Skip to content 
Further comparison with wildlife photographs eventually suggested one possible explanation. The shape appeared similar to images of very young or developing squirrels. The pale body, small size and undeveloped proportions seemed to fit better once adult features were no longer expected. This helped explain why the object had initially looked so unfamiliar.
Still, it is important not to present that identification as absolute fact without expert examination. Several mammal species can look surprisingly similar during very early development. Photographs alone may not reveal enough anatomical detail to determine the exact species or developmental stage. The most careful description is therefore that the remains appeared consistent with a developing squirrel, possibly a fetus or embryo.
This distinction matters because words such as “embryo,” “fetus” and “newborn” refer to different stages of development. An embryo is an earlier prenatal stage, while a fetus refers to a later stage before birth. A newborn has already been born. Without a professional examination, it would be difficult to determine exactly where the animal fell within that developmental sequence.
What can be said more confidently is that young squirrels look very different from adults. Newborn squirrels are often hairless, their eyes are closed and their body proportions are still developing. Before birth, those adult features would be even less recognizable. Someone familiar only with squirrels running through trees might therefore struggle to identify one at such an early stage.
Once the possible identification became clear, the discovery began to feel different. Before that point, the strongest emotion had been curiosity mixed with uncertainty. Afterward, the small pale shape could be understood as the remains of a developing animal rather than something completely mysterious. The explanation did not make the encounter less memorable. It simply changed the way it was understood.