Is The Skookum Cast Still Considered To Be A Potential Bigfoot Lay?

November 6, 2016

People's interest in this one cast is more fascinating than the cast itself.

November 6, 2016

I'll post photos of the hair imprints and give a short story about them this week sometime. No, we didn't see what made the imprints, but the slide marks were so fresh that grains of soil were still falling from them. At first we attributed them to bear, but the running steps at the base of the slide had no claw marks in them and were human shaped with the m. break evident.

Basically what happened was we were on a hair pin turn high in the Clackamas. There is a huckleberry field at the apex of the turn. We scared something out of the field. It jumped over the side and made a huge butt print with hair marks. Then it skidded down a steep slope leaving two skid marks, no evidence of four superimposed. At the bottom of the slope it turned left, ran across soft dirt. entered the logging road and amazingly, seems to have dived into tall fir trees in the very steep ravine on the other side of the logging road indicating to us, that it was comfortable using trees.

A4-422__Granite_Peak_start_of_skid_left.TIF

The hair marks are faintly visible in the bottom part of this photo. When it jumped off the ledge the heels impacted, it started skidding, then sat down hard {see edge of butt imprint next to the upper part of the skid}, shoved itself up {two hand marks were indistinct, but obvious in the dirt on each side of the two skids, and then as noted above, skidded down the very steep slope where it turned and ran.

We had a guest from France with us. He became extremely excited because it was obvious to him he was within seconds of seeing what he had studied for years. We looked on it with colder eyes as bears and elk do strange things with frightened; and are so much more common.

But I keep forgetting. You need to look carefully at photos of the Skookum Cast to see similar hair prints.

Edited November 6, 2016 by joebeelart

November 7, 2016

Thanks, Joe.

For clarity - is this how you see it?

8 hours ago, joebeelart said:

... we didn't see what made the imprints...

... the slide marks were so fresh that grains of soil were still falling from them...

... the running steps at the base of the slide had no claw marks in them and were human shaped with the m. break evident

... It jumped over the side and made a huge butt print with hair marks. Then it skidded down a steep slope leaving two skid marks, no evidence of four superimposed...

... The hair marks are faintly visible in the bottom part of this photo...

... see edge of butt imprint next to the upper part of the skid...

... two hand marks were indistinct, but obvious in the dirt on each side of the two skids

Are the indistinct "hand marks" visible in this pic? If not, did you take a photo?

Do you have any pictures of the "human shaped" "running steps" at the base of the slide that you can share?

joebeelart: We had a guest from France with us. He became extremely excited because it was obvious to him he was within seconds of seeing what he had studied for years. --- The French guy was another Bigfoot enthusiast?

November 7, 2016

I'll post the other photos in a day or so. I don't have the "hand mark" photos; think Jean from France has them. Yes, we have the "running steps."

The "butt" imprint is below the "fonts" reading "marks and hair marks." It was very impressive and very large. This photo shows only about 1/3 of the "butt" imprint. The pressure marks on the top of the imprint just left of the word "marks" were most impressive on site. Actually, the size of the "butt imprint" was stunning. The "butt crack" imprint is just under the 'hair marks' notation and is partially visible.

Later, Joe Beelart, West Linn, Oregon

The most important thing is not our photos. The most important thing is to compare these photos and the ones to follow with the hair patterns in the Skookum Cast. Basics are essential and mostly overlooked in field research.

Edited November 7, 2016 by joebeelart

November 7, 2016

Your photos are important because they provide a baseline for comparison with the Skookum impression particularly if the hair patterns provide an "exact" match (as you say) and if the same type of creature made both (uncertain) but since you didn't see what actually made the impressions your comments are, then, also important indicators of how you interpret the impressions...

50 minutes ago, joebeelart said:

The "butt" imprint is below the "fonts" reading "marks and hair marks." It was very impressive and very large. This photo shows only about 1/3 of the "butt" imprint. The pressure marks on the top of the imprint just left of the word "marks" were most impressive on site. Actually, the size of the "butt imprint" was stunning. The "butt crack" imprint is just under the 'hair marks' notation and is partially visible.

Is this one better?

