From: Eustaquio Anddrea Patounas <socex@terra.com.br>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 22:58:49 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 07:09:12 -0400
Subject: Animal Mutilations: What We Don't Know



Source: National Institute for Discovery Science

http://www.nidsci.org/articles/animal2.html

October 09, 2000


Animal Mutilations: What We Don't Know

George E. Onet, D.V.M., Ph. D.

For over thirty years, ranchers, veterinarians and official
investigators have been searching for explanations for animal
mutilation cases. Local authorities, FBI, Bureaus of Special
Investigators, and ad-hoc committees have conducted intense
investigations to gain more understanding about these phenomena.
Unfortunately, the results of these investigations did not
provide the public with solid answers to their questions.
Ranchers continued to feel helpless, confused, and frustrated,
while their resulting economic losses caused serious concerns.
In 1975, Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm called animal
mutilations "one of the greatest outrage in the history of
western cattle industry." (1)

Scientists involved with researching animal mutilations have
attempted to provide logical explanations, and in some cases,
these explanations were contradicted by the evidence gathered by
police investigators. Generally, scientists attributed
mutilations to commonly accepted factors such as natural causes,
predators, and scavengers. These explanations have caused
dissatisfaction among ranchers and some investigators.

Although some official investigators had been around livestock
all their lives, they stated that they have never seen the
characteristics that are now attributed to animal mutilation.
They concluded that at least a part of the animal mutilations
were "definitely not made by predators." (1) Sometimes,
investigators were puzzled by their findings. Even today, some
animal mutilation cases are simply classified as unexplainable.
(2)

The investigation of animal mutilations and the peculiar
circumstances in which they occur require gathering of physical
evidence immediately after the event, but this is not always
possible. Published data on animal mutilations have been used to
establish patterns. (3,4,5,6,7,8)

Those who decide to study the subject are still faced with
several crucial unanswered questions. Some of the most
significant are:

What causes the death of animals that are found mutilated? Some
evidence suggests that the mutilation takes place after the
animal has died. Otherwise, the body and the surrounding areas
would be stained with a great deal of blood because if the
animal were alive, the heart would continue to pump blood
through the open vessels. Reports reveal that compared to the
severity of the wounds, blood traces are scarce.

Natural causes of death in animals include: infectious diseases,
severe accidents, poisoning, bloat, birth-related accidents,
predators, electrocution, etc. which can be diagnosed through
macroscopic examination and laboratory analyses. In most
mutilation cases, it has been reported that animals died
suddenly. This is based on the testimony that they were seen by
the owner in good health and body condition shortly before being
found dead.

If predators caused the death, teeth marks would be found around
the hocks and the nose because those areas are usually attacked
first. Tissues would be torn, arteries and veins would be open
and bleeding would take placewhich would be easy to see.
Especially during the winter season, blood traces are easily
detected on snow covered terrain. In other seasons, the soil and
vegetation in the vicinity of the carcass would show tracks,
hoof prints, and/or signs of ante-mortem strugglesigns which are
difficult to miss.

During an investigation, authorities will conduct a thorough
examination of the mutilated body and the surrounding areas
using more or less standard procedures. Their findings are
documented in legal reports. If no signs of predator attack or
ante-mortem struggle are revealed, then the question is: how did
the animal(s) die? One answer is natural causes, but if natural
causes were not evident, the animals may have been euthanized
somehow and mutilated later. What could have silently killed
them without leaving any traces on the body and in the inflicted
tissues?

Regardless of the cause of death, normally there is an agony
phase during which the animals display contractions in different
parts of the body, especially in the legs and in the neck
muscles. Pedaling, for instance, will cause tracks on the
soilwhich would be noticeable. If tracks are not present, then
the animal(s) probably died instantly without going through the
agony phase. Possible causes of an instant death are lightning,
gun-shots or paralyzing factors. Weather conditions,
characteristic lesions on the body, and signs in the surrounding
area can confirm or exclude the possibility of lightning. Gun-
shots can be easily detected through a thorough necropsy.
Paralyzing factors are more difficult to identify. However, a
laboratory examination would have a good chance to clarify such
a suspicion. If none of these possibilities exist, what else
could be responsible for the death?

Special attention should be paid to situations when more than
one animal is found dead under similar circumstances. When three
or four animals are found in the same position, as if they were
walking in the same direction, or when the position of their
legs suggests that they were running, then the question remains
what caused the sudden death?

Some reports have mentioned that mutilated animals were found
laying in the middle of perfectly round areas where the
vegetation looked as if it had been burned. What could have
caused this strange occurrence? Other reports mention that large
allegedly mutilated animals (cows, steers) had all four legs
fractured with no plausible explanation. If one or two legs had
been broken, it could be easier to understand.

