bobcat – Linda J. Spielman

When Animals Break the Rules

Bobcats walk in direct register. Deer walk in indirect register. Red foxes have a bar in the middle pad of the front foot but not in the rear foot. Fishers move at a lope or bound. Cats have four toes. These and other statements are the received wisdom of the tracking literature. But are they always true? As we’ll see in the following paragraphs, there are exceptions to even these seeming inviolable maxims.

Let’s start with walking deer. They do indeed place their feet in indirect register most of the time. The photo below shows tracks made by a deer walking in indirect register toward the upper right. At the lower left you see a left rear print partly superimposed on the left front print. Roughly in the center of the photo there’s a right front track with a right rear track partly on top but a little behind. At the upper right the left rear track sits a little behind and slightly to the inside of the left front track. The zig-zag pattern is the signature of the walk, and each set of impressions is made up of the front and rear prints from the same side. It’s the partial superimposition of the two prints that makes it an indirect register walk.

Direct registration occurs when the rear print is perfectly superimposed on the front print. As the next photo (the trail of a white-tail deer walking from right to left) shows, this does occur, especially in younger deer.

As this close-up (from a different trail from the one shown above) shows, direct registration makes it hard to tell if the track was made by two feet or just one. Among all the deer trails you see, there are bound to be a few that show direct registration.

Bobcats are said to walk in direct register, but again this is not an absolute. The bobcat trail in the photo below (direction of travel from left to right) is in very obvious indirect register. The zig-zag pattern indicates the walk (and as a side note, you can see how much narrower it is than the zig-zag of the walking deer). In each set of two prints the hind print falls partially but not perfectly on the front print.

In case you have some doubts, a close-up from a different part of the same trail will convince you that this is indeed a bobcat trail.

Was the bobcat distracted? Or tired? We’ll never know. Later in the same trail the animal switched to an overstep walk, a gait that’s often seen in bobcats, so its overall behavior didn’t throw up any red flags.

The next photo shows a direct register trail made by a bobcat walking toward the upper left. In each impression you see what appears to be a single track, but is actually two tracks, the rear print superimposed on the front print. And here’s another interesting aside: The concave hollows around the tracks are not connected to registration, but were instead made by the thick fur covering and surrounding the bobcat’s feet. They’re known as hair halos.

Staying with felines for the moment let’s look at toes, which are supposed to be four in number (counting those which normally touch down) in both wild felines and domestic cats. In the next photo you see some tracks which are clearly feline, but don’t fit the four-toed paradigm. My friend Ben Altman has two house cats, both of which have feet with more than the standard four toes. This is called polydactyly and it’s caused by genetic mutations. It’s not uncommon in domestic cats but is rare in wild felines.

We’re told that fishers prefer to move at a lope or a bound but this, too, is not always the case. In the next photo you see a fisher trail going from lower left to upper right and a red fox trail moving from bottom to top. The fox is travelling at a lope, a gait similar to the habitual gait of a fisher. But what’s the fisher doing? Definitely not the typical lope or bound. Because the front tracks of the fisher are larger than the hind tracks we can work out what the gait is. At the very lower left in the fisher trail there’s a right rear print, and the sequence of the next eight tracks (up until the pattern changes at the upper right), is: right front, left front, right rear, left rear, right front, left front, right rear, left rear. This extended pattern shows that the fisher was speeding along at a flat-out gallop. Fishers don’t often do this, but they obviously can. Something alarming must have pushed the animal into unusual speed.

One of the absolute statements we often hear has to do with red fox tracks. The going wisdom is that there’s a bar or crescent shaped depression in the middle pad of the front track, but not in the rear track. A ridge of horny skin that protrudes through the hairy covering of the pad is the source of the bar, and it’s supposed to be absent from the middle pad of the hind foot. Here’s what we’re accustomed to observing–notice the bar in the front middle pad (on the left) and the absence of the bar in the rear middle pad (on the right).

But on rare occasions we see red fox tracks with a bar in the middle pad of both the front and rear prints. Here’s one example. The front track is at the lower right and the rear track is at the upper left.

Just so you don’t think this is a one-off, here’s another example. The front print is in the upper right and the rear print, with a reduced but visible bar, is at the lower left. (The carboard square in the upper left is one inch on a side.)

Raccoon trails are a common find, and the next photo shows the way a raccoon pace-walking trail is supposed to look. What we expect to see is sets of two prints, each set a front from one side and a rear from the other side. In the photo the direction of travel is from lower left to upper right, and the hind prints are larger than the front prints. Starting at the lower left, the first set is left front with right rear, the second is right front with left rear, the third is left front with right rear, and the last is right front with left rear.

The raccoon which made the trail in the next photo (direction of travel lower left to upper right) appears to be in serious violation of the rules of tracking. Instead of alternating front and rear tracks there are two sets with left rear and right front, then two sets with left front and right rear, and again two sets with left rear and right front. Can a raccoon even do that?

The answer is, no, a raccoon can’t do that. But two raccoons, one following close behind the other, can do that. It you focus on every other set of two you’ll see a normal raccoon pace-walk trail. So what appeared to be an impossible situation turns out to be a perfectly normal, albeit unusual, event.

