EXCLUSIVE TO THE DINOSAUR MAILING LIST

["dinotracker" <dinotracker@earthlink.net>]

EXCLUSIVE TO THE DINOSAUR MAILING LIST:

    First, please indulge me for some history.  Some of you on this list
have learned about my discovery over seven years ago of Maryland's
first-known Early Cretaceous (lower Cretaceous) dinosaur tracks, and of my
subsequent collection of hundreds of self-found tracks from tiny to
gigantic, and diverse trackways, incorporating what is surely over fifteen
dinosaurian ichnospecies (meaning in this case trace species of distinct
footprint type), such as those evidently made by: hypsilophodontids
(including two diagnostic manus/pes sets); iguanadontians (characteristic
manus and pes imprints); ankylosaurids (detailed manus and pes imprints,
being possibly nodosaurian); sauropods (detailed manus and pes imprints and
a wide range of lengths, from 4 cm, to 67 cm); basal ceratopsids -- O.K.
let's not get into whether that's exactly the right word. :-} -- (distinct
manus and pes imprints); and a wide variety of distinctly different (wherein
the formal differences are not attributable to substrate or motion variants,
etc.) theropodan, including seven footprints that may with good reason be
attributed to dromeosaurs (five of them are single tracks, but two
footprints are associated and sequential, left, then right).

    And to make this brief history more complete, one must mention:
Seventeen Early Cretaceous tracks attributable to pterosaurs, representing
at least two distinct ichnospecies (based on very distinctive pedal
morphology).  Included in this count are two manus/pes sets.  There are also
at least five seemingly crocodilian tracks, being isolated pes and manus
ichnites. Finally, there are five distinctly different track types that may
be reasonably attributed to mammals, including a single type where two
associated manus imprints are seen within a much larger reptile track.

    All the Early Cretaceous ichnites fall within a time beginning possibly
as early as the latest Barremian through the Aptian, of the Potomac Group.

    So, now that you have a refreshed glimpse of the earlier story, let me
relate the rest of the story, the  (to me) exciting NEWS, exclusive to the
dinosaur mailing list:

    Almost all of Maryland's known Late Cretaceous (upper Cretaceous)
sediments consists of marine material in which very limited and
unarticulated dinosaur bones have been found.  However, for several years I
have been encouraged by the find of a piece of upper Cretaceous substrate
consisting of small, parallel wave forms clearly produced in shallow, fresh
water.  In the environment where that sediment formed, I felt pretty certain
that a dinosaur stepping there would have left tracks, and vowed to someday
find a Late Cretaceous track or tracks, "...if there are any out there, as I
suspect".  Any of you who have been at my talks have heard me discuss that
goal.

    Well, last week, that aspiration was fulfilled, by my finding what -- so
far as I can determine -- is the first dinosaur track to emerge from
Maryland's Late Cretaceous.  I am still researching the age of the track,
but it is safe to say that it is at least forty-five to fifty million years
younger than the Early Cretaceous tracks.

    Maryland's first know Late Cretaceous dinosaur track is three-toed, 7.5
cm long, and a maximum of 5 cm wide, and was made by a right-side foot.
Now, the big surprise:  It might reasonably be attributed to a dromeosaurid,
and there is ample evidence that a digit II 'terrible claw' deeply
penetrated the then-soft substrate, leaving evidence that the motion of that
cycle-shaped claw created an appreciably different trace from what one sees
produced by more ordinary dinosaur toes, including digits III and IV of this
dinosaur.

    To make things even nicer, we do not need to rely solely on a top view
of the track to interpret it. As it happens, the substrate is now very hard
and tough, but thin, and one can see, in three dimensions, a really
wonderful view of what the three claws did simply by looking at the under
side.  I shall not try to further describe that or interpret it (it is
complex), leaving that for a technical paper.

    I should point out that this Late Cretaceous track which I am presently
attributing, with good reason, to a dromeosaurid is distinctly different to
the seven Early Cretaceous tracks (so very similar to each other) which I
attribute to a (different, of course) dromeosaur.

    Please do not ask me to divulge the specific formation or even the
general locality from which this find has come.  I am keeping that quite for
now, in order to protect the site. Without that information, I doubt anyone
would ever find it.

    If any one of you can provide me with links or information concerning
reliable skeletal images of the feet of Late Cretaceous dromeosaurids from
North America, your help would be greatly appreciated.

    In closing, I stress that it would be irresponsible of anyone out there
to try to discount what I have reported without having personally visited
the collection to check on it for yourself.  The door of our living room
museum has always been open to any professional paleontologists or
paleoichnologists, and many have come, sometimes even on rather short
notice.  Even if admittedly skeptical, you would be welcome, as it is a
pleasure to share the wonder's of Maryland's Cretaceous world.  Bona fide
students who can demonstrate a record of serious interest in paleontology or
paleoichnology are also welcomed after I have had a chance to do a little
background check.  If anyone is interested, email a request telling me about
yourself, background and interest, and we can take it from there.

     Thanks for 'listening' to an enthusiastic and admittedly excited
amateur paleoichnologist to whom a new door for exploration has been opened.

    Ray Stanford

"You know my method.  It is founded upon the observance of trifles." --
Sherlock Holmes in The Boscombe Valley Mystery