The Frasercot pelt originally owned (see Epilogue)
by Mark Fraser (© Dr Karl Shuker)
In a short Tetrapod Zoology online blog post of 13 August
2007 (click here),
English palaeontologist Dr Darren Naish, who also has a longstanding interest
in mystery animals, discussed a very eyecatching, enigmatic
pelt owned by Big Cats in Britain (BCIB) founder Mark Fraser. As revealed by a
colour photograph of it in his post, this most distinctive long-furred pelt sported
a beautiful pattern of dark scallop-shaped markings resembling overlapping
fish-scales, but which bore no resemblance to the pelage of any known mammal.
This interesting post swiftly attracted numerous responses from
readers, most of whom favoured various feline identities, including king
cheetah, aberrant leopard, and woolly cheetah (a freak cheetah form reported
from South Africa during the late 1800s and represented by a living specimen
exhibited at London Zoo during that same period), although viverrid and hyaena
identities were also mooted. Alternatively, could it be a fake – but, if so,
how was it done? After all, surely it would take great skill to paint a pelt so
meticulously with such a detailed pattern...wouldn't it?
A chromolithograph from 1877 of the woolly cheetah
briefly exhibited at London
Zoo at that time (public domain)
In his blog post, Darren dubbed this mystifying pelt a
Frasercot, in honour of its owner. He also noted that another pelt of this same
type had been doing the rounds of antique fairs in Britain.
Moreover, in October 2009 Darren was in Libya, conducting some
palaeontological fieldwork, and while visiting a market in Tripoli he was
surprised to see a Frasercot pelt for sale there, hanging down on one of the
stalls. It was too expensive for him to purchase, and in any case he was
naturally concerned as to whether he would be permitted to bring such an item
through customs, so he had to content himself with photographing it (a photo of
it duly appeared in a Tetrapod Zoology blog article by Darren uploaded
on 16 November 2009 – click here to see the photo).
Greatly intrigued by these pelts, in February 2012 I conducted
some internet research concerning them. While doing so, I discovered a couple
of photos of a smaller but otherwise identical pelt (alongside what looked like
a second, larger one, but which was partly concealed from view by other furs)
among the wares on the hand-cart of a fur vendor in Xiamen (aka Amoy), which is
a major city in Fujian, southeastern China (these photos are viewable online here).
The photos had been snapped on 31 October 2006 by a professional writer (name
unknown to me) hailing from Mendocino in California, USA, but based in Xiamen
during that time. Under her Flickr username 'Room With A View', she had later
uploaded them into one of her online Flickr albums.
Further investigations revealed that such pelts were actually
from domestic dogs but had been skilfully imbued in some way with the
distinctive Frasercot-style scalloping in order for the traders to pass them
off as exotic big cat pelts and sell them for lucrative amounts to unsuspecting
Western tourists. When I contacted Darren concerning my findings, he confirmed
that he had made the same discovery in relation to the Libyan pelt. Indeed, on
15 December 2010, one of his blog's readers, with the username NaturePunk, had
provided the following highly illuminating response to Darren's post regarding
the Tripoli pelt, verifying my own independent findings:
This is a dog skin that
has been dyed to look like a cat skin. Common thing for vendors to do in Asian
countries where dogs are killed for fur. I used to see this a lot when I lived
there, and they would sell the dyed pelts along with pelts which were left
un-altered. They see this sort of thing all the time at the Wildlife Forensics
Center in Ashland [Oregon] where I live now.
Here are some links to
photos of vendors selling dog pelts on the streets, trying to convince people
that they're either wolf or big cat skins, a few of which are dyed with the
EXACT same patterns as the pelt pictured above [i.e. the Tripoli pelt].
One of the links provided was the same as the one that I'd also
discovered (and which I've given earlier here), to the photo of the Xiamen fur
vendor with the pelts. A second one was to a photo that had been snapped and
uploaded onto Flickr by Tennessee-born teacher Bill Benson, now living in
Tianjin, northern China. It depicted another Chinese fur vendor, this time in
Dalian (a big city and seaport in northeastern China's Liaoning Province),
whose hand-cart bore a fully laid-out Frasercot pelt. Unfortunately, that
particular photo is no longer accessible online (but I have a copy of it on
file). Apparently, the vendor had tried to pass it off to Benson as a leopard
skin (which it certainly wasn't – no leopard possesses the Frasercot scalloping
pattern), but Benson affirmed that it was a dyed dog skin.