We need to learn what’s most common in animal tracks and trails, but we also need to think out of the box when faced with uncommon track and trail patterns. Whether it’s two animals conspiring to create a confusing trail, or one animal with an unusual track or behavior, nature can always throw up something we’ve never seen before. It may take days, weeks, or even months to understand what we saw, but that’s part of the excitement of tracking. It’s why we keep coming back for more.

Zig-Zags

In past posts I’ve used the term zig-zag to describe certain track patterns. In this article I’d like to delve more deeply into how zig-zags arise and what they can tell us about the animals that make them. When we humans walk in a relaxed, natural manner we place our feet in a zig-zag pattern because each foot falls to its own side of the line made by our moving center of gravity, the center line of the trail. It’s easy to verify this: Just walk naturally in snow or mud or on a dry surface with wet feet and then look at your tracks. The same logic applies to birds, so we often see patterns like the one in the next photo, made by a turkey walking from left to right. Each print angles inward, which helps to distinguish right from left. The sequence, starting at the left, is right, left, right, left, right.

Two legged zig-zags are pretty straightforward, but four-footed animals also create zig-zags, and it’s not as easy to understand how a four-footed animal can do that. Watching animals helps, but it’s hard to follow foot placement when animals are moving in real time. Fortunately for us twenty-first century trackers, there’s a tool that can bridge the gap–the internet. So let’s take a look at a video of a horse. If you click on this link: Bing Videos, then click on horses walking youtube and start the video, you’ll see a horse walking in slow motion. Notice that as each front foot leaves the ground the rear foot on the same side comes down in the spot just vacated by the front foot. The video doesn’t show the pattern on the ground, but it’s easy to see how the horse leaves a series of double impressions, each one a front track overlaid by a rear track. And since the feet on each side fall to their own side of the center line, the overall pattern is a zig-zag. The trail in the next photo, made by a deer walking from bottom to top, is a good example of a zig-zag made by a four-footed animal.

But all zig-zags aren’t the same. The physical characteristics of animals vary, and this affects the kinds of patterns they leave when they walk. There are also different types of walks, with differing relative placement of the front and rear tracks. In the photo above the walk is an almost perfect direct register gait, meaning that the rear feet fell almost exactly on top of the corresponding front tracks. The next photo shows tracks made by a woodchuck walking from lower left to upper right (and just below the second impression, tracks of a squirrel bounding toward the bottom). The trail is more variable but the tracks are mostly in indirect register, meaning that the rear tracks fell partly but not completely on top of the corresponding front tracks. Starting at the lower left the track sequence for the woodchuck is: right rear on right front, left rear on left front, right rear, right front, left rear on left front. Even in this more irregular trail the zig-zag is apparent.

The width of the zig-zag, known among trackers as trail width, varies from one species of animal to another. To measure trail width, find a relatively straight part of the trail and imagine or draw out two parallel straight lines that just touch the outsides of the alternate sets of tracks. Then measure the perpendicular distance between the lines. This is diagrammed in the next photo of the indirect register track pattern made by a walking opossum heading toward the upper right.

In the next photo you see a trail made by a gray fox walking from right to left. The trail has a different look from the opossum and woodchuck trails, both because of its narrower width and also because the fox’s step lengths are longer. But the zig-zag is still apparent. Trail widths, combined with step length, can be helpful in identification, since chunky animals like woodchucks and possums make wider trails and take shorter steps than slimmer, longer-legged animals do. And trail widths are especially important when you’re considering animals with similar step lengths. For example, trail widths for a walking coyote are generally between 4 and 5 inches while trail widths for deer moving at a walk range from 5 to 10 inches. Even when the tracks are degraded or obscured by collapsing snow it’s usually possible to differentiate between a coyote trail and a deer trail.

Animals find it harder to move in deep snow, but when they’re walking their trails still show the zig-zag pattern. In the photo below a red fox walked from bottom to top leaving a zig-zag arrangement of deep holes in the snow.

All of the gaits discussed above (and the one the horse was doing in the video) fit into what I call the regular walk–also called the diagonal walk in the tracking literature. But that’s not the only kind of walk animals can do. A common variant is the overstep walk. To see a dog doing the overstep walk click on this link: Bing Videos and then click on dog gaits youtube and start the video. The recording shows a dog walking at actual speed followed by the same sequence in slow motion. If you keep your eye on the spot just vacated by a front foot you’ll see the corresponding rear foot come down a little past it. (This video also does a nice job with the amble, equivalent to the pace-walk of the raccoon, and the trot.)

The interesting thing about the overstep walk is that the pattern of tracks on the ground also makes a zig-zag, but the points of the zig-zag consist of sets of two prints, front and rear from the same side, rather than the impressions of two superimposed tracks. In the next photo you see an overstep pattern made by a house cat moving from lower right to upper left. Because a cat’s front tracks are wider and shorter than the rear ones we can see that in each set the front track is behind the rear. The sequence, starting at the lower right, is: right front, right rear, left front, left rear, right front, right rear. Among animals that are habitual walkers, overstep walks are common.

