While at the zoo the other day I ended up (somehow) on the topic of big cats in Australia. Naturally, I said that there were no big cats in Oz, but while doing further research this came up: https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-hunt-for-big-cats-in-australia-20200703-p558qg.html Is this the Aussie version of Sasquatch? A trailer for those who haven't seen it: So, can any of our friends Down Under clue us in on this seemingly enduring mystery?!
I dunno, seems to happen regularly over here..! The 'photo of quite a large-looking black cat in the middle distance with no nearby frame of reference that is plainly Felis catus but claimed as Panthera pardus' story is a staple of local news outlets in the UK.
Some do grow far larger than normal I have seen some huge cats in western Queensland, I could not see how any big cat species could become established here in Australia and survive into a population
Feral cats have been shot that came within the size range of leopards, ie they were as big as a small leopard.
Mr J is quite correct after muti generations of living wild with only the strongest living to breed the Feral cats have reverted back into a wild form to fill a nich to become one of the most destructive animals for Australian wildlife ever and yes I have seen some very large freak size cats
This is interesting if a bit disappointing. I was personally hoping that the Yanks bringing over a mountain lion as a "mascot" would have some validity.
Feral cats can be up to 60 cm in length and can weight up to about 6.5 kg. Compare that with a small leopard at 90cm in length and weighing 37kg. Could you honestly compare the two, even from a distance?
Male leopards can weigh as little as 37kg and females as little as 28kg. One large feral cat shot at Dargo in Victoria weighed 35kg and was more than 1.5m long. Leopards of course can be larger, up to 96kg has been recorded. However where such leopards exist they regularly kill and eat humans and dogs, as well as storing their prey high up in trees. Neither behavior has been recorded in Australia.
The huge cat shot at Dargo in 2005 was said by the hunter to be 1.5m long and to weigh an estimated 35kg. However he only kept the tail as a trophy. The tail measured 60cm long (!). Tests reveal super-sized feral cat There are photos of huge feral cats shot in Australia on Google Images.
I can´t believe any feral domestic cat can weight 35 kg, that is simply impossible. No matter if in Australia or elsewhere. Male Carpathian lynx in best condition will have 20 - 25 kg. An adult female wolf (roadkill) found last spring around here had 28 kg and was in good condition.
It may come to that. I guess implied in this question is the suggestion this record may be fake, and indeed it may well be. The shooter disposed of the body, however as @Chlidonias said, the tail does exist. It is 900mm long and has been DNA tested and found to have come from a domestic cat. Thus there is substantially more evidence for this giant than big cat enthusiasts have been able to supply. To my mind the big cat proponents have a number of problems in establishing their credibility. Mountain lions: The most popular theory is that they were brought across as mascots for American troops during WW2. I can believe maybe one may have been released and lived out it's life in the Australian bush but multiple animas, enough to establish a population? Where are the records of these animals on the American side? If any number of mountain lions were brought in by American troops they must have been mentioned in disciplinary records, unit histories, or personal memoirs or letters. Most observed "big cats" seem to be black. It turns out that black mountain lions are extremely rare, so rare I could find only one reference to a black mountain lion on the internet. Leopards: "Black panthers" are common amongst leopards in Malaya so that is at least a logical place of origin. But how did they get into the Australian bush. Zoos are out as there have been no zoos in the areas people claim to see these animals. Circuses are proposed but leopards were never popular animals in circuses as they are difficult to train. In any case there are no records of leopards escaping from circuses, no official records, press reports or even stories handed down from Grandpop's days in the circus. And both species face issues relating to population dynamics: It would be very difficult for a species with such a small population base to both survive and to remain at a very low level. If we are to believe reports there are multiple isolated populations of big cats distributed across the Australian continent. How is this possible? And finally how come we have never seen a "big cat" shot, trapped, become roadkill or caught on any of the thousands of trail cameras now out there? Despite these problems with "big cats" people would rather believe they exist than acknowledge that after 200+ years of evolution and with a population of 1.5 to 5 million animals feral cats can evolved into a substantially larger animal than the domestic cat.
Having spend quite a bit of time years ago in the bush and have taken out feral cats, one must understand these cats do evolve after generation after generation and do revert back to a wild type and adapt to fill a nich, I can understand your view but they are out there and just about every where with nothing to stop them keep adapting as only the best are going to breed on adapting as they go, There is little to no value for anyone to keep culled cats many travel light in the outback
If you had 35 kg feral cats in Australia, your farmers would be the first to find out. Lynx will take out grown female red deer, adult sheep is just a snack. Your imaginary 35 kg feral cat would have enough power to kill cattle and horses. Cats have different way to kill and eat its prey than dogs/dingo, it can be recognized.
In agreement with everything said by MRJ above. The UK of course has its myths and legends too, and as a zoo we are pretty much in the forefront of press and public interest, and often the first point of contact for information and help. Of course hunters in the Australian outback would not really be able to retrieve a carcass; but the one consistent thing across all of these reports is the total lack of photographic evidence. Given the wide use of camera traps and the fact that the whole population of the planet seems to carry a mobile phone capable to taking excellent pictures, and there is now a culture of taking and recording footage, selfies, whatever - this lack of any photographic record is suspicious in its own right. I can understand why loggers, trappers, ranchers, and vested interests such as mining, even locals, would not want to go public with pictures of a Thylacine in remote Tasmania, even if they knew it existed (maybe, especially if they knew...?) - but there is no logic I can see to with-hold photographic evidence of 'big' cats.
Its a case of you have no idea of life in the Australian bush do you really believe the average farmer worries about a feral cats weight roaming around on ranches bigger than some European counties, Its easy to be a arm chair expert sitting back in your chair on the other side of the world
