Animal tracks help

[Chip]

In VT near the Long Trail this weekend, we saw plenty of snowshoe hare tracks (and one actual BIG WHITE BUNNY), chipmunk and these tracks. They showed claws,were linear and the paw prints overlapped. They were about 2" by 2". I thought red fox. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[HAYDK]

Hope this link helps.http://www.wildlife.state.nh.us/Wildlife/Wildlife_PDFs/Track_Card.pdf

 

[SAR-EMT40]

It is really hard from the pictures but your description and whats available in the pictures makes me think it is probably red fox.

Keith

 

[sleeping bear]

The toes look long to be a fox. I can't tell if there are 4 or five toe prints there, but my vote is fisher.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Chip -

I think they may be red fox tracks. They become very active beginning in mid-February looking for mates, and can travel long distances.

Kevin

 

[SAR-EMT40]

The toes look long to be a fox. I can't tell if there are 4 or five toe prints there, but my vote is fisher.

This looks like a perfect walker. Canines walk with a very specific purpose in life. They typically walk in a very straight line with I don't believe Fishers do either. Fishers have a lopping gate instead of the alternating gait of fox. Their front and back paws don't register into the same prints. I suspect that 4 toenails are present but I can't tell in the pictures. Perfect walkers consist of canines and cats. Cats don't display nails when walking so it has to be a canine. Red fox looks right to me. But I am no expert and can't see very much from the picture except the gate and stride.

Keith

 

[Puck]

Chip
Yesterday I hit the books trying to get the ID on those tracks.

The weasel family will show five toes, Usually. The fisher will at times show four or five. When walking the the tracks will over lap. That is one aspect that I noticed they were double tracking. And they were meandering all over the woods. I vote fisher.

 

[sleeping bear]

I'm sticking with Fisher. It's easy to say it's this, this, or this, but you have to look at what is in front of you objectively. The photo shows no size reference, but it was stated the tracks are about 2 inches by two inches. That could be a whole range of animals! It's often damn hard to distinguish fox from coyote, if not at times impossible.

The tracks in the photo, just at quick glance, do not look like fox or coyote because of the toes. Both the toe and the nail marks are too long. It's hard to tell if four or five toes are showing. Fishers and Martens often only show four, or the last is faint and hard to see. Also, the heel pad is quite small and all tracks shown are direct-registering. Fox and coyote tracks will show a larger, more distinct heel pad.

Gates of all animals can vary widely, but generally, fox and coyote tracks do not all direct-register as shown above. Fisher and Marten often do. Given the size of the tracks, and that Fishers are larger than Martens, my vote remains Fisher.

 

[sardog1]

Fisher, not fox. Fisher, 'cause (1) foxes most often single track (no, not always); (2) toes here are more fisher-like than fox-like, especially when looking at the bottom-most track and the one two tracks above that one.

Here's a fisher track recorded by the feds in MA that looks quite similar. This image is part of American Marten, Fisher, Lynx, and Wolverine: Survey Methods for Their Detection, an excellent resource for sorting out (or at least trying to sort) the tracks of the named species. (Oh, that we would actually have a chance at Gulo gulo here in the Northeast . . .)

 

[Chip]

Fisher it is then. The way the tracks were winding around the trees and rocks looked a bit "weaselly" (weaselish ?)

 

[sardog1]

You can impress your friends by eschewing the pejorative "weaselly" and using "musteline" instead. Of course, this supposes that your friends are the sort who wouldn't back away from you when you do it . . .