Another variation you’ll come across is the understep walk. The next photo shows the trail of an opossum doing an understep walk, heading from the lower left to the upper right. Again, the prints are arranged in sets of two, each set the front and rear from the same side. In each pair the hand-like hind track, with its thumb pointing inward, lies behind the front track with its more evenly spread toes.

We sometimes find zig-zag walking patterns in the trails of animals that aren’t habitual walkers. Fishers move mostly in bounds or lopes, but they walk when extra caution is needed or when the footing isn’t secure. The trail in the photo below was made by a fisher walking, mostly in direct register, from lower right to upper left.

Walking trails are less common for minks than for fishers, and for minks it seems to be mostly about the animal’s dislike of unstable surfaces. In the next photo a mink walked from right to left through mud (looking pretty dry in the photo but probably much wetter and slipperier when the tracks were made), leaving sets of paired tracks. But which walk is this, overstep or understep? We can tell because the middle toe in the mink’s hind print usually angles a little to the outside. So the sequence, starting at the right, is: left rear, left front, right rear, right front, left rear, left front, right rear, right front, and this is an understep walk.

White-footed mice are even less likely to walk than minks, but the next image attests to the fact that they do it on rare occasions. A white-footed mouse walked from bottom to top, leaving sets of paired tracks. The four-toed front prints lie behind the five-toed rear prints in each set, so the mouse was doing an overstep walk. The trail both before and after the walking part was on drier footing with normal mouse bounding patterns, so it was the wet mud that made the mouse shift to a walk.

Many animals get around mostly at a walk, and zig-zags abound in the tracking world. The details of the patterns can tell us a lot about the nature of the track maker. But the sight of a zig-zag for an animal whose default gait is not the walk is an even more compelling call to investigate. In addition to their help in species identification, zig-zags can tell us how animals interact with each other and with their surroundings. In this post we’ve only made a start. There are other kinds of zig-zags, and even patterns that look like zig-zags but aren’t. I’ll keep these topics for a future article. In the meantime, follow the zig-zags wherever they lead.

The Marvels and Mysteries of Deer Tracks

When we think of deer tracks what usually comes to mind are heart-shaped prints like the one shown in the photo below. The paired toes together form the overall shape, and the pointed ends of the toes point forward. In tracks like the one in the photo, the ridge that runs front to back between the toes may be as important for identification as the toes themselves. In fact, the tell-tale ridge may still be visible even when most other track details have been destroyed by weathering or melting.

The specialized feet of deer are very different from those of their ancient five-toed ancestors. The two large toes that make up the print in the photo above are analogous to the third and fourth fingers of our hand, but the toe bones (analogous to our finger bones) are highly modified and are enclosed in tough, protective structures. There are two smaller toes, the dewclaws, which are analogous to our index and pinky fingers and sit higher up on the back of the leg. The innermost toe (analogous to our thumb) was completely lost in the course of evolution. You can see the arrangement of the large primary toes and the smaller dewclaws in the next photo of the front feet of a deer.

Deer hooves are superbly adapted for running and jumping. Their keratinaceous outer sheathing combines with resilient internal tissues to cushion the feet against impact. The dewclaws don’t touch the ground most of the time, but with faster movement or on softer surfaces they can make contact to provide more support. In the next photo you see tracks made by a deer moving toward the right on a relatively soft substrate at a slow gallop. There’s a front print on the left and a hind print on the right. In each track the marks made by the dewclaws sit behind the impressions of the large main toes. (You’ll notice that the dewclaws of the front foot are angled to the sides while those of the rear foot are pointed more to the front.) The feet of deer are small relative to the animal’s size and bear more weight per unit area compared to non-hoofed mammals. This is why deer tracks show up on surfaces that are too firm to reveal the traces of most other animals (a serendipitous side-effect for trackers). It’s also why deer tracks are usually deeper than the tracks of animals like coyotes and bobcats, and why deer are generally less stealthy than mammalian predators.

You can see from the photo above that the two large toes are not always held tightly together the way they are in the first image. Sometimes a “four-toed” deer print can take on a bizarre appearance. In the next photo you see a hind track which has a resemblance to the bounding pattern of a squirrel. The tips of the large toes appear rounded because their points pushed downward under the soil surface.

Here’s an image of the front track of a rapidly accelerating deer in which only the marks of the dewclaws and the tips of the large toes registered.

Even when the dewclaws don’t touch the ground the two main toes may be separated, as in the photo below of a hind foot. Deer can exert muscular control over their toes and are able to spread them when they need more support or stability.

Here’s another shot of a rear track, again with the toes separated.

In the next photo you see some deer tracks I found on a seldom used railroad line. The animal had first walked through some mud and then travelled along the railroad track. It stepped carefully on the ties, and wherever it stepped it left muddy impressions. In the photo the direction of travel is from top to bottom, and what you see are the edges of the hooves printed in mud on the wooden ties. There are two tracks partly superimposed, the front print a little ahead of (below) the rear print.

