When I started Cryptid Corner I knew that eventually I would have to go there. You can’t talk about cryptids without getting swept away into the most outrageous and improbable of them all — the Chupacabra Chupacabras.
Not only does it have an awesome name, it also has an awesome M.O. It sucks the blood out of goats and other livestock. Now that’s just cool.
The interesting thing about the Chupacabras is that it’s an extremely new cryptid.
Unlike old standbys like Bigfoot and Nessie, the Chupacabras isn’t recorded in modern lore until the 1970s.
Originally, our little fanged friend was known as El Vampiro de Moca but after the phenomenon spread far and wide, it took on the name Chupacabras which literally means “goat sucker” “sucker of goats.”
Interestingly, the Chupacabras originated in Spanish speaking countries and stayed there for most of its sightings (and killings), but in the current decade it has been reported as far north as Maine in the US, and even as far away as Russia.
As recently as May 2007, there was a report of 300 dead sheep in Boyaca and sketchy rumors that a specimen of the culprit was captured and sent to Universidad Nacional of Colombia for further study.
For me, I think the biggest question of the Chupacabras phenomenon is what exactly is killing these animals?
Is it some sort of deranged behavior of a wild animal, or is it a more gruesome version of the crop circle hoaxes?
Whether the world ever identifies Chupacabras, I hope it lives on. It’s just too cool to disappear from human lore.
EDIT: Loren Coleman of cryptomundo.com has responded to correctly point out that the term “Chupacabra” to refer to this cryptid is technically incorrect. Instead, the correct spelling for even a singular creature would be “Chupacabras” which actually means “sucker of goats.”
Sorry for the mistake and thanks for the lesson! Seems like its a common mistake in the reporting of the Chupacabras.
Chupawhat?
“Chupacabras: It’s sort of like Jennifer Lopez, kind of cross-cultural.â€? – Loren Coleman, cryptozoologist, as quoted by ABC News, 1999.
“The ‘Chupacabra’ usage really gets my goat — pun much intended! To say chupacabra is to imply that the entity is ‘the sucker of a single goat.’ Chupacabras is ‘the sucker of goats,’ which was meant by the original nomenclature. Perhaps English speakers feel that a false plural is being formed and they resort to ’s’ removal. Fortunately the singular/plural issue is resolved–in Spanish–by a ‘definite article’ placed in front of the noun (el, la, los, las, lo):
One single chupacabras: ‘El Chupacabras’
A troupe of the things: ‘Los Chupacabras’
If female: ‘La Chupacabras’
A cluster of females: ‘Las Chupacabras’
So the word ‘Chupacabras’ remains intact — no need to amputate the final ’s’!” – Hispanic cryptozoologist Scott Corrales
For more on this, please see, including a 1960 reference to the use of the word:
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/chupawhat/
Unfortunately, I’m not a native (or non-native for that matter) Spanish speaker, so I was unaware of the mistake in how Chupacabras was commonly referred to as “Chupacabra.”
I now consider myself educated on the subject and will make sure to refer to it correctly in future posts.
Also, official edit to the post incoming. :)