Scat With Hackberries

[bipedalist]

.....and it's odd that the berries are not pulverized, generally with beer scat all you get is seeds.

Hmmmmm.....beer scat, not pretty. Assume bear scat. Not to take this too far off the scat track, but I feel I must respond to this; deferred at first, but it keeps staring me in the face

I've got pictures of black bear scat which is large, solid and cylindrical(I hope, some could argue BF I suppose) with partially masticated oak acorns/acorn shells that would cause a yell for the average organism much longer and louder than these hackberry hacks. That said, I don't want to get into a tape measure duel and take this off track. If anybody cares to see such, just PM me and I'll post up a private album on a picasa webpage to view such.

[Guest]

. . . partially masticated oak acorns/acorn shells that would cause a yell for the average organism much longer and louder than these hackberry hacks.

The original eastern forests must have resounded with the cries of those who swallowed their chestnuts husk and all . . .

[norseman]

Hmmmmm.....beer scat, not pretty. Assume bear scat. Not to take this too far off the scat track, but I feel I must respond to this; deferred at first, but it keeps staring me in the face

I've got pictures of black bear scat which is large, solid and cylindrical(I hope, some could argue BF I suppose) with partially masticated oak acorns/acorn shells that would cause a yell for the average organism much longer and louder than these hackberry hacks. That said, I don't want to get into a tape measure duel and take this off track. If anybody cares to see such, just PM me and I'll post up a private album on a picasa webpage to view such.

I have no doubt of that at all.

But acorns are much harder to chew than berries so that makes sense. Bears don't "gulp" their food down like a yote does, I've spent hours observing them eat over a bait stand, and they chew their food like you or I do. I've also observed coyotes on a deer kill, and some times they would simply tear off a chunk, flip it in their mouth once or twice and then simply swallow it gone.

The whole berries in the scat stand out to me a little bit like something a canine would do. IMHO.

[indiefoot]

There have been several BF reports in NE Kansas. NO Bear reports. None. Not historically, none. If you want to put them here it is your own invention, not the facts. Putting bears in Northeast Kansas has no basis in fact.

Coyote..... nonsense. Size alone excludes them, let alone two piles of scat with nothing but Hackberries in it.

Raccoons, again nonsense, size excludes them.

As far as hogs.

From USGS

viewcontent.pdf

The nearest hogs according to this document and local reports is two counties away, over 40 miles. I walked the farm lane that day looking for tracks and saw none, no BF, no coyote and no hogs(which I'm sure would have been evident in the dirt ditches).

Now as far as Hackberry fruit.

It produces small berries that turn orange-red to dark purple in the Autumn, often staying on the trees for several months.wiki

The berries, although edible, are small and out of reach, and are seldom eaten by humans.wiki

The fruit of hackberry, a sweet, edible drupe, is eaten by many small birds and mammmals. These berries persist though the winter, but most

are consumed or fall off by the spring

The cherrylike fruits often hang on the trees throughout the winter providing many birds with food.

Four sources indicating that Hackberry fruit would have been on the trees in mid February

Don't get me wrong, I invited opinions and everyone is entitled to give theirs and I appreciate the feedback. The skeptics don't so much offer opinions as throw poo and see what sticks. I still haven't heard a satisfactory explanation for two large piles of scat with nothing but a fruit that should have been on a tree at the time it was eaten.

[Guest]

The skeptics don't so much offer opinions as throw poo and see what sticks.

No, the "skeptics" offered reasonable hypotheses that an objective person would seek to rule out before whining that no one else is jumping on the "bigfoot is walking the country lanes of northeastern KS merrily pooping as he goes" bandwagon.

There is nothing you have provided to rule out the most likely sources (raccoons and canids) other than your hand waving about the scat being "too big."

PS: Black bears in Kansas - yes, eastern Kansas (this took embarrassingly little Google Fu, btw): http://www.ksr.ku.edu/libres/mammals_of_kansas/ursus-amer.html

[indiefoot]

No, the "skeptics" offered reasonable hypotheses that an objective person would seek to rule out before whining that no one else is jumping on the "bigfoot is walking the country lanes of northeastern KS merrily pooping as he goes" bandwagon.

There is nothing you have provided to rule out the most likely sources (raccoons and canids) other than your hand waving about the scat being "too big."

PS: Black bears in Kansas - yes, eastern Kansas (this took embarrassingly little Google Fu, btw): http://www.ksr.ku.edu/libres/mammals_of_kansas/ursus-amer.html

See Bolded.

This is from the publication you provided.

Range and Habitat: The original distribution of the black bear in Kansas probably encompassed the eastern half of the state, where it occupied forest and woodland habitats. Farther west it was found principally in riparian forests along stream and river courses, and was probably rare or absent from open grasslands. Presently, the black bear may occur in southeastern Kansas only as individuals dispersing from Missouri and Arkansas (see remarks section).

See Bolded

Did you intentionally misrepresent the material....."Southeast Kansas"

Pointing out your "mistake" took embarrassingly little proof-reading.

The nearest Bear reports are 180 miles from where this scat was found. Those reports were according to your source

only as individuals dispersing from Missouri and Arkansas

[Guest gershake]

the "bigfoot is walking the country lanes of northeastern KS merrily pooping as he goes" bandwagon.

Hey, people here have suggested quite the opposite of the pooping to have been merry.

[Drew]

No No as an educated field researcher and woodsman as you are, I am sure you meant a mangy bear or possibly Bob H. after a Hackberry pie, cause we both know a coyote scat is nothing this size... cause we all know Coyotes are opportunistic and eat what ever it takes to survive, not just berries considering it is a canine after all... Silly. you...

