# Cougar sighting in Sault Ste Marie



## tommy-n

Enigma said:


> Looks a little more hairer than the cougar I picked up in the bar the other night.:help::yikes:


You must be going to the wrong bars


----------



## Freestone

Hey Palerider,

For someone who doesn't want cougar discussions in the regular forums you sure seem to spend alot of time looking at them.:lol: I do agree that they should be posted in the non-game forum.


----------



## kristie

Okeedokee....I've had the flu all week, sorry for the delay...interesting pic.....where exactly was it taken??? Was/has the DNR been called to verifiy and inspect the sight and try to inspect tracks??? This is all very important stuff for verification. The more evidence the better.
And yes I've read the whole thread.
Thanks Whit backing me up while I've been down......


----------



## solohunter

CHIPPEWA COUNTY -- An image of a mountain lion has been recorded on an Upper Peninsula game camera.
We received an email with the photo attached that had been forwarded several times before it reached our inboxes.
After tracking down the owner, we learned that it was taken in the U.P. on October 10.
According to the owner of the camera, it was placed at a deer plot in Bruce Township located in Chippewa County. They say that it was located in dense forest near a Christmas tree plantation. The camera was set to capture images five minutes apart after detecting movement. 
This is the first time they have seen evidence of a cougar, even though the camera had been located in that location for a long period of time.
The owner said their initial reaction was shock and surprise, followed by a little fear.
We've talked to the DNR and they are in the process of further verifying the validity of this photo.
If you have game camera photos of any kind, we'd like to see them. Share them with the entire U.P. on YooperTube. 

from this article 
http://www.uppermichiganssource.com/news/story.aspx?id=366376
[/COLOR] 
they seem to have found the owner of the camera, and claim the DNR is involved,,???


----------



## upmounty

kristie,

i am a L/E officer in Chippewa County. I personally talked to a family member who got the pic. the owner of the land doesn't want anyone on his land to investigate this. I am in contact with our local c/o's also on this. So as of this time the person who took the photo doesn't want the pic to be confirmed by the dnr. I wish he would and i explained what needed to be done. The guy i talked to was still gonna talk to his dad about it and contact me if they change their mind.

out of respect to the guy i talked to i will not give the name and location over the internet. also, the dnr office has also talked to them about this issue.


----------



## MEL

upmounty said:


> kristie,
> 
> i am a L/E officer in Chippewa County. I personally talked to a family member who got the pic. the owner of the land doesn't want anyone on his land to investigate this. I am in contact with our local c/o's also on this. So as of this time the person who took the photo doesn't want the pic to be confirmed by the dnr. I wish he would and i explained what needed to be done. The guy i talked to was still gonna talk to his dad about it and contact me if they change their mind.
> 
> out of respect to the guy i talked to i will not give the name and location over the internet. also, the dnr office has also talked to them about this issue.


 
Very interesting post Mounty. Someone posted/emailed the pict all over the net, but doesnt want anyone to investigate


----------



## solohunter

they didnt lose a kid in a ballon recently did they??


----------



## k9wernet

upmounty said:


> the owner of the land doesn't want anyone on his land to investigate this...


Interesting statement... 

He doesn't want Joe Public poking around his property with news vans, or won't allow LEOs on his property? 

It seems to me (and I'm no expert on the law by any means) that if the DNR has reason to believe that an endangered (pardon, extirpated) species is existing wild on private property -- somewhere in the laws of this great land they would have reserved the right to get in there and check things out. Especially if that species is one that will eat you and your babies... and yellow labs.

KW


----------



## kristie

upmounty said:


> kristie,
> 
> i am a L/E officer in Chippewa County. I personally talked to a family member who got the pic. the owner of the land doesn't want anyone on his land to investigate this. I am in contact with our local c/o's also on this. So as of this time the person who took the photo doesn't want the pic to be confirmed by the dnr. I wish he would and i explained what needed to be done. The guy i talked to was still gonna talk to his dad about it and contact me if they change their mind.
> 
> out of respect to the guy i talked to i will not give the name and location over the internet. also, the dnr office has also talked to them about this issue.


