Footprint?

[Miocene_Mason]

One of the perks of living where I do, is that a large amount of red gravel used here, is Gettysburg formation. So whenever there's gravel, you just look for the glossy shiny bits, and see what you can find. I went somewhere where there was a lot of gravel used and I picked up a few things but I think this may be the footprint I've been searching for so long. It's weird though, three toed and a little fat, so I want your opinions for verification. I don't know what it would be from, so I need help with that as well, the Gettysburg (late Triassic) is known for footprints by the way. Ask if more pictures are needed.

Dang,  forgot scale. The stones a bit over an inch long and about 3/4 of an inch wide.

[JohnBrewer]

I'm pretty sure it isn't  the 'toes' would be splayed if a foot print/cast. 

[Miocene_Mason]

24 minutes ago, JohnBrewer said:

I'm pretty sure it isn't  the 'toes' would be splayed if a foot print/cast. 

This is what I thought as well, but some of the footprints from the Newark supergroup I've found pictures of online aren't splayed, or at least not fully. I'm also not sure if it's dinosaur, lizards and amphibian tracks also occur. I found this one also from the Newark supergroup, of New Jersey though, that looks incredibly similar. It is however a negative. It was on auction, it said it was dinosaur.

[ynot]

There are other undulations on the rocks surface that resemble the ones in the "print". I do not agree that it is a print. Just a superficial resemblance.

[Miocene_Mason]

1 hour ago, ynot said:

There are other undulations on the rocks surface that resemble the ones in the "print". I do not agree that it is a print. Just a superficial resemblance.

Okay if this is the general consensus. Now, I'll get to finding a real one soon....