Chris Mooney is a visiting associate in the 
Friends back in my home state of New York have been telling me about a 'monster' that supposedly washed up on the beach in Montauk, Long Island. Intrigued, I checked out the now famous photograph after the story appeared on CNN. Take a look:
Unfortunately, while I love a good creature mystery as much as anyone, I'm disappointed. The first thing to note is we have no perspective for scale and I'd be surprised if it was more than a couple feet long. Further, what's being called a 'beak' are more likely canine teeth, which suggest a decomposing carnivore. Now I haven't checked in with the guys at Zooillogix yet, but my guess is--despite that our 'monster' looks like a critter from Harry Potter--it's probably a dog or raccoon.
What do readers think?
Life Science
Comments
Another image at http://www.flickr.com/photos/netsky_/2723342764/
Looks like a dog.
Posted by: MightyMu | August 2, 2008 2:05 PM
I think it doesn't look very nice so I'm off to another website thank you.
Douglas Coker
Enfield Green Party
UK
Posted by: Douglas Coker | August 2, 2008 2:11 PM
MightyMu,
Newsday featured the second photo as well. It's a different angle, but what strikes me odd is that forelimbs in the first image appear bound, while in the second (presumably earlier) shot, they are not.
If this is indeed the same animal, the change implies someone--who may have insight into the species identity--had a close encounter with the body in the interim.
Posted by: Sheril R. Kirshenbaum | August 2, 2008 2:21 PM
I have no idea what kind of animal it is but it is clear in the pictures that the bones of the skull are visible in the nose area not a beak. The head definitely resembles a dog to me, even considering that the nose is gone the head doesn't seem angular enough for a raccoon or other wild predator that you would find in the area.
Posted by: Noadi | August 2, 2008 2:44 PM
I saw a Jeff Corwin interview and he said it was either a raccoon or a dog, but probably a raccoon. I googled "raccoon skull" and here are pictures that are pretty much identical to the "beak" that has everyone all het up.
http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Racoon/racoon.htm
http://www.skullsunlimited.com/Raccoon_Skull.html
There's no size context for the picture and few city folk have even seen a live raccoon, let alone a partially decomposed body.
Posted by: Bob | August 2, 2008 3:24 PM
Seem like a dog to me as a first impression... but after watching the raccoon skull pictures I'm not so sure now.
Posted by: Agersomnia | August 2, 2008 4:04 PM
We here at Zooillogix believe the Montauk Monster to be some sort of viral marketing campaign that has been tremendously successful promoting dead bloated dogcoons.
If it is not in fact a marketing hoax, then it is obviously a dead baby griffen of the wingless variety.
Posted by: Andrew | August 2, 2008 5:42 PM
Split the difference. Maybe it's a raccoon dog, all the way from Asia...
Posted by: pough | August 3, 2008 12:45 PM
Turtle without a shell
Posted by: Karen | August 3, 2008 4:04 PM
Isn't it possible that it's fake? And part of a marketing ploy for something? I heard it might be for some comedy show ... or cartoon? Whatever it is, YIKES.
Posted by: Marilyn Walker | August 4, 2008 11:20 AM
This creature is clearly a dead sea turtle without it's shell. I can't believe people would think otherwise. It has a fin in the front, and its face looks exactly that of a turtle, or reptile. It's skin is purple, like something was once covering it, a shell, duh.
Posted by: Kristin | December 21, 2008 12:37 PM