Jump to content
Kikisue

Mammoth tusk fragment or Pet. Wood or..? Need help with ID PLEASE!

Recommended Posts

Kikisue

Any thoughts on this piece my boyfriend found today at Port Williams beach in Sequim, WA? It was in the bluff half exposed after a fresh slide. No scale to weigh it here...but it's pretty heavy probably 4-5 pounds.post-20625-0-30561000-1454818739_thumb.jpgpppost-20625-0-10717800-1454819182_thumb.jpg

More photos in following post.

Thank you!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pterodactyl

Definitely mammoth tusk. Those little spores indicate it is bone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

I'm not seeing any Schreger lines.

I think that would rule out tusk.

I would guess it is a piece of bone.

Someone else may know what it is.

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peat Burns

I'm not seeing any Schreger lines.

I think that would rule out tusk.

I would guess it is a piece of bone.

Someone else may know what it is.

Regards,

I agree. Bone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pterodactyl

Definitely mammoth tusk. Those little spores indicate it is bone.

At least I got half correct! I'm a bit of an amateur. :P

Edited by Pterodactyl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kikisue

Thank you for your quick replies! Are these Schreger lines??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peat Burns

Thank you for the info, I see the difference now. He'll be bummed it's not ivory but I think it's still a pretty cool find!

It's definitely a neat find. Large bone chunk. Perhaps enough features present that someone on here might be able to take a stab at what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jpevahouse

Not like any tusk I've seen. Has all the characteristics of porus well worn bone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carl

At least I got half correct! I'm a bit of an amateur. :P

Always avoid using "definitely" unless there is no way to be mistaken. And unless you've seen it all (and none of us has), and especially when looking at photos (as opposed to the real object) it's wisest to use cautious language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×