Jump to content

Where Is The Patterson-Gimlin Film Site?


BigfootBookman

Where is the PGF Site?  

14 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

BigfootBookman

The problem with that orientation of the map, however logical, is that it does not at all match Daniel Perez' site on the ground and on the topo maps. At that site the creek flows down from the north above, then cuts generally from the east to the west for a considerable way, before heading down to the south toward Louse Camp. If the "Northerly" is north, then the map shows the creek coming from the west at the top... just plain odd. This would suggest a site location a good way farther downstream than Perez' own mark on the map.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest parnassus

The problem with that orientation of the map, however logical, is that it does not at all match Daniel Perez' site on the ground and on the topo maps. At that site the creek flows down from the north above, then cuts generally from the east to the west for a considerable way, before heading down to the south toward Louse Camp. If the "Northerly" is north, then the map shows the creek coming from the west at the top... just plain odd. This would suggest a site location a good way farther downstream than Perez' own mark on the map.

I think when he wrote northerly he meant 'sort of north." I think he did what people often do, generalize the larger direction of the creek into a specific locale, which as you have pointed out before, doesn't work. Drawing a diagram to scale is quite difficult if you try to do it in one draft. You remember something you want to put in but would be off the paper if the scale was correct. So you just put it in and write down a dimension/distance. If he had written not to scale everyone would be happy but who does that? This guy doesn't strike me as a compulsive type.

What is the handwriting under 60 to 100ft wide? I can't read it.

Edited by parnassus
Link to post
Share on other sites
BigfootBookman

Yes, I have noticed that tendency with many of the old-timers I talk to about the film site area having the creek running north there. They assume the creek is flowing northward (generally, i.e., "northerly"), when in fact it turns to the east in general direction right before the film site. When one is on the ground there, too, there is a tendency to confuse time of day and direction due to the steep walls of the canyon and their large covering trees. Hence, east can seem like north, and 4:00 can seem like 6:00. Without a compass and topo map, and a fore-knowledge of where one is going, it is very easy to get lost up in those convoluted mountains. Many have done so, hikers who lost the trail, etc.

Now, I say, look at the image below. Daniel says "the top of this page" is north. He does not say, "the top of Richard Henry's page." In fact, why would he place the image sideways, with Henry's writing not legible when holding the newsletter normally, if not for some other kind of necessity? Yes, he could have done so simply to preserve layout space, but that is not normally his method. The newsletter is perfectly prone to using a full page to display an important picture.

Here is how it appears on the page of the BIGFOOT TIMES:

post-37-033306000 1291192498_thumb.jpg

And here is a detail of the USFS topo map:

post-37-049618800 1291192701_thumb.jpg

I think they fit rather well in this comparison. The only issue is the location of the track-way on the upper or lower sandbar.

The "steep" descent indicated on the road down is quite congruent to the section of old road cut we found this summer right before what is generally called "the gulch," in the "big bend" seen in the map. However, beyond that, the contour of the Henry drawing matches very well the spot we are calling the "Barackman site," which was actually (we found out later) pointed out by Bob Gimlin in 2003, after the International Bigfoot Symposium in Willow Creek. Gimlin was a bit hesitant in his identification at first, as the scene had changed so drastically; but according to James "Bobo" Fay, who was standing with him there, Bob settled on this upper area in the end.

These are very rough overlays I did just to demonstrate these possible locations:

post-37-087255500 1291193361_thumb.jpg

post-37-056459700 1291193383_thumb.jpg

The description of a "corral" located downstream about 100-200 yards roughly corresponds with the bat boxes landing/camp site at the end of the spur road, 12N13H, which comes down off the hill from the 12N13 ridge road. It also corresponds perfectly with what Jim McClarin said about there being a horse camp right before the site. If this detail is correct, then it greatly favors the first overlay detail above. Scale Henry's drawing down a bit so that the "steep" area descending down into the creekbed is located by the end of the little feeder creek entering from above where you see the road, and it all fits quite well. Follow the creek road from there a couple hundred yards west and you are at the bat boxes at the bottom of the road coming down the hill.