Thanks for the status report UP mounty!!! Appreciate the info.


----------



## elkhoundloki

In-laws sent me original pic of this. They live VERY close to this area, and have always said there were cougars around ........ glad to see they finally have proof.


----------



## withgrace

I am a cougar skeptic, but I know where and who about this picture and I actually believeit is a real pic. I dont think the land owners put the picture on the internet...I think there family and friends put it on facebook and then it got sent to to their friends and somewhere along the line it shows up on this site. 
Anybody that knows about the EUP shouldnt be surprised that someone who lived here all their life might be hesitant to let the DNR on their land to track down a cougar especially amonth before deer sesason.


----------



## Whit1

elkhoundloki said:


> In-laws sent me original pic of this. They live VERY close to this area, and have always said there were cougars around ........* glad to see they finally have proof*.


Sorry to burst your proven bubble, but a photo,, of its own, will never be "proof" in a definative manner. The multitude of photos of cougar photos that have been spread about the 'net over the years certainly demonstrates that. In the mind of an individual a photo may be "proof" enough and that's fine, but as for suggesting that a photo erases all doubt (proves) as to the existance of a cougar, etc. is not true. Other evidence will need to be developed and, coupled with photos, will actually prove that cougars are here. That is why the DNR needs to take a closer look.


----------



## upmounty

k9wernet said:


> Interesting statement...
> 
> He doesn't want Joe Public poking around his property with news vans, or won't allow LEOs on his property?
> 
> It seems to me (and I'm no expert on the law by any means) that if the DNR has reason to believe that an endangered (pardon, extirpated) species is existing wild on private property -- somewhere in the laws of this great land they would have reserved the right to get in there and check things out. Especially if that species is one that will eat you and your babies... and yellow labs.
> 
> KW


i was told they didn't want anyone on the land... also, i don't believe law enforcement can go on the land to investigate without permission or the dnr would have been there already.


----------



## swampbuck

Proof would be something like when that dead wolf was dropped in front of the UP dnr office years ago.


----------



## kristie

Or like....tracks and or hair that can be ID'ed cougar, determined to be at the exact site the picture was taken........hmmmmmmmmmm


----------



## cointoss

Don't know wether the picture is a hoax or not but figure there are wolves around the area a plenty and I wouldn't be tying my lab to the front porch there any time soon.


----------



## solohunter

Whit1 said:


> Sorry to burst your proven bubble, but a photo,, of its own, will never be "proof" in a definative manner. The multitude of photos of cougar photos that have been spread about the 'net over the years certainly demonstrates that. In the mind of an individual a photo may be "proof" enough and that's fine, but as for suggesting that a photo erases all doubt (proves) as to the existance of a cougar, etc. is not true. Other evidence will need to be developed and, coupled with photos, will actually prove that cougars are here. That is why the DNR needs to take a closer look.


come on,, photo,s have convicted alot of people in court, but in the age of photo shop the original would have to be diseceted and compared tg other pic,s from camera and location of the camera revealed and a "test pic taken ect,, CSI stuff done,, 

I doubt the DNRs interest in actually finding out that cougars are really here,,


----------



## elkhoundloki

Whit1 said:


> Sorry to burst your proven bubble, but a photo,, of its own, will never be "proof" in a definative manner. The multitude of photos of cougar photos that have been spread about the 'net over the years certainly demonstrates that. In the mind of an individual a photo may be "proof" enough and that's fine, but as for suggesting that a photo erases all doubt (proves) as to the existance of a cougar, etc. is not true. Other evidence will need to be developed and, coupled with photos, will actually prove that cougars are here. That is why the DNR needs to take a closer look.



I agree, and do hope they do get more proof. I've seen tracks and talked to eyewitnesses around there, but this was first photo I've received. I'm always skeptical of photos, but in this case, knowing who/where the photo came from ...... it's good enough for me.


----------



## thanis

As often as people make wild reports on the internet there is an equal level of idiocy from critics who think they are skeptics. 

The difference between a crtitic and a skeptic is that a "healthy" level of skepticism should reflect that it all but impossible to know anything with absolute certainty.

