Two Toed Footprint in Folkestone, England?

[FUTABA]

Some time ago I was on Facebook and came across a post by Everything Dinosaur stating a possible Dromaeosaur / Troodontid footprint was discovered in Folkestone, Kent (in the Yookay for anyone unfamiliar) and that the NHM was investigating. It's apparently 100 million years old and if confirmed as dinosaurian in origin it would be the first of it's kind found in these parts.

Does anyone know any more about this and what are your thoughts on the (possible) discovery? I hope it is confirmed as a theropod footprint as it's very close to where I live and I'd love to go visit there sometime and perhaps see it for myself. It'd be a brilliant claim to fame and one of the very few things that'd make me proud to live where I do.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

[Everything_Dinosaur]

The prints are formed in loosely cemented sands of the Folkestone beds and several have been found, unfortunately, once exposed they rapidly erode.  However, if we examine the other fossil evidence associated with these trace fossils, "balls of sand" preserved evidence of ghost crab activity, oyster fossils etc. this suggests that the prints were made in a tidal zone.  A large biped ventured out onto the tidal flats, probably to feed, what on, no one knows but the preservation of strange indents which remain unexplained could be the preserved holes made by a feeding beak, perhaps this biped was probing in the mud just like today's oyster catchers etc.  It was certainly a much larger animal, the largest prints are over six inches across.  A fragment of a jawbone was found a few years ago it has been interpreted as belonging to a giant, flightless bird.  The prints could represent a Lower Cretaceous flightless bird, this would extend the existence of such creatures much further back in time.  Our own crude calculations based on comparative studies with Theropods and extant flightless birds today, estimate the height of this animal at over six feet tall.  Ostriches (Struthio camelus) etc. walk on just two toes, the trace fossils could represent a bird, however, the prints could well be Theropod, no body knows and all this is a little speculative.  There needs to be more fossils (body fossils), bones etc found before stronger conclusions can be made.  Glad you liked our blog article, hope this helps.

[FUTABA]

Very informative, thanks a lot.

[Dinoguy2]

"The prints could represent a Lower Cretaceous flightless bird, this would extend the existence of such creatures much further back in time. "

By flightless bird do you mean modern flightless bird like a ratite, or could it represent something similar to Gargantuavis? Things like Gargantuavis and Patagopteryx are basal euornithes, so they must have had Lower Cretaceous members of their lineage(s), possibly ones that were already flightless.

Balaur may also be a flightless bird lineage with roots in the lower K, and would have had two-toed footprints...

[Everything_Dinosaur]

It is going to be a frustratingly vague answer I'm afraid, from what we know of the Gargantuavis material (France) and the evidence for Patagopteryx (South America), these fossils, again fragmentary in nature, are dated to the Late Cretaceous in both cases with Patagopteryx being slightly earlier than the French material.  Trouble is with the Folkestone material it is much older strata (Lower Greensand Beds), this suggests maybe as much as fifty million years between the Folkestone material and the Gargantuavis fossils.  Without any body fossils it is very difficult to comment any further.  However, if we were to speculate for a moment, given the rapid radiation of the birds during the Cretaceous it is possible to imagine flightless birds evolving, whether they are the ancestors of the likes of Patagopteryx or a dead end branch of the Enantiornithines is just impossible to comment on given our limited knowledge in this field and indeed the lack of fossil material and academic papers to refer to.