See here: http://bigfootbooksb...m-mcclarin.html

It's all quite fascinating to me, truly. However, I just spent several hours today dealing with a ton of information from another big-name researcher (choosing anonymity) who claimed direct information from Rene Dahinden. This site location spoken of was 2 miles up from Louse Camp, which would be about 1.5 miles downstream from the Perez-identified location. A lot of the confusion with this Henry drawing would be resolved were the site indeed located downstream where the creek runs from north to south. Perez also has direct information from Dahinden, however. So, I suppose, the plot thickens.

Best,

Steve, Bigfoot Books

http://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.com

I think when he wrote northerly he meant 'sort of north." I think he did what people often do, generalize the larger direction of the creek into a specific locale, which as you have pointed out before, doesn't work. Drawing a diagram to scale is quite difficult if you try to do it in one draft. You remember something you want to put in but would be off the paper if the scale was correct. So you just put it in and write down a dimension/distance. If he had written not to scale everyone would be happy but who does that? This guy doesn't strike me as a compulsive type.

What is the handwriting under 60 to 100ft wide? I can't read it.

Edited by BigfootBookman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

You should check with Perez, I believe he's added some of the hand written notes to the map. My guess is he added the word "Northerly" himself to help clarify his typed description on the left. The reason I think this is because the "o" and the "y" in Northerly are not drawn consistently with other words on the map. I'm also guessing that Perez added the "We parked here" note. It appears to be different than the other text.

Perez also states that the creek is flowing South, which would match the main part of the map (the longest stretch of creek drawn in). This confirms the Northerly up top, at least to me.

Hope these observations help. Interesting stuff. Thanks and good luck. I'm glad you're working on it.

Parnassus,

The words under "60' to 100' wide" are "Logs & ? (Brush or Bushes maybe?).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest parnassus

Parnassus,

The words under "60' to 100' wide" are "Logs & ? (Brush or Bushes maybe?).

Thanks hog,

From what Bigfootbookman says, it seems that Peter Byrne, who photographed Michael Hodgson on the site in the early 70's when it looked much as did in 1967 and 1968, seems to agree with Henry's idea of the relationship between the batboxes/fire circle and the filmsite; Byrne said 100 yards north of the batboxes; Henry says not far 100-200 yds, and his directions are a little whack.

Edited by parnassus
Link to post
Share on other sites
BigfootBookman

Hogsback,

Daniel told me that Richard Henry drew the map, and that sure as heck doesn't look like Daniel's handwriting on there. I have samples. I'd ask him, but I fear he is getting a little tired of my constant film site questions.

And yes, I see "LOGS" in the writing there. It corresponds well with the pile of wood seen in the film. The second word is indecipherable. It looks like he possibly mis-wrote the first letter. Who knows? Maybe Daniel.

The "We Parked Here" would not refer to Daniel and Richard Henry parking there. That would not be possible on Daniel's location of the site today. It corresponds with what Jim McClarin, who was on that trip in 1967, told me--they drove right down to the film site and parked the Jeep there. We found an old road cut right there in the right place, right above where Henry's drawing says "steep" in its descent into the creekbed, so I believe it.

Another thing: the creek in Perez' location flows from EAST to WEST, with winding bends only tending to north or south.

Steve, You should check with Perez, I believe he's added some of the hand written notes to the map. My guess is he added the word "Northerly" himself to help clarify his typed description on the left. The reason I think this is because the "o" and the "y" in Northerly are not drawn consistently with other words on the map. I'm also guessing that Perez added the "We parked here" note. It appears to be different than the other text.

Perez also states that the creek is flowing South, which would match the main part of the map (the longest stretch of creek drawn in). This confirms the Northerly up top, at least to me.

Hope these observations help. Interesting stuff. Thanks and good luck. I'm glad you're working on it.

Parnassus,

The words under "60' to 100' wide" are "Logs & ? (Brush or Bushes maybe?).

Parnassus, Byrne told me

(see my blog: http://bigfootbooksb...ding-bluff.html)

that one stands at the bat box nearest to the parking landing and takes a compass looking due north just a few degrees off. We used a compass on-site. This is up into the forest on the canyon wall right there, NOT upstream toward the area that matches with Richard Henry's drawing. In my estimation, Byrne's site is right there where Henry and McClarin place the "corral" or horse camp, where they found dung and hay leavings. McClarin actually thought this was where Patterson and Gimlin set up their base camp, but that does not correspond with Gimlin's statement of a couple of miles or more from the camp to the film site. Byrne was at the bat boxes just a few weeks before we were this summer, so it is hard to figure that his memory had gone wrong in that short of a period. However, though there is no doubt he was at the real film site in 1972, it would appear that his memory since then has altered. We found no conditions at his location that matched anything in the film appropriately.