The pressure marks on the top of the imprint just left of the word "marks" were the most impressive on site --- In grids B5 and C5, correct? Why do you consider these particular marks to be the most impressive on site?

The "butt crack" imprint is just under the 'hair marks' notation and is partially visible --- Not sure I can see it. Which grids contain the "butt crack"?

If the pic shows only the top 1/3 of the "butt" imprint then isn't the perceived "butt crack" in the wrong position and, then, not actually a "butt crack" at all?

Isn't the entire perceived very large "butt imprint" in the wrong position for a human-like creature skidding down a slope?

November 7, 2016

On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 8:40 AM, DWA said:

Meldrum's book offers the executive summary; but considerable attention by very qualified researchers says an elk didn't do this. One of the more prominent anthropologists of the past century went from skeptic to proponent on the basis of this cast alone; and I still haven't read a contesting opinion that explains how an elk stands up from here...without leaving its prints in the *middle* of the cast.

(Meldrum's book states that primates in zoos have been observed feeding in the precise way apparently indicated by the cast.)

How exactly did a sasquatch leave that print without leaving footprints in the surrounding mud

This same mud that contained elk tracks

November 7, 2016

I was always under the impression it was said to have crawled Mag no ? I may be wrong.

November 7, 2016

Hello Night Walker: Very good observations. The animal did not skid down the slope on its bottom. It sat, then stood. The slope was very steep. There were a few hairs on a bush part-way down the slope we collected, but they have been lost. The "butt crack" is out of the picture to the bottom. A bit of the ridge seems to show in the photograph, to me.

The left "cheek" impact / pressure ridge is right of the words "Butt imprint &" and above the yellow line. Will post more photos later today.

November 7, 2016

Well, have just spent half an hour trying to find the computer file / pictures of the Granite Peaks skids. No luck. Must have been on the old computer which "burnt." That means I have to go through my print files to find the original photos and then scan them. I will do that as soon as I can because I think the hair pattern comparison is important.

Also, don't install a backup hard drive in the same case and with the same power source as the main drive. When they cook, they cook together.

November 8, 2016

17 hours ago, BobbyO said:

I was always under the impression it was said to have crawled Mag no ? I may be wrong.

Then there should be a trail from crawling.

It was mud after all

The quote below is taken from Thom Powell's book "The Locals"

"It worked! They ate the fruit! A bigfoot lay across the mud so it could reach the fruit without leaving footprints. There's a big print and a whole bunch of other stuff in the mud! You got to come see this!" Minutes later, we were all staring in disbelief at the impressions in the mud almost a mile away from camp. The fruit had been placed in the center of a muddy flat beside a logging road where a puddle had stood the day before. The puddle was situated in the middle of a large gravel pull-out that was used to park and turn around logging trucks. Rainwater had fonned the puddle only a few hours before. Derek found this superb spot on his midnight drive and he positioned a pile of fruit in the center of the disappearing puddle. Nothing could reach the apples, peaches, and cantaloupes he left without leaving some kind of trace. As soon as they arrived at the spot the next morning, Derek, Rick, and LeRoy noticed that some of the fruit was gone. It took a little longer to figure out why. Rick was the first to put the pieces together and interpret the unusual marks in the mud.

The discussion of the previous night was still fresh in his mind. In front of him lay the evidence to support my most unlikely-sounding position of the night before: Bigfoots DO know a set-up when they see one! But fresh, homegrown produce is a rare treat for a bigfoot who resides at high elevation. Our bait must have been irresistible and a bigfoot went after it, leaving a lower torso impression, but no footprints, in the mud.

Could we be seeing strong evidence that bigfoots will do what they can to avoid leaving obvious tracks? No other explanation seemed to fit. Some of the fruit was gone, some lay in bits around the area, and a large, hair-covered fonn with long, thick arms and legs left an impression of its lower body in the mud next to the fruit. When he arrived at the site, the first thing recognized by Rick Noll was a heel impression. Then he noticed what appeared for all the world to be the impression of hair-covered but-tocks. Leroy and Derrick were back by his side and they collectively resolved the impression of a thigh, an elbow, a forearm and finally a fist and finger marks. That's when they dashed back to camp to show the rest of us what resulted from the fruit-baiting experiment.

