Discovery Of Uncataloged Predator Dangerous To Man ?

[HOLDMYBEER]

I know it sounds a bit odd but I am not wanting to derail other threads that peripherally touch on this issue.

I am asking forum members if they know of instances where unknown/ unclassified predators have been discovered to exist and found to be dangerous to man. I am interested in the surprise discovery of a species that had a history of preying on humans and were not known to exist previously anyplace on the planet.

About the only thing I can think of is some sort of micro-parasite or bacteria. I am guessing predators dangerous to man were usually detected in prehistory. Can anyone think of such an instance in natural history?

[Drew]

The Great White shark is appearing in places it hasn't been in a long time. i.e. Cape Cod area

[Guest COGrizzly]

Before the Lewis and Clark expedition, the Grizzly bear was not cataloged or defined as a species. (Not sure it this example fits)

[salubrious]

You heard of that book Missing 411, right?

[Guest Darrell]

Unclassified and dangerous to man in N. America? We are talking animals right? Maybe some sub species of wolves, bear, or cat but nothing in post WWII that I can remember. There may yet be some marine species that could prey on humans.

[Guest TexasTracker]

I'm sure the early explorers into Africa and South America encountered deadly animals they did not know existed. Is this what you're talking about?

[BobbyO]

Here we go, 2010.

http://reinep.wordpress.com/2010/03/13/giant-chimp-discovered-it-is-a-new-species-and-it-is-human-sized/

[Drew]

Bobby O, that is not a new species of ape. The headline is misleading.

The Bili Apes are Pan troglodyte species.

[HOLDMYBEER]

I am looking for an instance where people were found dead or perhaps missing altogether, later determined to be the result of a species of animal that had never been seen before and not yet recognized by science. In the case of the grizzly, certainly the native populations were aware of the problem; science hadn't recognized the animal because science hadn't visited grizzly habitat. The White Shark and sharks in general have been know to exist and pose a threat to humans though home range may have changed to new locations.

The point I am trying to explore is if a species can exist undetected for any period of time amongst human populations while also behaving in a manner that poses a danger to man.

Yes, I suppose early travels to places like Africa brought foreign man into contact with animals they had not before experienced. I would think, however, if the animals posed a threat to man, the local inhabitants would have known of the threat posed by the species, hence, the animals would have been recognized back in prehistory.

Is there an example from history where people disappeared or met their deaths due to the presence of a species that was not detected for some substantial period of time?

Sorry if I am being conceptually vague.

[Guest]

Ignorance serves as an example right? IN the bear example, or in shark examples where a certain species is not known to be inhabiting perhaps locals and natives do know but "science" does not?

To apply your vagueness to the specifics of sasquatch (in my mind a bear like predator rather than a cougar or shark or something that must kill for food), aren't there multiple native American tribes that refer to them as the eaters of man or similar? So in this case it wouldn't be a totally unknown predator right?

-KW, isn't very good at vagueness.

[Guest BFSleuth]

I think in almost every case of large new species detection indigenous people already knew about the species and had experience with predation on humans. I think the premise of your OP is regarding species that modern science hadn't detected and where foreign men were also predated on or where modern incidents of predation on locals with foreigners present or doing follow up investigation?

It would seem that if you take into account indigenous people's knowledge of local species, then certainly the concept of BF falls within this discussion. There are indigenous North American reports, stories, and legends from all over North America that note the presence of BF and their predation on or kidnapping of humans.

[Guest poignant]

I wouldn't classify microbes or bacteria as predators...parasites and pathogens yes, but not predators (you could argue though that parasitism is a subset of predation).

Bili apes are a subspecies, not a full out species.

Missing 411 is very compelling, while it is spun as being NOT bigfoot-related, the anecdotes leave you wondering otherwise if certain tribes of BF have taken to a taste for human flesh. An analogy would be Transient versus Resident Orcas. Sea lions and seals will beach at the sign of Transients but are unperturbed when Resident Orca pods are around - this is because Resident pods only have a taste for fish.

Intelligent, opportunistic creatures with long lives and highly plastic minds will inevitably end up with a variation in tastes.

HOLDMYBEER, your original question is frankly, a little odd, but you need to break down the question to whether said predator was ethno-known (i.e. known to the locals) or known to western science. I'm guessing you are referring to the latter.

You also need to clarify whether you mean that there was a known predator that was only found in a particular location, but later discovered to also exist elsewhere.

In this case, yes Great white sharks and bull sharks moving up estuaries are a problem but they are not a new species.

unrecognized or extinct species = bigfoot, giant varanus (australia)

recognized species + new location = bull sharks, GW sharks, saltwater crocs maybe, feral big cats in the UK

Oh yeah, would also like to add feral pythons in Florida being a potential problem too.

Recognized species + new location.

Edited August 30, 2012 by poignant

[BobbyO]

Yes, I suppose early travels to places like Africa brought foreign man into contact with animals they had not before experienced. I would think, however, if the animals posed a threat to man, the local inhabitants would have known of the threat posed by the species, hence, the animals would have been recognized back in prehistory.

Is there an example from history where people disappeared or met their deaths due to the presence of a species that was not detected for some substantial period of time?

Then you're talking about Sasquatches..

[yowiie]

We have an example here in Australia, there was a new snake discovered in central Australia, highly venemous. As if we don't have enough of them already

[HOLDMYBEER]

Well, the OP was an attempt at wrestling with the general idea of a species remaining unrecognized/uncategoried/undiscovered while also constituting a substantial threat or danger to local populations. It would seem to me that the threat or danger posed by such a creature would not only lead to but probably hasten its discovery/recognition.

True enough, a number of Native American legends speak to a danger posed by the sasquatch. And yes, people do go missing every day of every month of every year here in the US. I am not, however, aware of recovered human remains pointing in the direction of association with a crypto-creature. That is why I ask. Perhaps people on this forum are familiar with evidence that predators of man can co-exist with man and remain undetected. If in fact the sasquatch both exists and has posed a threat to human beings, it just seems to me there would be some sort of significant study of the issue that would drive to discovery of the species.

I have know several medical examiners. I have worked with them and their staff. I have reviewed lists of recovered remains stored at their offices, but I have never sensed any sort of common pattern of evidence reflected in those remains that pointed to a crypto-creature preying on humans. Maybe forum members are aware of cases that prove otherwise.

Edited to add, I am speaking of the large picture here, presuming man and sasquatch have co-existed for thousands of years.

Edited August 30, 2012 by HOLDMYBEER