The critic refuses to believe unless "they" have proof. The skeptic allows that the lack of all needed evidence does not disprove or prove.


----------



## MEL

thanis said:


> As often as people make wild reports on the internet there is an equal level of idiocy from critics who think they are skeptics.
> 
> The difference between a crtitic and a skeptic is that a "healthy" level of skepticism should reflect that it all but impossible to know anything with absolute certainty.
> 
> The critic refuses to believe unless "they" have proof. The skeptic allows that the lack of all needed evidence does not disprove or prove.


 

I was just gonna say the same thing

........soooooooo what do ya think about the cougar sighting in the Soo area??


----------



## thanis

MEL said:


> ...soooooooo what do ya think about the cougar sighting in the Soo area??


Good chance they are actually cougars. 50 /50 if they are reclaiming a territory or former pets trying to make it.


----------



## DFJISH

I thought I was a skeptic, but after reading the definitions I'm definitely a critic. I've seen cougar photos _ad nauseaum_....and every one of them was photoshopped or taken out of MI. The guy not letting the DNR on his land to check things out raises up a great big red flag. I'm willing to eat humble pie all week... when someone produces a cougar...dead or alive.


----------



## elkhoundloki

The DNR patrols this area a lot (by truck and plane) and probably have made more enemies that friends ...... plus a lot of people don't believe the DNR/government has a right to come onto private property. That being said, I'm not a surprised that he doesn't want DNR around.
Also to the skeptics ......... the DNR says that they haven't planted cougars and claim they don't exist in Michigan. If they don't exist, why would they bother stating in the hunting guide that you can't shoot them?


----------



## wally-eye

elkhoundloki said:


> The DNR patrols this area a lot (by truck and plane) and probably have made more enemies that friends ...... plus a lot of people don't believe the DNR/government has a right to come onto private property. That being said, I'm not a surprised that he doesn't want DNR around.
> Also to the skeptics ......... the DNR says that they haven't planted cougars and claim they don't exist in Michigan. If they don't exist, why would they bother stating in the hunting guide that you can't shoot them?




:lol: Enemies? More than likely when someone gets busted for doing something illegal they tend to blame others instead of themselves..:sad:


----------



## kristie

elkhoundloki said:


> The DNR patrols this area a lot (by truck and plane) and probably have made more enemies that friends ...... plus a lot of people don't believe the DNR/government has a right to come onto private property. That being said, I'm not a surprised that he doesn't want DNR around.
> Also to the skeptics ......... the DNR says that they haven't planted cougars and claim they don't exist in Michigan. If they don't exist, why would they bother stating in the hunting guide that you can't shoot them?


Ummmmmmm..........so flying and driving around is bad??? Alot of people do these things???? 

And here's my standard cougar thread comment........the MDNR HAS NOT translocated any cougars to Michagan, we can't afford it, if we had it would have been as publicized as the moose lift. Also, we don't claim they don't exist, even have a cougar reporting page on our website, you should check it out!!!!
I'm tired now....carry on


----------



## ahoude23

kristie said:


> Ummmmmmm..........so flying and driving around is bad??? Alot of people do these things????



The DNR's out to get ME. That's why they fly around and drive all over the place!:lol:


----------



## dsgt1

well you can call it what you like. I have also seen cougars in the u.p as far west as curtis area. I know what i saw and have a assoc degreefrom lake state in wildlife biology. this waS BACK IN EARLY 90'S. so all the dnr b.s. is in the bowl u can flush all of what they say.


----------



## kristie

DNR bs?


----------



## Whit1

dsgt1 said:


> well you can call it what you like. I have also seen cougars in the u.p as far west as curtis area. I know what i saw and have a assoc degreefrom lake state in wildlife biology. this waS BACK IN EARLY 90'S. so all the dnr b.s. is in the bowl u can flush all of what they say.


I'm also curious about the DNR "bs" remark. Just because the department needs more proof, evidence, etc. in order to verify the presence of an animal, in this case a cougar, doesn't mean it is bs. You may have an Associate Degree in Wildlife Biology, but if you base a claim soley on "eyewitness" accounts, including your own, you may need to take more coursework.