If the tracks in the previous photo are hard to understand, the next image may help. There’s a front track (at the upper left) and a rear print (at the lower right), and the direction of travel is toward the upper left. The firm sandy base prevented the deer’s hooves from sinking in, and the thin covering of loose sand recorded the track details nicely. The outer rims of the hooves show as curved grooves in the sand, but the inner parts of the hooves barely touched the surface.

Tracks like these are sometimes misidentified as bird tracks, so beware! In fact it’s important to always be fully engaged–even with deer tracks–because, as the preceding photos show, they don’t always conform to our expectations. Every once in a while, among all the typical prints, you may find some that are surprising or puzzling. If you spend some time on these, you’ll gain a deeper understanding of deer tracks, both the common ones and the not so common ones.

Knowing Coyote Tracks

Coyotes are one of our more common predators, but when we find a possible coyote track it can be difficult to identify it with certainty. Could it be a fox? Or maybe a bobcat? And there’s also the possibility of domestic dog. Dog tracks show up almost everywhere and are often mistaken for coyote. In this post I’ll share some thoughts on how to separate coyote prints from some confusing look-alike tracks.

First let’s deal with felines. The bobcat track below is a right front print, oriented toward the top of the frame. Like coyotes, bobcats have four toes and an undivided middle pad, but unlike coyotes (and other canines) bobcat tracks are asymmetrical. They have a leading toe (the second from the left in the photo) and a trailing toe (the right-most one), and the middle pad is canted to the outside. Try this simple test for symmetry: Imagine a vertical line which passes through the center of the track, and then imagine folding the right half of the track over onto the left half. You’ll see that they don’t match up. Now do the same thing with the track in the next photo, a coyote front print, again oriented toward the top of the photo. You’ll see that the right half matches almost perfectly when folded onto the left half.

Both the bobcat and the coyote prints pictured are clear and complete, but because of varying conditions some bobcat tracks–especially rear prints–appear more symmetrical, and canine tracks sometimes have an asymmetrical look. Fortunately, there are other features that can help to distinguish the two. An important feature is the shape of the ridges between the toes and the middle pad. In the coyote track the large ridges between the toes and the middle pad form an X, and at the central point of the X there’s a dome. The major ridges in the bobcat track don’t form an X–they could be described as a squashed H or a partly rotated C-shape with some kinks. Another characteristic to look at is the relative sizes of toes and pads. In bobcat tracks the toes are small in relation to the overall track size, and the middle pad is large. In coyote tracks it’s the reverse: the toes are larger and the middle pad is smaller in relation to the overall track size. In the coyote track there are some delicate claw marks, two close together ahead of the leading toes and a lighter one on the left outer toe. Claw marks are absent in the bobcat photo. If more grip is needed a cat may extend its claws, but claw impressions are much less common in bobcat tracks than they are in coyote (or other canine) tracks. Bobcat prints also tend to be rounder, and coyote prints are more oval or egg-shaped.

Then there’s red fox, whose tracks overlap with coyote tracks at the lower end of the coyote size range. The next photo shows a red fox front print, oriented toward the right side. It’s similar to the coyote track in being symmetrical, and in having the canine X and dome, but there are some features that separate it from coyote. The hair that covers the underside of the fox’s foot shows as striations in the toes and middle pad. This hair gets worn down as the season progresses so it may be less conspicuous in late summer and fall, but in early winter a new growth of thick hair develops. Red fox tracks in snow often have a blurry appearance because of the dense hair. The undersides of coyote toes and middle pads are bare of hair in all seasons, so the toe and pad impressions have smooth surfaces and crisp outlines.

In the middle pad of the red fox print there’s a curved indentation (vertically oriented in the photo) made by a ridge of tough skin that protrudes through the hair. This bar or chevron (present in the front foot and very rarely in the rear foot) is unique to the red fox and, when visible, separates it conclusively from the coyote. In the preceding photo of the coyote track you can see that the bar is absent.

Distinguishing coyotes from domestic dogs can be the toughest challenge. Dogs are so variable that there aren’t any absolute criteria, and many dog tracks are similar to coyote tracks in size. The photo below shows the rear (on the left) and front (on the right) prints of a coyote, oriented toward the right. As in most canines the rear track is smaller than the front. Note the absence of claw marks except for the delicate, closely set pricks ahead of the leading toes of the front foot. Both front and hind tracks are oval in overall outline, and their middle pads are small in relation to the overall track size.

Coyote rear (left) and front (right) tracks

Comparing those tracks with the dog tracks in the next photo, we see some clear differences. The front track of the dog (above) is more rounded and has a larger middle pad. The claw marks in the front print are more robust and are present ahead of all four toes. The rear print of the dog (below) is slimmer than the front but has a conspicuous middle pad, and there are claw marks ahead of all four toes.

Domestic dog front (above) and rear (below) tracks

Dog tracks like the front print below (oriented toward the top) are even easier to identify. The large middle pad and the thick claw marks are strong indicators, but the most striking feature is the spreading of the inner and outer toes. Many dogs have “floppy” feet. Because they are not as active their feet lack the muscle tone of wild canines, and their toes spread more. The inner and outer toes and claws may point to the sides rather than straight ahead. Dogs that get plenty of exercise, like the one that made the tracks in the preceding photo, may not show this spreading.

Varying conditions can affect the appearance of coyote tracks, and this is where things can get confusing. The coyote front track (facing to the right) in the next photo doesn’t look as neat and tight as the coyote tracks shown in previous photos. There are claw marks ahead of all four toes, the inner and outer toes aren’t as tightly tucked in behind the leading toes, and the claw marks are more divergent. This animal was trotting on soft, moist sand, so it allowed its toes to spread slightly for support. But the track still shows the small middle pad and the delicate claw marks that point toward coyote rather than dog.

Faster movement can have an even greater effect on tracks. The print shown below (a front, pointing toward the right) was made by a galloping coyote. The toes are spread, the claw marks are deep, and the middle pad looks asymmetrical. But even this track shows coyote rather than dog features. The claws are sharply pointed and the middle pad is small compared to the overall track size.

There will always be times when making a firm identification is difficult. The tracks may be distorted or degraded, or there may only be partial tracks. But even if we can only come to a tentative conclusion, we can still observe and learn as much as possible. And the more we struggle with challenging situations, the better we will be at knowing coyote tracks when we see them.

Dog Tracks: Common But Not Always Commonplace

Our familiar companion animals leave their tracks everywhere, and we see them so often we may find ourselves giving them only superficial attention. But if we look more carefully we may be surprised at how much they have to teach us. Dog tracks can show us the traits that are shared among dogs and their wild relatives, and they can also reveal the remarkable range of variation that could only belong to a long-domesticated animal.

The photo below (direction of travel toward the top) illustrates a number of core features that are shared by dogs, foxes, coyotes and wolves. The front track (lower left) is larger than the rear track (upper right). Both front and rear tracks have four toe impressions, and a single smooth middle pad. The tracks are symmetrical, meaning that if an individual track were divided down the middle and the right half were folded over onto the left half the two halves would superimpose almost perfectly.

There are a few additional traits in these prints that are shared among some–but not all–dogs and their wild relatives: The overall outlines of both front and rear prints are oval, the toes are held tightly together, and the claw marks point straight ahead. The larger ridges between the toes and the middle pad form the celebrated canine X, and the center of each track is occupied by a rounded dome or plateau. But although the tracks are roughly coyote sized, we see several additional traits that indicate dog rather than coyote. The claw marks are wide and deep, the middle pad of the front print is large compared to overall size of the track, and its trailing edge is rounded.

A comparison between the dog tracks above and the coyote tracks in the next photo will highlight the differences. (The coyote front print is below and a little ahead of the rear, and the direction of travel is to the right.) Like the dog tracks, the coyote prints are compact, with oval or egg-shaped outlines and tightly held toes. But some of the claw marks are missing, and those that are visible are delicate rather than robust. The middle pad of the front track is relatively small, and its trailing edge is concave.

The dog front track shown in the next photo is even more of a departure from the two preceding illustrations. Instead of being oval the print is round in outline, and the toes, especially the inner and outer ones, are widely spread and angled to the sides. The upper arms of the canine X seem to have been pressed apart, and there’s a curved ridge instead of a dome at the center of the track. Like the previous dog tracks, the print in the photo below has wide claw marks and a large middle pad. A track like this is easily recognizable as dog.

The photo below shows another dog track variant. The overall outline is rounded–in fact the print is a little wider than it is long. In contrast to the triangular middle pads of the previous dog tracks, this print has a trapezoidal middle pad with a broad leading edge. Instead of an X the internal ridges form a distorted H shape, and there’s a horizontal ridge rather than a dome in the center of the track. The absence of claw marks is unusual for a dog print. This is the kind of track that might be mistaken for a feline–a house cat, bobcat, or even a cougar depending on the size of the print. But there are clues that indicate dog, and they become obvious if we look at a true feline print.

The photo below shows the right front track of a bobcat. If we test for symmetry using the folding test described in the second paragraph, we can see that the dog track above is symmetrical and the bobcat track below is asymmetrical. There’s a leading toe (second from left) and a trailing toe (rightmost) in the bobcat print, and the middle pad is canted to the right. Instead of the canine X we see an angular C-shaped ridge that is also canted to the right. Another important feline trait is the contrast in size between the large middle pad and the small toes.

Wild canines have a way of placing their feet quietly, without tension or unnecessary movement. Dogs, on the other had, often express slight jiggles or shifts in the movements of their legs, and the difference can sometimes be seen in their tracks. In the photo below you see two dog tracks (in the upper left, the front a little below and behind the rear) and two coyote tracks (the front in the upper right corner and the rear just below the two dog tracks). Displaced bits of snow lie inside and around the edges of the dog tracks, while the coyote tracks have mostly smooth floors and margins. The best way to see the action that produces this kind of difference is to watch a dog walking or trotting directly away from you. You may see subtle shifts in the body or slight wobbles as the legs contact the ground.

Dogs lead easy lives compared to wild animals, and this often shows in the trails they make. The tracks of three creatures can be seen in the photo below. A dog meandered from top left to bottom right, leaving two partly superimposed tracks in the upper left corner, two tracks close together midway down the left side, and two more widely separated tracks at the lower right. A coyote trotted from top to bottom leaving smaller direct register prints, one between the dog tracks in the upper left and another at the lower left. And my boot tracks can be seen to the right of the dog tracks.