Actually Coyote scat is totally that size. And being that they ARE opportunistic, they will eat, in fact totally chow down whatever they can find, if it happens to be a bunch of berries, then they will eat it.

[norseman]

Don't get me wrong, I invited opinions and everyone is entitled to give theirs and I appreciate the feedback. The skeptics don't so much offer opinions as throw poo and see what sticks. I still haven't heard a satisfactory explanation for two large piles of scat with nothing but a fruit that should have been on a tree at the time it was eaten.

You were there, I wasn't. All I can do is look at your hard evidence and make my own assumptions.

Maybe our coyotes are bigger than yours, but I think concerning size the scat really isn't all that big. And while coyotes don't climb trees and eat berries......... I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that a coyote could of found some on the ground and have eaten them.

The whole berries in the scat really sends up red flags for me.

[indiefoot]

I'm looking for plausible, not things that are "not outside the realm of possibility".

1" plus coyote poop is what I consider an extraordinary claim.

1" plus raccoon poop is what I consider an astronomical claim.

Feral Hog poop where there are no Feral Hogs is what I consider an extraordinary claim.

Bear poop where there are no bears is what I consider an extraordinary claim.

Any large mammal poop that is made up of Hackberry fruit and nothing else is what I consider an extraordinary claim. Yet that's exactly what I've shown pictures of. I'll wait until someone shows me something comparable, that could plausibly have been on that farm road in February.

IMO, I don't know what that might have been would have been a pretty reasonable response. I just didn't want people to overlook Hackberry Fruit as a possible food source. There are literally tons of them available.

[Guest rockinkt]

I have no doubt of that at all.

But acorns are much harder to chew than berries so that makes sense. Bears don't "gulp" their food down like a yote does, I've spent hours observing them eat over a bait stand, and they chew their food like you or I do. I've also observed coyotes on a deer kill, and some times they would simply tear off a chunk, flip it in their mouth once or twice and then simply swallow it gone.

The whole berries in the scat stand out to me a little bit like something a canine would do. IMHO.

FWIW - I agree.

[Guest]

See Bolded

Did you intentionally misrepresent the material....."Southeast Kansas"

Pointing out your "mistake" took embarrassingly little proof-reading.

Oy.

From your post #94:

"NO Bear reports. None. Not historically, none. If you want to put them here it is your own invention, not the facts. Putting bears in Northeast Kansas has no basis in fact."

From my link:

"The original distribution of the black bear in Kansas probably encompassed the eastern half of the state, . . . "

My link addressed your statement that black bear did not occur in Kansas, even historically. It did.

Are black bears in eastern Kansas today? Yes, that is likely. Even the apparently outdated information I provided from the University of Kansas Field Station indicated that dispersing bears probably make it to southeastern Kansas rather frequently, even if their forays are short-lived. What about northeastern Kansas? Well in the last several years, black bears have steadily increased in population in AR, MO, and OK. A wandering bear in northeastern KS would surprise me a little, but it's by no means out of the question.

[indiefoot]

The bears were gone before the white settlement started in the late eighteen-sixties. The tribes that were moved in here before that got rid of the few that were available for fur.

Your post didn't say "original", it implied now and I think you know that.

You have to ask yourself what you would have said to a grad student who tried to pull that switch. There have been reports in the three counties at the southeast extreme and those weren't local bears. Trying to put bears in the area I'm working in is not plausible.

Having a bear wander 200 miles unseen into this area, eat a gut full of Hackberries, do his duty and then leave unseen, all the time in mid-February when he is supposed to be hibernating. Wow

[norseman]

The bears were gone before the white settlement started in the late eighteen-sixties. The tribes that were moved in here before that got rid of the few that were available for fur.

Your post didn't say "original", it implied now and I think you know that.

You have to ask yourself what you would have said to a grad student who tried to pull that switch. There have been reports in the three counties at the southeast extreme and those weren't local bears. Trying to put bears in the area I'm working in is not plausible.

Having a bear wander 200 miles unseen into this area, eat a gut full of Hackberries, do his duty and then leave unseen, all the time in mid-February when he is supposed to be hibernating. Wow

For the record I don't think it's a bear.......a bear would have ground those berries to nothing with their large molars. But consider this.......bears are nocturnal, can travel great distances and may or may not be hibernating during mid February. It depends on the area that they live in.

I would not expect a black bear in your neck of the woods often, unlike a griz, they are much more of a forest animal, and lack the claws needed to make a living on the prairie. But that doesn't mean that they cannot wander around a bit and pass through areas that are not generally their type of topography either. So I wouldn't be absolutely shocked if a black bear was out there on the prairie.

[Guest]

You have to ask yourself what you would have said to a grad student who tried to pull that switch.

If you are insinuating that I have unscrupulously used the linked information to score some kind of rhetorical points in this discussion, then please add that insinuation to the list of things about which you've been wrong today. I did not do that and I do not do that. I simply don't play such games. If I did, how do you think I'd be able to enjoy the respect I do on a public forum where I disagree with the majority of the participants? Such an m.o. would not be tolerated, and it also wouldn't advance discussions.

The problem here is your apparent inability to admit an error (to the point of accusing others of unsavory behavior). Again, these are your words:

"NO Bear reports. None. Not historically, none. If you want to put them here it is your own invention, not the facts."

If you are unsure of the meaning of such words as "none" and "historically", then I suggest you consult a dictionary before using them.