raccoon
    4 looks like a deer

    The rest cottontail.
  7. I don’t think 4 is a deer.
  8. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    believe he miscounted and it should be 4 and 5 and I agree with his ID on those two images. The rest seem like rabbit to me except that one where you show down the trail, that one I am not sure of.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. EDA5D0E4-B598-4640-BD85-3DD72C8AB270.
    Thanks! I do need to get more familiar with the wildlife in Eastern Oregon. Seeing so much cool stuff
  10. archaeopteryx

    archaeopteryx Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 25, 2017
    Looking at your location, it might be interesting to consider hooking up with Cascadia Wild if you're particularly curious. Part of the reason for the spread of answers here is the images are mostly ambiguous. Mostly due to some combination of the condition of the track, composition, difficulty in inferring specific sizing from available scale references, lack of context, or sometimes some other factor. Additionally, tracking is a skill with a long learning curve. Bringing that back to good photography for later investigation is not always so simple but, speaking as someone whose job includes helping folks with track identification, I'd suggest considering both track and gait details more carefully. If you can photograph for both with a well defined scale reference and avoid the significantly angled views above which hide information in detail shot that makes the job easier.

    Picking up a tracking guide if you don't already have one may be helpful, just keep in mind the best it'll do is give a sense of what questions to ask. Working out the answers takes time, practice, and a lot of I don't know along with admitting and fixing mistakes. ODFW's species lists tend to be useful as well. Also, keep in mind eastern Oregon refers to 20-40 million acres, depending on how the term is used, with substantial variations in climate, elevation, and associated habitats. Whilst it's plausible all these images are from the same place and were taken within a few hours of each other I can't responsibly assume that. So documentation of both time and place is advisable---a reasonably specific but easy to follow place description, date, time, and GPS coordinates (with elevation!) in WGS84 is a good minimum standard. Clear labeling of images and well defined grouping is also a good idea. For example, the confusion above about number 4 versus 5 is avoidable. Location descriptions don't need to be fancy (coordinates do that better) but should be enough to catch typos; for example, if a location's given as a mile west of Blue Lake on Gearhart Mountain but the coordinates map over by Dragon Peak on the other side of 395 that's kind of important. Making coordinates links to aerial maps is also appreciated as that makes it quick to get some context on the area and what kinds of habitats it offers.

    It's my sense the responses so far overestimate Leporidae and underestimate Sciuridae. I'm not seeing Martes, Procyon, or Taxidea tracks here. For canids, it's often best to assume domestic dog by default and start considering coyote only if a good case for non-domestic can be constructed. In this case that's probably a function of whether all the boot prints are from your group or not, which is something you know but not something I know.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. I sure feel extremely guilty now, after reading your reply for doing a piss poor job presenting these photos. I apologize. All were taken within 20 minutes of prairie city to the east. Elevation was around 5000? Right off of route 26. These are all snapshots taken for only one reason and that is for us to look back at some point in the future to remember that amazing day. We had no idea there was so much snow just 20 minutes from town. My wife was the one who was really curious and that is why in at least one photo she put her hand next to the print and asked me to ask in one of the forums I frequent. I try not to ask and do my own research but this time I said why not, since I was still going through a couple of thousands of shots due to not having a computer for nearly 2 months. All human prints belong to the 2 of us. You are correct, no stray dogs around here, that is for sure. So thanks for your thorough post. I’ll pay more attention in the future and I’ll have more shots of prints to take snapshots of soon. Thanks again.
  12. archaeopteryx

    archaeopteryx Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 25, 2017
    Excellent! Recognizing notes for your own use are different from documentation for someone else gets you a long way.

    If more people understood this I would spend a lot less time trying to reconstruct the thinking behind 20+ year old data sets. ;)
  13. So did my reply help you in any way to identify those prints?
  14. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    I took one of those cloth measuring tapes and cut a foot off of it just for this reason.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. archaeopteryx

    archaeopteryx Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 25, 2017
    I like those too since they're small and light, though use the sort of plasticy version (doesn't absorb much water and dries out easier) and carry the full length for measuring stride. I get a fair number of emailed pictures with hiking sticks or ski poles for stride, which is good thinking, but people invariably neglect to mention how their sticks are set up or how tall they are. So, over the years, I've become a fan of just having a ruler in the picture. Tends to make for less back and forth and can save drawing scale bars in Photoshop.
    Confirms the guesses I mentioned and also that a few I didn't type up were fairly close. So doesn't actually change much, I'm afraid. Once you get through your other images and usual research feel free to post back with specific questions; I'll see the alert and have a look.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Aristophanes

    Aristophanes Mu-43 Regular

    Loch Ness Monster
  17. Thank you!
  18. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Sasquatch making a trail by splatting a rabbit into the snow.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. I have 3 new ones from yesterday. Outside of Prairie City, elevation is about 4000 or so. Thanks!

    EF9901D5-FDC1-4411-AF6C-837D93CCE94B. 7354BC90-E68B-4AEC-8332-685EA8CBD9DF. 1D9684EA-8772-45B6-A50C-2B8631EF9308.