[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


At 09:34 AM 30/09/97 -0700, you wrote:
>I would not expect MANY of these foorprints, I would expect SOME.  It seems
>dromaeosaurs are turning up everywhere these days.  I think the reason
>there anen't any is that the animals didn't walk on two toes.  We are
>looking for prints that don't exist.  Of course I could be wrong, but would
>like proof- I just want the answer, not to be right.  I agree with most of
>the other stuff you said.

There is only one theropod footprint from the entire Dinosaur Provincial
Park formation (it is likely Gorgosaurus).  There are a few others of
?ornithomimids from south of there, but they are very rare.  There is a
suspect print that was found by Zhi-Ming Dong in DPP that was said to have
two toes, but it has never gotten very far.  The problem with a footprint is
that it is often in VERY slippery terrain.  The animal may not be doing what
it normally does to get around.  A dromaeosaur that normally holds its
second toe off the ground may drop it for traction.  On the other hand, if
it did walk on three toes, maybe it picked up that huge claw in the mud to
prevent being mired.  One footprint can tell volumes, but it also may tell

Dromaeosaurs are turning up everywhere, but as teeth or bits and pieces.
There are precious few even slightly complete specimens (except in Mongolian
sand [poor areas for any footprints to preserve]).  Tyrannosaurs are
everywhere, but I have only heard of two footprints associated with them.  I
think that the skeletal remains with their unusual adaptations will have to
do for the mean time (unless somebody finds a dromaeosaur trackway, ie with
lots of prints, which would be much more credible proof).

Darryl            <dinoguy@interlog.com>
Visit my webpage at:
"Genetics explains why you look like your father, and if
you don't, why you should."  (anonymous)