DALE DRINNON: Appendix to Cryptozoological Checklist - Former Checklist Summary 3

Category III of former Checklists: this category is one that deserves more attention. It centers around cryptids that appear not to be identifiable as known species but are not so far different that they stand out as glaringly odd.

Heuvelmans
1. High-fin sperm whale
2. Antarctic saber-fin whale (possibly related)
3. Double-dorsal finned dolphins
4. African unknown sirenians
5. Lake Titicaca seal/ manatee
6. Gigantic anaconda
7. Minhocao (stated as an "even larger giant snake", probably an error)
8. The "mysterious beast", a probable giant catfish
9. New Britain migo
10. Celebes unknown crocodile
11. Tatzelwurm
12. Tzuchinoko (Japanese unknown snake, possibly Angkistrodon)
13. Ahool, giant bat of the Orient
14. "Olitiau", giant bat of Africa
15. Outsized African pythons
16. South American apes ("Ameranthropoides")
17.Marquesan rail
18 Lau (as African giant catfish; reports also tend to sound like crested cobra)
19. Jhoors and Burus, unknown monitors of India
20. Possible similar African forms (nguma-monene is possibly related but entry conflates it with
the crested crowing cobra)

Shuker
1.Trinity Alps giant salamander
2. Antarctic Narwhal
3. Two-backfinned Mysticete
4.Palmyra fish (type of killer whale?)
5. Scott's dolphin
6. Giant rattail
7. Beebee's Abyssal fishes
8. Giant woebegong "Ground shark"
9. Percy Fawcett's "toothless shark" (South American catfish, poss. related to "Mysterious beast")
10. Genaprugwirion, Welsh large unknown lizard (just as likely a large agamid as a tuatara)
11. Van Roosmalen's tapir
12. Jetete
13. Black wattleless guan
15. Alovot
16. Kondlo
17. Sasao
18. Goodenough black bird of paradise
19. O'Shea's Papuan viper
20. Cigau

Former Checklists Classification summary part IV
This section is the one that will be hardest for mainline science to accept. It incudes some highly original or unlikely forms and in some cases call for not only the erection of new genera for them but even new families. Some of the reconstructions of these forms are highly speculative. There are very good reasons to drop any or all of these from serious study.

Heuvelmans, primarily "sea serpents"
1. Super-otter
2. Many-humped
3. Cetacean centepede or many-finned
4. Super-eels (admittedly a composite category and dubious on that criterion alone)
5. Merfolk and
6. Steller's sea-ape.
7. Giant invertebrates: ctenophores and salp-chains, poorly described but promoted by Mackal. At least some of Mackal's identifications are patently false, such as when he uses salps to explain "yellow-bellies" and ends up by lamely saying that salps do not come in that coloration pattern. So why bother?

Shuker
1. "Trunko", a "sea-mastodon" ( from some carcase cases and suspicious for that reason)
2. Mamba mutu (unknown African sirenian)
3. Giant Jellyfishes. ( At least some of the candidates are invalid.)
4. Giant salmon of China. These are most likely NOT salmoniformes but Huso sturgeon.
5.Luminous Mudskipper (if it is only covered with luminous bacteria, that is not a separate species)
6. Allghoi khorkhoi, "Mongolian death worm"(highly exaggerated accounts)
7. Orang bati ("flying people")
8. Seram (Ceram) civet (not known if really native sample)
9. Sawfin-dorsalled Freshwater dolphin (possibly deformed or damaged)
10. Caribbean crowned crowing cobra (If true, could ONLY be the exported version of the African kind)
11. Ulama or screaming devil bird of Sri Lanka
12. Sumatran hummingbird (almost certainly not a hummingbird, unless artificially introduced)
13. Ethiopian vampire bat (possibly diseased, in which case they are most likely rabid)
14. Dodu (3-Toed African mystery ape, more than likely a mistaken description unless pathological)
15. Das-adder (mammal-headed snake)

Some of these are probably unknowns; others most likely are vague rumors or mistakes and several might be pathological specimens of known animals. This is hard to sort out but most of them look to be false leads or descriptions that are so bad that the living animals could not be recognized. More information is needed in these instances. In most of these cases the categories as they are described are probably invalid.