According to a recent report (private communication, Dec. 1996),
issued by the Criminal Investigations Division in Fort Pierce,
Florida, tissue and blood samples from a mutilated animal were
submitted to a state diagnostic laboratory. By using gas
chromatography, they found three unusual compounds in the liver
and the aortic blood: Furaltadone (an antibacterial compound),
Oxipronolol acetate (a beta blocker), and Amfetaminil (a
psychotropic drug).(9) How did these chemicals get into the
blood stream when the necropsy report did not mention signs of
intravenous injection? Their presence suggests, however, human
intervention.

What is the logical explanation for the missing body parts and
the way in which they were removed? The most plausible
interpretation which has been reflected in veterinary reports is
that animal mutilations are the work of scavengers. The kind of
tissues removed suggests a preference for soft easily accessible
body parts (teats, udder, tongue, external genitalia, ears,
etc.). In such situations, it is likely that the animals died of
natural causes and were scavenged afterwards. However,
scavengers do not kill animals.

A strange feature in animal mutilation reports is the apparent
precision by which the tissues were cut. Examination of the
remaining tissues gave investigators the strong impression that
they were cut with surgical precision. However, how this was
performed could not be established with certainty. In some
instances, the edges of the remaining skin looked so regularly
serrated that it could not be caused by a predators bite or
tearing.(8) For example, portions of 20-25 cm skin edges were
straight and regularly serrated, which suggests the use of an
instrument. What kind of surgical instruments could have been
used to leave this kind of cut?

In some cases, it was suspected that laser beams were used.(7,8)
However, with currently available laser technology, cutting a 3-
5 mm thick cow hide would require equipment weighing several
thousand pounds. How could that equipment have been deployed and
used in usually remote areas without being seen or leaving
tracks in the surrounding environment?

Is the blood in the mutilated animals indeed missing? Some
reports have stated that blood was missing from the body or was
only present in small amounts. In 1971, an Idaho veterinarian
necropsied a purportedly mutilated horse and found that all
internal organs, including the heart and the lungs, had been
completely desiccated.(8) At necropsy, by compressing
parenchymal tissues such as liver, lung, and kidney, one would
expect that a certain amount of blood is expressed even if post-
mortem coagulation or hemolysis had occurred. This is true under
normal conditions when animals die without being exsanguinated.
If massive ante-mortem bleeding had taken place, these organs
would appear pale and the amount of blood obtained by
compression is significantly reduced. But if there is no
indication of extensive internal or external hemorrhage which is
capable of draining blood from the circulatory system, then the
lack of blood looks peculiar.

The main task would be to establish whether the blood was
removed by artificial means. A thorough examination of the
central and peripheral circulatory system, including the heavily
vascularized tissues, should establish the correlation between
the macroscopic aspect of the tissues and the microscopic
images, which give more detailed information on the status of
the capillary vessels and their blood load.

What are the morphological changes in the tissues from mutilated
animals? In some cases, tissue samples were examined in well-
established diagnostic laboratories. Histology performed on over
thirty skin samples from the excision lines by Dr. Altshuller, a
Colorado pathologist, revealed lesions suggesting overheating.
Although there were no data on the degree of autolysis of the
samples, collagen and hemoglobin were significantly changed in
the proximity of the excision. (7,8)

In a 1991 report, the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory of
Corvallis (Oregon State University) determined that skin
sections from a suspected mutilated steer showed lesions
consistent with electro-surgical excision.(10)

Another element that could bring a better understanding of these
kinds of processes is the bacterial load of tissues. Post-mortem
decomposition usually involves a variety of aerobic and
anaerobic bacteria which cause tissues to decay. Compared to the
surface of the affected skin, where numerous bacteria can be
identified in the areas of coagulation necrosis, there is no
such bacterial population. What could have caused such
morphological skin changes? Only further systematic histological
and molecular biology examinations, to study intimate cellular
and chemical changes, could give valid clues on how these
lesions were inflicted.

What causes the domestic and wild animals in the vicinity of
mutilated animals to behave strangely? Anecdotal reports from
ranchers indicate that after an animal has been mutilated the
rest of the herd behaves strangely and will keep their distance
from the carcass for days. They look afraid and are in visible
distress. A Utah rancher reported that the horse he was riding
became very nervous when it saw a mutilated cow. The horse
started to snort and would not go near the cow.

Wild animals, including predators, scavengers, and birds seem to
display a similar reaction to mutilated carcasses. According to
ranchers, mutilated animals will remain untouched even in areas
where wild animals are commonly seen. On a Utah ranch, a carcass
of an allegedly mutilated cow was in the same position with
intact hide, except for the initial missing body parts, for over
9 months. The animal was laying in a wooded area which was
populated with coyotes and other predators.