Close-up of Mark's Frasercot pelt, showing its
distinctive scalloping pattern (© Dr Karl Shuker)
Even so, I was still unclear as to the manner in which such an
intricate pattern was applied to the pelts, although I wondered whether it may
involve a stencil or something similar in order to produce such a precise
effect.
At much the same time, I learnt from British naturalist and
taxidermist Jonathan McGowan that he had included on his website
(www.thenaturalstuff.co.uk) a photo of the Frasercot pelt that had been doing
the rounds of the antique fairs - he saw it at one in Lincolnshire. Of particular
interest, however, was that Jonathan was convinced that this particular pelt on
which the scalloping had been applied was not from a dog but from a large cat,
probably a unicoloured species such as a puma. Memorably, the stall-holder
claimed that it was from a rare species that she called a fishscale leopard! On
5 March 2012, Jonathan kindly provided me with the following additional
details:
The pelt I found was at
the RAF Swinderby antique fair in Lincolnshire about three years ago. I at
first thought it was a painted dog pelt and asked the lady if I could have a
look. On doing so I noticed the short legs with typical cat like short bristly
fur on the ankles. The feet were cut off unfortunately but the head was on and
it had typical cat shape with leopard like ears and big long whiskers, although
few in number but not like small dog whiskers. The woman said that it came from
South Africa and mentioned that even the dark scales have the skin underneath
also black which proves that it is real! I replied that this does indeed
suggest that it is a fake as dark pigmented skin does not correspond with dark
hairs. It had nothing to do with it, but looking closely at it, only a few of
the scallops had dark pigment under them anyway! And when I held the fur up to
the light, I could see that each individual hair was black tipped correctly
with lighter underneath. If it were a fake, I wondered just why some very
skilled person went to the trouble of painting every individual hair just to produce
this! However I am well aware of the Chinese ingenuity in regards to faking all
kinds of things. Just maybe a mutant leopard did have such scalloping fish
scale spots! I don't know but it is unlikely and I would rather see it as a
hoax as a genuine thing. She wanted £200 for it and I had already spent my
quota for the day.
Messaging Mark Fraser online via Facebook also on 5 March
concerning his Frasercot specimen, I learnt that its head was distinctly
dog-like in appearance rather than cat-like, and that he had purchased it from
Coventry-based taxidermy enthusiast Martin Cotterill, who in turn informed me
that he had bought it several years ago from a dealer at Swinderby Antiques
Fair! In other words, exactly the same fair where Jonathan subsequently saw the
one that he photographed.
As Mark's pelt is dog-headed whereas the one seen by Jonathan
was cat-headed, they are evidently not the same specimen, but it seems
reasonable to assume that they were from the same dealer – otherwise it is a
truly formidable coincidence that two such similar yet extremely unusual pelts
should come up for sale at the very same antique fair. If so, does this mean
that the dealer had a regular supply of them, or had merely bought the two
together as a one-off purchase? Whatever the answer, the very fact that a
dog-headed pelt and a cat-headed pelt exhibited precisely the same
highly-unusual scalloping pattern provided, I felt, conclusive evidence that
the pattern was indeed applied artificially rather than being natural.
Three photos of Mark's Frasercot pelt, showing its
pelt, head, and a paw (© Mark Fraser)
Mark uploaded some photos of his pelt's head and feet onto
Facebook, and these were certainly canine rather than feline in shape. On 10
March 2012, moreover, I was able to confirm this directly, as well as ascertaining
its total length (55 in from nose-tip
to tail-tip) when Mark very kindly sent the pelt to me on loan in order for me
to examine it. I was also able to see for myself that the artistic workmanship
of the applied scalloping pattern was of an extremely high standard – but the
biggest surprise, and revelation, was still to come.
I showed it to my mother, Mary Shuker, who
had always been very knowledgeable regarding clothes and fashion in general,
and she told me straight away that she'd seen real and artificial (faux) fur
coats with this same pattern in the past, and also with other exotic-looking
patterns. She then took out of one of her wardrobes a faux fur jacket with an
extraordinary pattern on it, totally unlike that of any real species but which,
when I examined it, could be seen to have been applied in precisely the same
way as the pattern on Mark's Frasercot pelt – i.e. with the pattern visible on
the upper surface of the hairs but not on the undersurface.