The DNR actively attempted to look into this latest photo account, but were denied permission to do so. Of coure that is the property owners perogative and there's no problem with that whatsoever. That's a choice the property owners made. Of course the photo was put out on the 'net and perhaps other places against, apparently, their wishes. I'm sure they are satisfied with that decision and well they should be. It's the constant, or seemingly so, harping that the DNR is trying to hide something, deny, sit on their butts, too lazy to look into the report, comments that filter into these threads that cut the wrong way.

I've said it before, as have others, with the exception of that particular photo of a possible cougar in Michigan there have have zero, none, nada, etc. such photos ever posted in these forums that turned out to be legit.

DS, trust me when I say that I'm not cutting you down, but rather pointing out the error in your "bs" comment.


----------



## elkhoundloki

wally-eye said:


> :lol: Enemies? More than likely when someone gets busted for doing something illegal they tend to blame others instead of themselves..:sad:


I'm not making excuses for the people that do things illegally .... I'm stating exactly what you just did, and as a result, those people tend to not like the DNR, police or whomever.
Just to be clear, I an NOT trying to say that this is the case with this particular individual.

kristie
I have no problem with the DNR patrolling the area, by whatever means, and as often as necessary ....... it's just an observation.


----------



## snaggs

About 15 years ago,a resident of Luzerne Michigan,a neighbor of my friend,hunted in DA UP EH!! We knew him only as a neighbor. He went hunting in DA UP EH!!! and not by MOONLITE. As my friend and I chatted with him one day he said..." Let me show you something". He went inside his house and came out with 3 photos of a "COUGAR". He shot the photos within 30-35 yards of the animal. No doubt...no doubt at all it was a COUGAR. He did not want to shoot it but had his rifle ready at his side. You don't know him nor do I know him well...but I do believe....I do believe....I DO I DO I DO......:lol::yikes:


----------



## solohunter

kristie said:


> DNR bs?


Bachalors of Science?????


----------



## bersh

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Nov. 4, 2009

Contact: Kristie Sitar, 906-293-5131, Debbie Munson Badini,
906-226-1352 or Mary Dettloff 517-335-3014


DNR Verifies Cougar Tracks, Confirms Location of Trail Camera Photo in
Eastern Upper Peninsula

The Department of Natural Resources today announced it has verified two
sets of cougar tracks and confirmed the location of a cougar photo in
the eastern Upper Peninsula. The tracks were discovered in the DeTour
and Gulliver areas, while the photo was taken near Bruce Township.

On Oct. 26, DNR Wildlife Biologist Dave Jentoft received a call late in
the day at the Shingleton Field Office reporting tracks that looked like
cougar prints near DeTour. The caller was instructed to cover the tracks
to protect them from the elements, and Jentoft was able to respond the
next day to take photographs, measure the tracks and conduct a field
investigation. The information Jentoft collected was shared with the
DNR's trained cougar team, and the consensus was reached that the tracks
appear to have been made by a cougar.

On Nov. 2, DNR Wildlife Biologist Terry Minzey was contacted by a
private landowner near Gulliver who reported finding large tracks that
he thought may be from a cougar. DNR biologists Kristie Sitar and Kevin
Swanson investigated the site with Minzey, taking measurements, photos
and plaster casts of the tracks. In conjunction with the DNR's
specially-trained cougar team, it was determined that the tracks are
from a cougar.

"These are the first confirmed cougar tracks in the eastern Upper
Peninsula, and we appreciate the cooperation of the callers who reported
the tracks and worked to keep them covered until we could respond to the
scene," said Sitar, who is a member of the DNRâs cougar team. "Other
landowners who believe they have evidence of a cougar on their property,
such as tracks or a kill site, are encouraged to contact their local DNR
field office as soon as possible, which allows staff to investigate
before the evidence is compromised. Without good evidence, like what we
had in these two cases, verification becomes increasingly difficult."