Wild creatures cannot afford to waste energy. There are exceptions: young animals play, and during mating season mature animals can make some wacky moves. But the business of survival demands efficiency of movement. Dogs, on the other hand, can expend energy without the pressure of finding their next meal. The coyote in the photo above had a destination in mind and moved with purpose. The dog was well fed and carefree, and counted on finding food and shelter when it got home. And I was focused on the story those tracks told about the lives of dogs and and their wild relatives.

Separating Felines and Canines

Cats and dogs–they live among us as companion animals, and their wild relatives are a familiar presence in our landscapes. The two groups differ from most other mammals in having four toes on both front and back feet, and in both groups there’s a smooth pad (the middle pad) behind the toes. So how to tell them apart? One thing we often hear is that canine tracks show claws and feline tracks don’t, but the presence or absence of claws can’t always be relied on. Cats can extend their claws if they need more grip, and the claws of wild canines may not touch the ground because they are naturally trimmed by constant movement. Fortunately there are other features that can help us to distinguish between canines and felines. It’s a simple matter of paying attention to details, and there are plenty of them. So let’s get started.

In the photo below you see the front track of a coyote, direction of travel from bottom to top. The overall shape is elongated, the toes are relatively large compared to the middle pad, and the outer toes are tucked tightly behind the leading toes. The middle pad has a pointed forward edge. Roughly in the center, between the toes and the middle pad, there’s a dome-like area, and an X is formed by the ridges between the middle pad, the outer toes, and the two leading toes taken together. The dome and the X are the negative spaces, areas that are not pressed down by toes or pads, and their arrangement is an unmistakable indicator for members of the dog family. (By the way, note that there are no claw marks.) And another important detail: the track is symmetrical. By symmetrical I mean that the right half is almost identical to the left half.

Here’s a way to grasp the concept of symmetry. In the next illustration I’ve added a vertical line which bisects the track. If you imagine folding the right half over along the line so it lies on top of the left half, the two halves will match almost exactly. The two leading toes are almost even with each other, the inner and outer toes are of similar size and spacing, and the middle pad seems to point straight ahead.

Now let’s compare a feline print. The photo below shows the front track of a bobcat. The overall shape is more rounded, the toes are relatively small compared to the middle pad, and they’re arranged in a wide arc in front of the middle pad. The left-most toe is smaller and farther back than the others. There’s no central dome, and the ridge between the middle pad and the toes is broadly curved or C shaped. Rather than pointing straight ahead, the middle pad is canted to the left. The arrangement of toes and middle pad makes the track very asymmetrical.

To get at the asymmetry here’s the same photo with a vertical line bisecting the track. If you do the mental experiment of folding one side over onto the other as we did with the coyote print, you’ll see that the two halves don’t match. One toe leads all the others, and the smallest one lags behind the other three. The whole print seems to be canted to one side. Because it’s asymmetrical we can tell which front print this is–it’s the left. If we were looking at an isolated coyote track it wouldn’t be possible to know if it was a left or a right.

Here’s the front print of another canine, a red fox. It’s not as elongated as the coyote print, but the overall shape is still more oval than round, and the outer toes are tucked in behind the leading toes. The central dome and canine X are unmistakable, and the track is beautifully symmetrical. In this case claw imprints show as delicate punctures directly ahead of the toes. The mud was just moist enough to show the hair on the underside of the foot and the chevron in the middle pad perfectly.

Perhaps you’re thinking that I oriented the bobcat track incorrectly, and that if it were rotated a little it could be made to look more symmetrical. But the asymmetry is inescapable, no matter how you look at it. In fact, when an animal is moving at a steady gait the correct orientation of each print is dictated by the direction of travel, and the imaginary bisecting line should be parallel to the direction of travel. The next photo shows part of a sequence of tracks made by a house cat moving at an overstep walk, a gait in which the rear print lies ahead of the front print from the same side. The direction of travel is from lower right to upper left.

In the next illustration I’ve added a line which defines the direction of travel to the same photo. (Sorry about the slight wobble, just imagine it’s really straight.) With the line as a reference, you can see that each track is canted to the outside. Also notable in this photo are the shapes of the middle pads: wide and blunt on the forward edges and scalloped on the trailing edges. The C-shaped ridges between the middle pads and the toes are especially striking.

The topic of gaits brings up another criterion sometimes said to distinguish canines from felines–direct register versus indirect register. Walking felines are said to place their feet in direct register, so that the back foot comes down exactly on top of the print of the front foot from the same side. Canines are supposed to prefer the indirect register walk, placing the back foot partly, but not exactly, on top of the front from the same side. But this isn’t a make-or-break test. The next three photos illustrate this point: first you see a bobcat direct register walk, next a bobcat indirect register walk, and finally a red fox direct register walk. The fact is that both felines and canines use both direct and indirect register walks. It’s fair to say that domestic dogs and cats are more likely to walk in indirect register than wild canines, but even among wild species there’s variation, and the difference isn’t very useful for identification purposes. And of course it wouldn’t apply in other kinds of walks, such as the overstep walk in the previous illustration.

Our other fox, the gray fox, makes tracks that are a little more catlike. In the photo below you see a rear print, below, and a front print, above. The overall shapes are round enough to be confusing, the central dome and canine X are a little different from the ones shown for the fox and the coyote, and in the hind track there appears to be a leading toe. Gray foxes have semi-retractable claws which don’t usually show in tracks, so the presence of claw marks suggests that the animal needed more stability in the wet mud.

In spite of the variations the tracks are clearly canine. Compare them to the bobcat tracks in the next photo, this time a left rear below and a right front above.

These two photos bring out some potential pitfalls in the task of differentiating canines from felines. Animal feet aren’t rigid, and toes may spread or tighten depending on the animal’s movement and the nature of the substrate. In the gray fox hind print the two leading toes gripped the soil differently, causing one to appear farther ahead than the other. The normal symmetry of canine tracks can be altered by head turns, changes of direction, or by sloping terrain. Another potential source of uncertainty is the fact the hind feet of felines are often more elongated than the front feet. In the bobcat photo above the rear track has a slightly canine appearance due to the tighter arrangement of toes and the more oblong shape.

And lastly, never underestimate the power of domestic dog tracks to create confusion. The track in the next photo was about the size and overall shape of a bobcat print, lacked claw marks, and mimicked the blunt middle pad and C-shaped ridge of a feline. Red flags were raised by the symmetrical structure and the large toes, but it was really the presence of more tracks which clinched the identity as dog. Domestic canines are incredibly variable–their tracks can be quite round and the tendency of the toes and middle pads to spread can give the negative spaces a feline appearance.

So the task of separating canines and felines is not always easy. Isolated prints are harder than more complete sequences, and weathering and distortions can make things difficult. But the more you study them, the better you’ll be at picking out the crucial features. And if one of these creatures is rare in your area, it’s a joy to find it’s tracks and know you’ve made a solid identification.

When the Snow Gets Deep

One of the challenges in a winter like the one we’ve been having is tracking in deep snow. Our native animals are mostly well equipped to cope with such conditions, but the evidence they leave can be mystifying–animals may change their habits, tracks and trails may look very different, and the details we generally rely on for identification may be absent. But the lives of animals are still written in the snow. To read these stories we just need to acquire some new reference images and expand our tracking skills.

A red fox made the trail shown below. In the deep snow the direct register walk was the most energy efficient gait, each hind foot coming down in the hole made by the front foot on the same side. Compared to walks in easier conditions the fox’s steps were shorter and its trail width was greater. The animal lifted its feet cleanly out of the snow, leaving just a few drag marks.

The direction of travel, from bottom to top, is revealed by the sprays of snow which fell off the feet as they rose out of the holes and moved forward. Whether animals are walking or moving at faster gaits–as long as their movements are regular and smooth–snow falling from their feet usually lands ahead of the tracks. Only during sudden acceleration or changes of direction do we see snow pushed backward or to the side.

A coyote walking from left to right made the trail in the next photo. The snow was less consolidated so there’s a softer appearance to the trail. The details in the track floors are obscured by the snow that fell in as the feet were lifted out, and the animal’s feet skimmed the soft surface leaving drag marks. Looking down into the holes (which is always a good idea in this kind of situation) we can see the shapes of the forward edges of the animal’s feet. The overall shape of a coyote’s foot is oval or egg-shaped, but how should we describe just the front half? The best I could come up with is parabolic or bluntly arched. Whether or not there’s a word for it, this shape is characteristic of coyotes and red foxes, and also some dogs. And there’s another feature that is typically canine: in the very tip of the hole on the right you can see two small dents made by the leading claws–a dead giveaway for a red fox or coyote. Gray foxes usually have more rounded leading edges and less tendency to show claw marks. Being shorter legged than red foxes, gray foxes are more likely to leave drag marks, and dogs are also prone to dragging their feet.

These two trails illustrate the general appearance of canine trails in deep snow. Because walks in deep snow tend to be very close to direct register it may be possible to get rough measurements for track widths, and this, plus stride or step length, can help to separate coyotes from red and gray foxes.

Bobcat trails in deep snow may be quite different from canine trails. In the photo below a bobcat walked from bottom to top, and at each step it spread its feet as they went down into the snow, creating a sequence of interlocking triangles. As usual, snow obscured the details of toes and pads at the bottoms of the holes, but in the lowermost impression you can see that the forward edge of the track is widely crescent-shaped rather than parabolic.

Sometimes animals negotiating deep snow move faster, perhaps out of fear or maybe just playful antics. In the photo below a red fox bounded from upper left to lower right, leaving holes where its body went in up to its shoulders. There may not be much information inside the holes, especially if the snow is loose and movable as it was when the photo was taken, but their width provides a rough measure of the width of the animal’s body. The level of effort required for this kind of movement means that it can’t be sustained for long periods, so following the trail either backwards of forward will probably bring you to a change of gait.

