Skull found along river bank.
No interactions present.
Always good to give an accurate indication of size, rather than just 'large', which could mean anything! ;)
My Flickr photos...
Hi Ian..Usually have a slide rule with me to show scale,but no kit with me on that paticular day. I did put keys beside it for scale but that particular photo was blurred,I know "large" is rather unscientific,:)
The proportions of the tooth row and diastema suggest red deer and not fallow, as do the size of the zygomatic arch and the hint that there might be a canine.
Hi Mydaea,..Sorry about the poor photos ,I may try to retrieve it(the Skull) and take some more detailed photos later. A Fox had also broken off and scattered some of the more delicate pieces of the Skull,no doubt making I.D.more difficult for you. Thanks for your input,it would be very exciting if it was a Red as they are scarce in the area.
Red deer has a small canine in the upper jaw. Fallow typically does not. Even if the tooth is not there, the socket will be, alongside the large hole in the front of the jaw. http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Fallow/fallow.htm and http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Red/red.htm.
I really can not call on this one without more information, the size would be the clincher.
I'm not convinced there is any evidence of a canine socket, the curvature does not look as though it is going to lead to a canine swelling in the jaw. Also the large, round eye socket is more indicative of fallow than red deer. If I had to give an ID then I'd go with fallow but I really can not be certain.
Visit the iSpot Yorkshire forum for information on events, issues and news relating to 'God's own country'
Lat/Lng: 54.621, -6.725
OS grid ref: NV951353