Thanks hog, From what Bigfootbookman says, it seems that Peter Byrne, who photographed Michael Hodgson on the site in the early 70's when it looked much as did in 1967 and 1968, seems to agree with Henry's idea of the relationship between the batboxes/fire circle and the filmsite; Byrne said 100 yards north of the batboxes; Henry says not far 100-200 yds, and his directions are a little whack.

Best, Steve, Bigfoot Books

Edited by BigfootBookman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
BigfootBookman

I seem to have neglected updating this thread. There are 27 BLUFF CREEK FILM SITE PROJECT VIDEOS up now on BFRO-VIDEOS on YouTube... and we're not finished yet!

New information has been pouring in, so we're well armed for a new session of these next spring and summer.

For now, enjoy!

Best,

BFBM

*******

Watch them here, or via these links on my BIGFOOT'S BLOG:

http://bigfootbooksb...-update_08.html

That is for 9-13, and,

http://bigfootbooksb...-film-site.html

for 14-21.

Edited by BigfootBookman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
BigfootBookman

Lund-Patterson+with+Drawing.JPG

Hi all. Sorry to neglect this thread. For your info., here are some new links...

Report on Cryptomundo about the BLUFF CREEK FILM SITE PROJECT.

http://www.cryptomun...reek-film-site/

There is a new SUMMATION SERIES of videos, shot at Cinnabar Sam's Restaurant in Willow Creek.

See here for player boxes on BIGFOOT'S BLOG:

http://bigfootbooksb...-summation.html

Links for BLUFF CREEK FILM SITE PROJECT on BIGFOOT'S BLOG:

http://bigfootbooksb...-film-site.html Videos 1-3

http://bigfootbooksb...ect-update.html Videos 4-8

http://bigfootbooksb...-update_08.html Videos 9-13

http://bigfootbooksb...-film-site.html Videos 14-21

http://bigfootbooksb...-film-site.html Videos 22-30

http://bigfootbooksb...fork-comes.html Videos 31-36

http://bigfootbooksb...-summation.html Videos 37-45

Or you may find all of these on BFRO-VIDEOS on YouTube, under "Uploads, See All."

Best,

BFBM

PS--image above shows how Patterson really thought Bigfoot would look like, before shooting the PGF. Notice it really doesn't look like Patty? (Photo courtesy of Larry Lund)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...
SweatyYeti

I thought I'd 'bump' this thread, up...because of Steve's recent work, in finding the Filmsite. :)

This 2-Frame animation isn't all that relevant...but, this thread is a better place for it than most of the other PGF threads...

MKD2FramesEarlyMiddleAG3B.gif

I took two Frames from an 'MK Davis' stabilized-gif, and re-aligned them....just to see what it shows. I was hoping to see some indication of a change in elevation of the camera...but I don't see any.

It does show that Roger moved closer to Patty, between those frames....and a little to his right.

It also shows some 'relative movement' between a log pile, on the left, and the far background. A nice '3D' effect. :)

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
BigfootBookman

Thanks, Sweaty Yeti, for reminding me of this old thread.

I believe we have finally found and documented the true PGF site. Updates have been posted in the last few pages of the Munns Report thread under Film, Patterson Gimlin Film subcategory. Check it out, everybody.

BFBM

Link to post
Share on other sites
BigfootBookman

This, in my humble opinion, is the PGF site as it is today.

post-37-026909400 1321046831_thumb.jpg

Click to Enlarge Image

Above, our survey of the upper Bluff Creek sandbar area, with current features old enough to be seen in the film noted.

Compared with Rene Dahinden's 1971 "aerial" photo of the known site.

This site was always on the top of my list, and was recently confirmed by Bob Gimlin when he returned there this summer.

See the Munns Report thread for more information.

http://bigfootforums.../page__st__1350

BFBM

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Thanks, Sweaty Yeti, for reminding me of this old thread.

I believe we have finally found and documented the true PGF site. Updates have been posted in the last few pages of the Munns Report thread under Film, Patterson Gimlin Film subcategory. Check it out, everybody.

BFBM

You're welcome, Steve. There's too much information in this thread, for it be left 'buried' in the PGF Section. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...