Edited November 8, 2016 by MagniAesir

November 8, 2016

14 hours ago, joebeelart said:

Well, have just spent half an hour trying to find the computer file / pictures of the Granite Peaks skids. No luck. Must have been on the old computer which "burnt." That means I have to go through my print files to find the original photos and then scan them. I will do that as soon as I can because I think the hair pattern comparison is important.

Also, don't install a backup hard drive in the same case and with the same power source as the main drive. When they cook, they cook together.

Great advice power supplies used to be of variable quality. Never give up on a dead drive though, always install smartdrive technology and mirror imaging drives just in case on a regular basis. This is much too late for most reading this..... including moi, in one example my drive cooked the day after BFRO tracking team left the 'hood. Strange timing but when they go they go.

On 11/6/2016 at 10:33 AM, joebeelart said:

I'll post photos of the hair imprints and give a short story about them this week sometime. No, we didn't see what made the imprints, but the slide marks were so fresh that grains of soil were still falling from them. At first we attributed them to bear, but the running steps at the base of the slide had no claw marks in them and were human shaped with the m. break evident.

Basically what happened was we were on a hair pin turn high in the Clackamas. There is a huckleberry field at the apex of the turn. We scared something out of the field. It jumped over the side and made a huge butt print with hair marks. Then it skidded down a steep slope leaving two skid marks, no evidence of four superimposed. At the bottom of the slope it turned left, ran across soft dirt. entered the logging road and amazingly, seems to have dived into tall fir trees in the very steep ravine on the other side of the logging road indicating to us, that it was comfortable using trees.

A4-422__Granite_Peak_start_of_skid_left.TIF

The hair marks are faintly visible in the bottom part of this photo. When it jumped off the ledge the heels impacted, it started skidding, then sat down hard {see edge of butt imprint next to the upper part of the skid}, shoved itself up {two hand marks were indistinct, but obvious in the dirt on each side of the two skids, and then as noted above, skidded down the very steep slope where it turned and ran.

We had a guest from France with us. He became extremely excited because it was obvious to him he was within seconds of seeing what he had studied for years. We looked on it with colder eyes as bears and elk do strange things with frightened; and are so much more common.

But I keep forgetting. You need to look carefully at photos of the Skookum Cast to see similar hair prints.

This narrative is consistent with the strategic use of tree stands by Sasquatch as observed by Bob "Action" Jackson, a seasonal Ranger in Yellowstone who had an encounter in the Northwest section of Yellowstone or Thorofare area when he confronted the Sasquatch stalking a deer uphill when it broke cover and met him and his steed as it then proceeded to strike a bearing in zig-zag fashion from tree to tree downhill to avoid open terrain (and him horseback), much unlike any other animal on Earth would have. As luck would have it my own closest sighting involved Sasquatch moving uphill directly toward me in zig-zag fashion until slowed by both my presence and a ground-bait station in its path.

Edited November 8, 2016 by bipedalist

November 10, 2016

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 11:41 PM, MagniAesir said:

How exactly did a sasquatch leave that print without leaving footprints in the surrounding mud

This same mud that contained elk tracks

That question doesn't explain the lack of elk prints where they *need to be* in the middle of the cast, and doesn't seem to give the proponents any problem. Take it up with them; but elk don't levitate.

Edited November 10, 2016 by DWA

November 10, 2016

On Monday, November 07, 2016 at 3:32 AM, BobbyO said:

According to Joe there were elk prints in the surrounding area, but he thinks they are oldet.

you discount elk because they don't levitate, well I put to you neither do sasquatch

November 10, 2016

On 8 November 2016 at 4:27 AM, MagniAesir said:

Then there should be a trail from crawling.

It was mud after all

According to this, it seems it wasn't all mud as we'd think.

Edited November 10, 2016 by BobbyO

November 10, 2016

Sign In

Is The Skookum Cast Still Considered To Be A Potential Bigfoot Lay?

Recommended Posts

Guest OntarioSquatch

joebeelart

Night Walker

joebeelart

Night Walker

MagniAesir

BobbyO

joebeelart

joebeelart

MagniAesir

bipedalist

Guest DWA

MagniAesir

BobbyO

BobbyO

Browse

SSR

Policies

Activity