Re(4): Cougars from South Dakota IP: 18.104.22.168 Posted on February 15, 2015 at 02:30:13 PM by weather01089
Read more there Helen, that was what the RI DEM initially called it. Dog? Shows how much they know about tracks. Summary, one of the witnesses was a wildlife biologist, and did not accept that conclusion, having seen the cat and evidence. They called in the RI Enviromental Police, who did a THOROUGH investigation. Initial claim was that the deer was "hit by a car". Problem is, the evidence was otherwise. Here are some other links.
Cougarnet had the Enviromental Police report, complete with the pictures posted on their site, and listed it as a CLASS ONE confirmation. It has suddenly disappeared. That's fine though, we have copies of all of it. Basically, the evidence shows a large deer was attacked in a lady's garden, and dragged some distance with SHOULDERS OFF THE GROUND, into the woods, and covered with leaves and debris. The bite wounds location, and size, firmly indicate cougar. There were COUGAR tracks at the site, and scat. RI DEM "lost" the scat before DNA could be done. The enviro police officer examined and documented the deer. That account you posted that they gave is totally false.
Some of The Enviromental Police Officer's account is here:
McCollough confirmed this was a cougar attack, as did several other experts after the Providence Journal intervened.
Note the RI DEM's initial account was that the deer "was hit by a car", and the cat seen was a bobcat. The dog account came later. The witnesses, one of whom can be considered expert, did not agree. The deer per the officer's investigation, had no sign of being hit by a car, broken bones etc. And no deer kills were reported. The carcass displayed the classic cougar attack signs. The DEM clearly ignored, and after the fact have concealed evidence and this confirmation. Note, they are still telling the press there have been no confirmations since the 1800s. Replies: