Puerto Rico, 1993, in a town named Canovanas, about a dozen goats were found dead at a small farm. Their owner found them without blood in their bodies. Similar cases started to be made public in other areas of Puerto Rico, later in California, Texas, and even in Northern parts of Mexico. The general public did not know who or what to blame for the attacks so they started referring to the attacker as the Chupacabra. The Chupacabra, or Goat-sucker as it would be said in English, obtained its name because some of the first victims found were goats. There are many assumptions on what this ‘being’ is; they range from tales on extraterrestrials to wild dogs. However, the logic of these theories do not fit the common characteristics of the Chupacabra.
Since the beginnings of time, many animals have developed new ways to survive. Some have become larger or smaller, and others have acquired brightly designed furs. All these in order to accommodate to the new habitats that man is constantly changing due to innovations in technology. So, perhaps the Chupacabra is a new form of evolution of a parasitic mammal that lives in the areas where the Chupacabra has attacked. This mammal is from the family Desmodontidae and its appearance, feeding style, and attacking mode matches the Chupacabra’s almost to a one hundred percent; the mammal is commonly known as the Vampire bat.
There are three types of Vampire bats: Desmodus rotundus, Diaemus youngi, and Diphylla ecaudata, which can be found throughout the areas of Northern Mexico, extending into Central and South America (Walker 324-326). Vampire bats all have basic similarities among each other, and also with the Chupacabra. In Vampire bats, the fur is colored in different tones of gray, and the bats’ back have darker tones of gray that go into a dull brown. Since these bats are found in areas of warm climate, their fur is short and each hair is spaced out from the other hairs. This gives the bats’ hairs an appearance of being raised and in disarray (Brown 21), or ‘sticking up,’ as in the case of the Chupacabra. Vampire bats have very specialized teeth. The most notorious are the front incisors and the canines, which are sharply pointed in order to cut into a victim’s skin. Vampire bats have large eyes that are very dark in color, and in some areas of Sonora, Mexico, these bats have been found to have pink to red eyes (Brown 22). Bats are flying mammals; therefore, they have wings which are attached from their arms and long fingers to the sides of their bodies. These wings have a leathery appearance, just like the membranes seen on the Chupacabra. Vampire bats are not very large in size;
Many of the Chupacabra believers would like for it to be a being from another world; they would like to tell skeptics that they had been wrong to think that the Chupacabra was a dog. According to veterinarians and other officers of the Department of Agriculture in Puerto Rico, wild dogs are the ones that have committed the attacks ("El Chupacabras"). However, dogs could not have been the ones to have committed most of the attacks on the animals. Many of the attacked sites were located next to the houses of the owners, who claimed that they did not hear anything. If dogs had been the ones responsible for the deaths, the owners would have heard the barking and howling of the dog or dogs attacking, and eventually the barking of all the other neighborhood dogs. Whenever a dog attacks an animal, it usually does it in a very vicious way (dog attacks leave recognizable traces). Some of the traces would be the damaged cages of some of the animals, scattered feathers in the case of chickens, ducks and geese, missing animals that could have been eaten, smashed plants and dug holes at the sides of the cages, and the wounds found on the animals. A dog’s bite can scar the entire area of skin where the bite was given, plus it can tear a victim’s muscles. In the Chupacabra’s victims none of these traces are noticeable; the skin and muscles do not have any trauma internally or externally other than the punctures through which the blood was extracted. These killings were made clean and efficient, just the way a Vampire bat would do it, and dogs definitely are not clean hunters.
So far, the Chupacabra has not actually been seen in action. Apparently the Chupacabra attacks only during the night and does it in an extremely careful manner. The way punctures have been made indicate that the Chupacabra climbs on the victim’s back in order to bite it. Non-skeptics speculate that the Chupacabra’s bite is not painful since it does not awaken the animals (including hens, which are known to be extremely scandalous). How can something bite into an animal’s skin without being noticed by the victim itself? This is quite a simple task performed by Vampire bats. Vampire bats land on top of the animals very gently, or sometimes the "Vampires advance on their targets as circumspectly as possible, on foot" (Leen 139). Their teeth are so thin and sharp that it is quite easy for them to bite into the skin and cut a small piece of it. "This operation is practically painless and usually does not disturb the sleeping or quiet animal or human being" (Walker 322). Vampire bats then proceed to lick the wound with their long tongue in order to add an anti-coagulant so that the blood will not clot. After this is done, the flowing blood is then lapped with the tongue. All of the procedure is done very cautiously in order not to awaken the victim. Even if the victim is to wake up, there is no much that it can do in order to get rid of the Vampire bat, unless of course, the victim is a human; in this case the person would probably try to hit it and then call for help. However, neither the Chupacabra nor Vampire bats get near people that often; apparently both prefer the blood of "cattle, mules, horses, and goats" (Allen 96).
Another characteristic that intrigues the owners of attacked animals is the apparent lack of blood in the victims. Almost every person that has analyzed the deaths, claim that they were not able to find any blood in the bodies of the animals. Nevertheless, when the veterinarians of the Department of Agriculture in Puerto Rico made autopsies to about twenty of the animals, they found the correct amount of blood that was expected (Navarro). The animals were not completely drained after all. Vampire bats are able to drink blood up to sixty percent of their weight and sometimes a Vampire bat can "drink its own weight or more, and starving individuals have been known to draw up to two ounces of blood from a victim" (Brown 48). Two ounces do not sound like a lot of blood; however, when a significant amount of blood is extracted, any victim becomes weak and runs the risk of dying. In chickens the extraction of two ounces of blood can be fatal, since "in nine out of ten the feathered victim dies" (Allen 96). If a small one ounce Vampire bat can do this to a chicken, then a larger developed bat of nearly three feet in height could definitely weaken a goat or cow to death.
Allen, Glover Morril. Bats. New York: Dover, 1939. Brown, David E. Vampiro: The Vampire Bat in Fact and Fantasy. Silver City, NM: High-Lonesome Books, 1994. "El Chupacabras: La Hora de la Verdad." Ocurrio Asi de Noche. Narr. Enrique Gratas. Telemundo. 21 June 1996. Leen, Nina. The World of Bats. New York: Holt, 1969. Navarro, Mireya. "El Chupacabra." New York Times News Service 26 Jan. 1996: n.p. Turner, Dennis C. The Vampire Bat. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1975. Turner, Edward, and Clive Turner. Bats. Sussex, Great Britain: Priority Press Limited, 1975. Walker, Ernest P., et al. Mammals of the World. 3rd ed. Vol. 1. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1975.
The Outlook | Who Is RLP? |
Links | Conclusion |
RLP - The Outlook : https://members.tripod.com/~RLP/index.html
Comments?I know you want to click!!! (No... Don't click on 'click', click on 'Comments?')