Animals that die of natural causes do not seem to trigger the
same type of reaction from other animals. On a recent trip to a
Nevada ranch (Dec. 1996), a dead cow was found on a pasture
close to the highway. The cause of death appeared to be
distocia. Part of an oversized calf was engaged in the pelvic
tract, but the birth could not be finalized. The exhausting
efforts of the cow resulted in her death. The carcass was not
removed for over ten days. Animals grazing in the immediate area
were not bothered by the carcass.

What causes the disappearance of animals? The disappearance of
animals can be attributed to a variety of causes such as
rustling, running away, predator attacks, etc.

When animals are stolen, a legal investigation is usually
initiated. In some cases, tracks or other clues lead to a firm
conclusion that the animals were stolen even if perpetrators are
not identified.

When animals run away, there are indicative signs such as broken
fences and tracks. Later recovery of the animals is a chance to
verify such situations.

When predators are the cause of animal disappearance, different
tracks are left behind such as blood, hair, skin portions, body
parts, foot prints, etc. In most cases, it is not difficult to
come to a conclusive answer from these findings.

Reports of unusual animal disappearances have been filed with
sheriffs departments and other investigators.(1) Certain cases
were finally clarified, but there were situations in which no
traces could be found and the cases remained unsolved. In the
last couple of years, there have been some reports of
disappearance of large numbers of animals under circumstances in
which theft was ruled out by authorities.

Could individuals or cult organizations be involved with animal
mutilations? Over the years, investigators have focused on the
possibility of certain individuals or groups being involved with
animal mutilations. Officials have even obtained confessions.
However, the confessions came from imprisoned persons who were
seeking lenient treatment. If satanic cults were involved, this
would not explain the widespread and high incidence of
mutilation cases throughout the years. In spite of all police,
FBI, and other investigators efforts to gather solid evidence,
no one has ever been arrested or convicted for such a crime.(1)

In order to answer these questions, thorough clinical, morpho-
pathological and laboratory examinations need to be conducted.
Only by carefully analyzing the results of such scientific
research can pertinent conclusions be drawn. By looking for
intimate changes in tissues from mutilated animals, down to cell
and molecular levels, can valuable findings be correlated to
help us define what in fact had happened to these animals. The
first requirement to accomplish such a goal is to have
necropsies performed as soon as possible after the animals
death, and to have proper tissue samples collected for complex
laboratory analyses. The second requirement is to perform an
expanded array of tests when the animal tissue samples are in
pristine condition. No matter what the outcome of an in-depth
research on animal mutilations would be, economic losses and
ranchers worries make searching for the answers to these
questions perfectly justified.

An important conclusion from a recent National Institute for
Discovery Science (NIDS) survey indicates that necropsies were
never performed and samples were not collected for laboratory
analysis on any of the reported animal mutilation cases. This
suggests an urgent need for veterinarians involvement in
investigating animal mutilations.

We hope that we will acquire more information on this matter
with future endeavors. By expanding our inquiry, and with the
help of bovine veterinary practitioners, we hope to have a
broader picture of the facts as far as incidence, patterns and
ways of investigating such cases are concerned. Unfortunately,
there still lingers among veterinary practitioners the practice
of choosing the most conventional explanations, even if no
concrete evidence supports them. This tends to obscure the real
circumstances and causes of animal mutilations. By preferring to
follow commonly accepted diagnostics, veterinarians are inclined
to simplify the process of justifying the cause of death and
avoid being exposed to additional, sometimes unpleasant
questioning.

Acknowledgment: Sincerest thanks to the President of NIDS, Mr.
Robert T. Bigelow, for his steady support and to the NIDS staff
for promptly reviewing and editing this material and for their
valuable suggestions.


SELECTED REFERENCES

  1. Vallee J., Messengers Of Deception, And-Or Press, Berkeley,
Ca. 1979, 165-188

  2. Blokesmith P., UFO - The Complete Sightings, Appendix 6,
Animal Mutilations, Barns & Noble, Inc., New York, USA, 1980,
162-163

  3. Clark J., Strange Cases Of Cattle Killings, Fate, 1974, 27,
8, 79-90

  4. Clark J., Books, News And Reviews, Reality Mutilation, Fate,
1984, 37

  5. Clifton C. S., Mutilation Madness, Fate, 1988, 41, 6, 60-70

  6. Hall R. H., Livestock Mutilations: A National Mystery,
Zeletic, Scholar, 1988, 7, 43-51

  7. Howe L. M., An Alien Harvest, Pioneer Printing, Cheyenne,
WY. 1993, 62-102

  8. Howe L. M., Glimpses Of Other Realities, Pioneer
Printing,Cheyenne, WY, 193, 126-195

  9. Florida Department Of Agriculture & Consumer Services,
Kissinnee Diagnostic Laboratory, Results Of Laboratory
Examination, 11.25.1996

10. Rae M. A., Report On Laboratory Examination, Corvallis, OR.,
Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, College Of Veterinary Medicine
Oregon State University, Feb. 22 ,1991