Mom's faux fur jacket
exhibiting artificial patterning (© Dr Karl Shuker)
Moreover, when I asked her how such a
pattern could have been applied, she told me that she knew how – because the
person from whom she'd bought this jacket had told her, informing her that it
was applied by a machine that physically stamps the pattern onto the faux pelt
using a form of heated inked plate bearing the pattern. And so, with that
all-important disclosure, my mother duly solved the mystery of the Frasercot
pelts!
My mother, Mary Shuker (© Dr
Karl Shuker)
Meanwhile, for absolute confirmation of its
taxonomic identity, Mark had kindly given me permission to snip some sample
hairs from his pelt and submit them for formal trichological examination and
identification. This I did, sending them to Danish zoologist Lars Thomas, based
at the Zoological Museum of the University of Copenhagen, who has considerable
experience in hair analysis. And to ensure absolute objectivity during their
examination, I did not provide him with any information whatsoever as to the source
of the hair samples.
However, when Lars provided me with his findings, and which here
on ShukerNature are now revealed for the very first time online, I was
extremely surprised. This was because his initial, provisional examination of
them had indicated to him that they were definitely not felid, but likely not
canid either, seeming instead to be most probably of mustelid origin, and, more
specifically, from the genus Mustela (containing weasels, stoats,
ferrets, and polecats). Yet he was far from happy about this, because the hairs
had also presented him with various anomalous features that he had not
anticipated finding.
In particular, their pigment granules looked very strange, and Lars
wondered if they had received chemical treatment, because a lot of the colour in outlying
regions of the hairs seemed unnatural, and therefore had possibly been dyed.
Moreover, he mentioned to me that chemical treatment can make pigment granules
split, thus making canid or felid hairs look like mustelid hairs, because pigment
granules in the latter are clearly separate, whereas they are not in canid and
felid hairs.
I then provided
Lars with full details of the hair samples' origin, knowing that he had heard
of (but never examined) the Frasercot pelts, and I also sent him some
photographs of Mark's specimen. After receiving my news and pictures, Lars then
conducted a more detailed examination of the hair samples, which included sectioning
one of the hairs – whereupon he discovered that it was round in cross-section.
Crucially, this eliminated mustelids, because their hairs are oval or
elliptical in cross-section. He also discovered that some of the hairs showed
signs of heat damage and of being compressed, some of them being completely
flat in very specific areas, as if they had been under pressure.
Needless to say,
this would be the case if the edge of a heated stamping device had been applied
to them – which in turn is exactly what my mother had described concerning the
artificial application of the Frasercot patterning on fur coats that she had
seen. In addition, when Lars rubbed some of the darkest hairs with ethanol and
various other solvents on a Q-tip, he was actually able to rub off some of the
colouring. Consequently, he informed me that he now had no doubt that the hairs
had indeed been somehow artificially treated and dyed.
The scalloped markings of Mark's Frasercot pelt (©
Dr Karl Shuker)
An independent confirmation of his findings came unexpectedly
when, while subsequently browsing online in the hope of finding further photos
of Frasercot pelts, I revisited Bill Benson's Flickr albums and discovered that
although his earlier-mentioned missing Frasercot pelt photo had not reappeared
there, a second one was present in a different album by him. He had snapped it on
26 September 2006, and it shows an extremely large Frasercot pelt being held up
by its street vendor, somewhere in eastern China (it is viewable here).
However, whereas all previous Frasercot pelts seen by me have exhibited a
pristine pattern, in this one the pattern is very patchy in appearance, with
certain portions faded or even entirely worn off, clearly demonstrating that it
had been artificially applied. Benson affirmed again that these pelts are
indeed dyed dog furs, and he also noted that poor vendors from western China
come to eastern China in the hope of selling their wares.
Just as the
riddle of the Frasercot pelts finally seemed solved, however, a further mystery
arose concerning them. Prior to receiving the results of Lars's examination of
the hair samples from Mark's specimen, I had discovered online a photograph of yet
another Frasercot-patterned pelt – but crucially, unlike all previous ones
encountered by me, this was not a detached pelt. Instead, it was a live
dog, yet whose fur bore the characteristic fish-scale scalloping of the
Frasercot pattern!
