Somehow or another, the waters got muddied by somebody who decided to label a hairless canine as a ‘chupacabra’ because someone found one of these things near supposed “chupacabra killings.”
I couldn’t tell you whether or not the chupcabra is real as it was originally described, but the media and people who clearly don’t have two braincells to rub together have rendered the designation “Chupacabra” profoundly meaningless in cryptozoology.

Perhaps we need a database of some kind? Maybe something giving us images, even ones that are computer generated, of what various common species look like without their hair? This could be perhaps a good reference to look to in these cases.

What is sad to me is that when a hairless animal shows up, there is often a lack of rational analysis of what we are seeing and rather a jump to more outlandish or bizarre explanations. In my opinion, there is a lot of grasping at straws in these cases, with explanations ranging from the invariable Chupacabras all the way to aliens. Why is this? Would the first, most rational, scientific response not to be to investigate whether this is in fact just a hairless version of a known or even common species? Then when that analysis turns up nothing, then you go looking to other explanations. Occam’s Razor applies here. Eliminate the known before you go grasping for the unknown.

What you have here with a hairless coyote being billed as a Chupacabras before determining whether it is indeed a coyote or perhaps without even considering that, is not only not science but indeed the very opposite of science. I’d like to see people keep their heads and their wits about them when investigating these things.

Another corrollary of the “hairless animal = strange creature” phenomena that I think pertains to this discussion is when decomposed carcasses get immediate billing as something outside known science. Again, we have seen this time and time again in this field, and to me it is a very similar situation to these hairless animals. Decomposing animals can take on an unearthly, bizarre appearance. You have the process of deterioration, bloating, plus the effects of scavengers working over the carcass, which can lead to the loss of soft tissues and an altered appearance (scavengers tend to go for the soft parts first) and yes, even hairloss. So the same rules apply here as they would to animals that have taken on a strange appearance due to hair loss, such as these coyotes.

If we want to keep a scientific approach, when these sorts of strange carcasses or hairless animals show up, we need to discern what known species could be the culprit before even speculating on unknowns. If not, then as Loren says, this has very little to do with science.

I want to find answers, not make headlines.