In spite of their long legs, deer are not well suited for moving in deep snow. Their feet are small in proportion to their body weight, so they sink in deeply. Deep drag marks like those in the photo below are typical, and sometimes the tips of the toes can be seen at the bottoms of the holes.

In deep snow deer may limit their movements to trails they’ve already made, such as the one in the next photo, where they can move with less effort. If the difficult conditions persist the animals may limit their movements to very restricted areas which become crisscrossed with trails. These deer yards are usually found under conifers, where the snow isn’t as deep and the evergreen foliage traps heat. When deer yard up the available browse is quickly eaten, so they eat very little, reduce their activity, and wait out the winter.

For short-legged animals like porcupines, skunks, and muskrats the only option in deep snow is to bulldoze their way through. In the photo below a skunk struggled from upper left to lower right, its body plowing through the snow and its feet punching deep holes in the bottom of the groove. The small pits made by the feet, combined with the short strides and wide trail width are good indicators of the animal’s identity.

When temperatures fluctuate or sun melts the surface, snow can develop an icy crust. Sometimes this reduces the problem of movement, allowing lighter animals to move easily over the surface. But if the hardness of the crust varies or the animal is just a little too heavy, we may find scenes like the one in the photo below. A coyote attempting to cross a drift found that it wasn’t always supported by the crust. Where it broke through it left crisp outlines of its lower legs and spread toes.

Like other animals, rabbits and squirrels can plunge deeply into snow, and this can make it hard to identify their tracks. But the difference in the positioning of the front feet usually provides a clue to the animal’s identity. The next photo shows a cavity made by a gray squirrel bounding from lower left to upper right. Inside the hole there are two depressions, each one made by a front foot and a rear foot from the same side. The wide separation of the depressions and the equally wide entry and exit disturbances give the hole a boxy or rectangular shape.

Compare that to the next photo of a rabbit in deep snow, also bounding from lower left to upper right. Because the rabbit brought its front feet down on or close to the center line of the trail, the entry point (at the lower left) is narrow. The rear feet made a wide depression in the deepest part of the hole and left separated drag marks coming out. The result is a triangular cavity with the wide end opening toward the direction of travel.

Maybe the biggest hinderance to learning how animals move in deep snow is just getting out into the stuff. You’ll need snowshoes or skis, or at the very least good gaiters, to get close to the tracks. But if you spend some extra time arranging all your gear you’ll be rewarded with a deep look into the lives of animals in deep snow.

The Allure of Scent Marking

Deep in the coldest months of winter, when you’d think every animal is single-mindedly focused on survival, some predators are being distracted by an equally compelling urge–mating. Even as the snow flies, time spent hunting decreases and behaviors connected with reproduction become more predominant. For the tracker one of the best signs of this change is an increase in scent marking. I followed a red fox trail recently, and she was detouring to urinate on raised features like this stump every 500 feet or

so. I say she because the arrangement of tracks and the placement of the urine could only have been done by a female fox. In the photo the small spots in the left half of the stump are urine (you can ignore the dark chunk of bark near the center). The fox came in from the lower left, paused on the upper side of the stump to pee, and proceeded towards the upper right. The more deeply impressed track marked SF was made by the supporting rear foot (the left) while the right rear was raised. During mating season red fox urine has a strong, slightly skunky–but not unpleasant–odor that is obvious even to us smell-challenged humans. So as I followed the trail the air was perfumed with fox musk.

My dog Banjo (dogs are great teachers for wild canine behaviors) demonstrates the technique in the photo below, supporting her weight on her right rear foot plus the two front feet and positioning her left rear leg up and forward. You can actually see the urine squirting downward under her rear end.

Male canines also raise a rear leg when they urinate, but the leg is held out and back, and the urine goes out to the side rather than downward. I don’t currently have a male dog so I can’t show you that, but I’m sure you can imagine the posture. A male coyote, traveling from left to right,

made the scent mark above, supporting its weight on the right rear foot (the track at the lower center) and shooting the urine sideways onto the upper part of the stump. Coyote urine has a mild odor and isn’t nearly as detectable by humans as fox urine is.

Bobcats also feel the mating urge in the winter, and again, those who have house cats, especially males, may have observed the technique. A male bobcat left its signature on the log in the photo below, coming in from the top of the frame, depositing its message, and leaving at the lower left.

It first gave the log a good sniff (revealed by the front print facing the log), then turned so its rear was facing the wood and sprayed urine backwards. Here’s the photo again with the tracks marked.

S denotes where the bobcat placed a front foot as it sniffed the log. RH, LH, RF and LF show the four feet in a squared posture as the cat faced away from the log and urinated backwards. Bobcat urine, like house cat urine, has a strong odor of ammonia, so if you had been there to sniff the side of the log you would have detected the cat-box odor. Female bobcats also scent mark, mostly downward from a squatting position.

Scent marking by wild canids and felids continues through pair formation, den preparation, and birthing. Soon after that hunting begins to regain its importance as the pressure to provide food for the growing young increases. But the timing of reproduction isn’t accidental. The earlier onset of predator reproduction means that their greatest need for food coincides with the greatest abundance of prey animals, which mostly mated in early spring and multiply during spring and summer.