The only
information accompanying this remarkable, currently unique example was that the
photograph had allegedly been snapped by a Mr Richard Brooks on the Indonesian island
of Bali. I have spent considerable time trying to trace Mr Brooks, but all to
no avail. And so, due to its great significance to the subject in hand, I'm
including a small, low-resolution version of his photo here on a strictly Fair
Use, educational, non-commercial basis only, acknowledging fully that Mr Brooks
is its copyright holder.
Live
dog allegedly on Bali exhibiting Frasercot fur pattern (© Richard Brooks –
reproduced here in low-resolution format on a strictly non-commercial,
educational, Fair Use basis only; despite considerable attempts, I have so far
been unable to trace Mr Brooks)
Of course, in
this age of readily-available photo-manipulation techniques, it needs to be
stressed here that the worrying possibility of this photograph actually being the
result of one such process cannot be ruled out, especially as its supposed
originator has so far resisted all attempts to be traced and his name may therefore
be fictitious, just a pseudonym.
What makes this living
Frasercot-patterned canine specimen so fascinating if indeed genuine, however, is
that clearly its pattern could not have been applied to it by a mechanical,
heat-stamping device. So as the Frasercot pattern is of artificial, man-made
design, it must have been applied to the dog's fur by being painstakingly
painted upon it, and surely with the dog fully anaesthetised while this very
delicate process was being performed (having said that, the spots on this live dog are rather bigger than those on all Frasercot pelts currently recorded, so it would have been less difficult to apply them to it).
The obvious question
to be asked here is why anyone should wish to perform such an elaborate form of
decoration upon a live dog anyway. But perhaps its Frasercot-adorned coat made
it valuable or much sought-after as a pet, or even for sale as an exotic 'rare
breed' to some unsuspecting tourist, and it is certainly not the first time
that I have seen domestic animals with intricately-embellished coats.
Dog
with fake spots in Kalimpong, West
Bengal, India (©
Sukanto Debnath/Wikipedia – CC BY 2.0 licence)
For instance, there
are photos of many different examples online involving dogs, including
tiger-striped, leopard-spotted, and even black-and-white giant-panda-rendered
versions (utilising chows - click here for photos). Also, while visiting Tijuana, Mexico, in 2004 I saw
one of the famous 'Tijuana zebras' – in reality, donkeys that have been painted
with stripes in order to look like zebras – being used for photo sessions with
tourists.
One
of Tijuana's
famous 'zebras' – in reality a donkey with painted-on stripes (public domain)
So it would seem
that after perplexing cryptozoologists and mainstream zoologists alike for many
years, the mystifying Frasercot pelts are finally a (Chinese) puzzle no longer.
My sincere thanks to Mark Fraser, Lars Thomas, Dr Darren Naish,
Jonathan McGowan, Martin Cotterill, and above all my late mother Mary Shuker
for their greatly valued contributions to my Frasercot investigations; and
additionally to Mark for so kindly loaning to me his Frasercot pelt for
examination.
EPILOGUE – 19 April 2017
Today I discovered here
that Mark's Frasercot pelt was sold on the internet auction site Ebay UK on 28
June 2014, but at present I have no further details concerning this transaction
or its new owner/whereabouts.
Photographed alongside me for scale purposes (I
stand 5'10" tall) while on loan to me during March 2012, the Frasercot
pelt then-owned by Mark Fraser (© Dr Karl Shuker)
2ND UPDATE: 30
November 2018
Earlier tonight, German cryptozoological researcher
Markus Bühler drew my attention to the following photograph featuring a Frasercot
pelt, a photo (and pelt specimen) previously unfamiliar to me. The photo is currently
doing the rounds online within at least two reports dating from mid-November
2018, concerning China's controversial interest in the trade and use of bones from
endangered rhinoceroses and tigers, which have traditionally been used in
Chinese folk medicines. These reports can be accessed here
and here.
Frasercot pelt (far right) that was on
sale somewhere in China during 2006 (© holder currently
unknown to me despite searches made by me, reproduced here on a strictly
non-commercial Fair Use basis for review/educational purposes only)
My investigations of this photograph have revealed
that it was snapped somewhere in China and is an archive image dating back to 2006. My
thanks to Markus for kindly alerting me to this important image.