WSA Posted May 17, 2022 Posted May 17, 2022 (edited) Hey all. These photos were sent to me by a friend, forwarded by someone he knows in St. Clair County, Alabama. Here's what she wrote about it: Here’s the footprint pics. The footprint doesn’t appear to have an arch. It is WIDE with a very narrow heel. I don’t spend time looking a footprints but that doesn’t look right to me. The 2nd pic appears to have the right foot but it is barely visible. The 3rd pic is my foot in comparison. I have a big foot for a girl… 8.5/9. What freaks me out more is that there are no other prints leading up to or away from it. This was about 5ft from my hvac unit on the driveway side of my home. I live on the end of a culdesac with woods on the driveway side and back of my property. There is lots of deer and such around. 😊 I do sort of believe in Big Foot or rather I do believe the folks that say that have seen Big Foot have seen something. To me, the wedge shape and what appears to be a claw drag says "black bear" , and bears are present, but uncommon. Still, the length of the track gives me pause. What do y'all think? . Edited May 17, 2022 by WSA correction 2
ShadowBorn Posted May 17, 2022 Moderator Posted May 17, 2022 WSA Looks like there are two left feet, in my opinion. There might be a third along the road where the tire mark is. It might have stepped onto the driveway and that is where maybe the trackway may have been lost. I am not sure, would need a picture of the Driveway. Just I can see where those tracks were located. The tracks could have been on the driveway. A car/truck could have ran over the rest of the trackway. But it does look like two possible animals.
WSA Posted May 17, 2022 Author Posted May 17, 2022 Here's a close up of "both" tracks, and the one on the right (if not the actual right foot) is much less distinct.
WSA Posted May 17, 2022 Author Posted May 17, 2022 ShadowBorn...yes all of that could be possible I think. Could be it stepped into the more compact soil where vehicles have driven, and any track on that would be hard to discern.
NorthWind Posted May 19, 2022 Posted May 19, 2022 There are tread marks from a shoe in it. Could have stepped in someone's shoe print. If I had to guess just from these photos, I would say it's a case of mistaken identity, but I'd love to see them in person!
NorthWind Posted May 19, 2022 Posted May 19, 2022 I know someone in St. Claire County who would be willing to go have a look in person.
Skinwalker13 Posted May 19, 2022 Posted May 19, 2022 The heel is really narrow. I’m thinking these were most likely made by a person especially with the surrounding foot traffic there.
7.62 Posted May 19, 2022 Posted May 19, 2022 I'm not saying you're are wrong but that doesn't look like any blackbear track I have ever seen . I've seen them dragging , stepping inside the other track and it never looked like that. Hard to say really .
WSA Posted May 19, 2022 Author Posted May 19, 2022 Thanks for the comments guys. Yeah, this probably will always be one for the "inconclusive" pile. I have no first-hand information about the exact location or how old the photos are. I assume the sneaker print overlay was done by the person inadvertently stepping on it before noticing the more distinct print. I've seen black bear direct-register tracks (fore and back foot overlap)that mimic that shape, but typically if you look close you can see the outline of the hind foot. The soil medium here does not appear to allow for that level of detail. Should I hear of any other "interesting" activity from this area, I'll be sure to post it. THAT would make the analysis of these tracks all the more plausible as BF related. 1
7.62 Posted May 19, 2022 Posted May 19, 2022 2 hours ago, WSA said: Thanks for the comments guys. Yeah, this probably will always be one for the "inconclusive" pile. I have no first-hand information about the exact location or how old the photos are. I assume the sneaker print overlay was done by the person inadvertently stepping on it before noticing the more distinct print. I've seen black bear direct-register tracks (fore and back foot overlap)that mimic that shape, but typically if you look close you can see the outline of the hind foot. The soil medium here does not appear to allow for that level of detail. Should I hear of any other "interesting" activity from this area, I'll be sure to post it. THAT would make the analysis of these tracks all the more plausible as BF related. LOL just not that close to her house
ShadowBorn Posted May 19, 2022 Moderator Posted May 19, 2022 There are dermal ridges that seem to go vertical on the foot. If you look closely you can see them. Not sure if bear have dermal ridges on their paws? But I do know that these creatures do as well as humans. They are pretty large dermal ridges to be human. Even on one of the toes you can see vertical dermal ridges. I am not sure if this is normal for humans? But that is what I look for first if possible. The other thing is how deep the track is in the medium of the soil that the track was placed in. The medium does not look very sandy, but very hard rocky medium. Compared to the tennis shoes the tracks looks like they were made by something with heavy weight. Just my opinion. But more info is needed to know more about this area.
Madison5716 Posted May 20, 2022 Posted May 20, 2022 NorthWind and I have seen some prints with very narrow heels that look almost triangular, like these prints. It's curious, for sure. In our case, I have been assuming more or less that the skinny prints are from females and the big fat prints from males, whether large or small, regardless of size. From speaking with another couple of researchers, they're thinking the same thing. That one sure looks just like our "little girl" that we've found multiple times - tiny and triangular in some sandy soil types, but more traditional looking in others. Looks like very long toes. Interesting!
CelticKevin Posted May 20, 2022 Posted May 20, 2022 On 5/18/2022 at 5:48 PM, NorthWind said: There are tread marks from a shoe in it. Could have stepped in someone's shoe print. If I had to guess just from these photos, I would say it's a case of mistaken identity, but I'd love to see them in person! Agreed. I don't think they are BF tracks. Probably an different animal.
ShadowBorn Posted May 21, 2022 Moderator Posted May 21, 2022 22 hours ago, Madison5716 said: Looks like very long toes. Interesting! Those toes do look very long. Not Human! Very interesting. Trackable. 21 hours ago, CelticKevin said: There are tread marks from a shoe in it. Could have stepped in someone's shoe print. This sentence could be turned around. Where the print was there first, then the shoe print stepping on the print. @CelticKevin I think they might mean that these tracks could be from a creature. I do not think that they are a hoax in my view. But I am not an expert in analyzing primate feet. Looking at the tracks closely I see ridges. Vertical and thick. I have seen it in other tracks of the forum. So could that be hoaxing. I do not think so. West and from the east part of the US. @Madison5716 Those long toes print could be from a female.
Recommended Posts