The cougar photograph, taken by a trail camera on private property near
Bruce Township in mid-October, has been under investigation by wildlife
staff since Oct. 22. The photo shows a cougar at night walking through a
food plot. Though there was no doubt the photo depicted a cougar, the
location where the photo was taken was not accessible to DNR staff for
on-site inspection until Nov. 2. At that time, a field investigation by
Jentoft and DNR Wildlife Technician Tim Maples made it possible to
verify the location by comparing camera angles and vegetation markers at
the site, allowing wildlife officials to confirm the photo was taken at
that spot.

Cougars, also known as mountain lions, originally were native to
Michigan but were thought to have been extirpated around the turn of the
last century. The last known wild cougar taken in Michigan was killed
near Newberry in 1906. However, sightings are regularly reported and
although verification is often difficult, the DNR was able to verify
several sets of cougar tracks in Marquette and Delta counties in 2008.

Established cougar populations are found as close to Michigan as North
and South Dakota, and transient cougars dispersing from these areas have
been known to travel hundreds of miles in search of new territory.
Characteristic evidence of cougars include tracks, which are about three
inches long by three and a half inches wide and typically show no claw
marks, or suspicious kill sites, such as deer carcasses that are largely
intact and have been buried with sticks and debris.

Reports of cougar tracks and other evidence should be made to a local
DNR office or by calling the department's 24-hour Report All Poaching
line at 800-292-7800. If a citizen comes into contact with a cougar, the
following behavior is recommended:

- Stop, stand tall, pick up small children and do not run. A cougar's
instinct is to chase.

- Do not approach the animal.

- Try to appear larger than the cougar. Never take your eyes off the
animal or turn your back. Do not crouch down or try to hide.

- If the animal displays aggressive behavior, shout, wave your arms and
throw rocks. The idea is to convince the cougar that you are not prey,
but a potential danger.

- If a cougar attacks, fight back aggressively and try to stay on your
feet. Do not play dead. Cougars have been driven away by people who have
fought back.

Cougars are classified as an endangered species in Michigan. It is
unlawful to kill, harass or otherwise harm a cougar except in the
immediate defense of human life. For more information about the recent
cougar tracks and photo, call Sitar at 906-293-5131. To learn more about
cougars and how to identify their tracks, go online to
www.michigan.gov/dnr and click on Wildlife and Habitat.

The DNR is committed to the conservation, protection, management,
accessible use and enjoyment of the Stateâs natural resources for
current and future generations.


----------



## kristie

Investigation complete, reported......good stuff.....


----------



## solohunter

A report claimed that the DNR confirmed two sets of tracks in the UP in 2008?? what location were those found in in relation to these??


----------



## WMUAngler

I was already getting nervous about hunting in the Detour area with bears, wolves, AND Yoopers, and now I have to worry about cougars too.  How close exactly does that monster have to get to me before I can open fire? I'd hate to shoot an endangered species too early, but I'm also not about to wait for him to draw first blood. 

All I know for sure is that I'll be carrying my camera as my primary cougar weapon and my S&W 460 Magnum as my back up this year.


----------



## Twisted Pleasure

Some of you still skeptics crack me up, dang there is tons of people on here who know the people who took the photo, i know the family very well and they have no reason to make it up. It is legit...now i wish they would give tags on em, but thats not going to happen any time soon...


----------



## Dan-Senior

Hello from Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. I was reading the article about a cougar sighting near Detour. In the spring of 2009, 6 of us were ATVing behind Echo Bay Ontario. Echo Bay is not all that far from Detour. I was the lead biker and coming out of a gully at about 10 mph and heading up the hill. At the peak of the hill, there was a sharp 90 degree turn to the left. When I came around that corner, there, right in front of me (no more than 15 feet away) were two young cougars. From my 40+ years of bushwhacking including trapline work, I know my animals. These were not wolves, lynx, fishers'; these were cougars. The most obvious sign were there tails. Because these were still young cats, they had two-tone coats. So, If someone says they spotted a cougar at Detour. You may want to consider believing them.


----------



## corihor

Whoa no way! I would so be scarred it I saw that thing!


----------

