Anybody else want to take a guess at it?
http://www.news-record.com/news/local/rand/creature_060304.htm
Sporkman - 06 Jun 2004 21:13 GMT
I caught the tail end of something on the local news saying someone had
identified it as a grey fox. There's reference to that in the article,
though, and unless they've trapped it I don't think one could say for
sure. I've seen gray foxes in the wild, and they don't much look like
that. Looks more like a red fox having gone through chemo. Seems like
it could be a hybrid of some type. Don't know whether fox and dog could
intermingle with a live birth resulting. Probably an animal that was
exposed to a chemical that made it sick enough to have its hair fall
out, and the hair has just begun to grow back.
> Anybody else want to take a guess at it?
>
> http://www.news-record.com/news/local/rand/creature_060304.htm
Anton Mates - 06 Jun 2004 21:39 GMT
Well, it's definitely a canid--some viverrids look kinda foxlike but
don't have anywhere near that leg length. I doubt that it's a
nondomestic of the genus Canis (dogs, jackals, wolves) as the head and
the back legs are awfully foxy. It could be a hybrid but I've never
heard of a fox hybridizing with anything in Canis--which doesn't mean
they can't, of course.
I'd favor 3 options, in no particular order of likelihood:
1) It's a weird dog. Dogs come in all shapes and sizes and fur
lengths--though as Garrison says it could be shaved as well. I've
never seen a dog that looked much like this, but I bet there's been
one--and the animal's particular pose in the photograph may have played
up its foxiness more than is warranted.
2) As Lorraine Smith suggests, it might be a de-furred grey fox. The
coloration is a very good match, as you can see here
(http://home.globalcrossing.net/~brendel/fox.html), and the apparently
longer legs may be an illusion due to the reduced underbelly fur.
Also, in a Courier-Tribune article,
http://www.courier-tribune.com/nws/mystery053004.html, Kurdian says
that "it must be a female, because she's nursing." The interesting
thing about this comment is that he might be misinterpreting the large
lump or lumps visible on the animal's abdomen. Those could also be due
to glandular tumors or hypertrophy...which can result in fur loss. I'm
thinking here particularly of Cushing's Syndrome, which affects quite a
few dogs (and ferrets, and a ton of other carnivores.)
3) If it is an actual nondiseased wild critter, I think it's most
likely to be a zorro, one of several species of foxlike South American
canids (not closely related to true foxes.) You can see an Azara's
Zorro at http://www.canids.org/SPPACCTS/dgymnocer.htm and a Crab-Eating
Zorro at http://www.canids.org/SPPACCTS/cthous.htm. They have the
coloration of the animal in the photo, and a rangier build and shorter
fur than a grey fox. Most zorros are rare, but people manage to buy a
lot of endangered species as pets these days. I wouldn't be surprised
if this was an escaped exotic.
And I have degrees in math and physics so I know what I'm talking about.
--Anton Mates
Gregory L. Hansen - 06 Jun 2004 21:44 GMT
>Anybody else want to take a guess at it?
>
>http://www.news-record.com/news/local/rand/creature_060304.htm
I'd vote against a defurred wild animal. Unless someone caught the animal
and deliberately shaved it, the defurring would never be so uniform and
complete, with no other apparant damage or injury. And half a year is a
long enough time for fur to start growing back, if it's going to.

Signature
"The main, if not the only, function of the word aether has been to
furnish a nominative case to the verb 'to undulate'."
-- the Earl of Salisbury, 1894