Bigfoot Cast Collection Appears On Website

Just an ordinary bag of casting material, that he just happened to be carrying (for three seasons) when he ran across this picture perfect track...

Well that was his story long ago. Now that he is older he is willing to let "Mike" know it was his mother's special casting formula in that bag. Then "Mike" thought that Melissa Hovey ought to know. Then she thought the world of Bigfooters ought to know.

:D:D
 
Eric Thorsen, and Mountain Tracks, are both in Bigfork MT.

I'd say these two casts are by the same artist/ caster
 
What I genuinely don't know is if a bear can leave an impression that detailed (with complete claws) out in the wild. I doubt it but don't know for sure. I mean, shouldn't the claws obliterate their own impression as they are pulled out of the substrate for the next footstep?

I would bet the story is bogus and that the cast was made by a sculptor with a bear's foot.
 
Last edited:
Melissa Hovey on her blog said:
Excellent article Mike, and proof of what is possible when we pay attention to proper casting methods.

Awesome castings. :)


No. This shows something impossible for Bigfooters (or anyone) in the field with interest in casting animal tracks. This was apparently created inside an artist's studio.
 
Eric Thorsen, and Mountain Tracks, are both in Bigfork MT.

I'd say these two casts are by the same artist/ caster


I'm not so sure about that. If true, it would probably mean that Eric Thorson lied about his own paw sculpture back in 1974.

The 1974 paw (from the blog) appears nowhere in Thorson's 350+ piece gallery of work. That doesn't mean he didn't do it. But looking at the guy he doesn't look old enough to have created and marketed the paw sculpture way back in '74.
 
I've seen a lot of grizzly tracks. Followed them to the bear in some cases.

The claw impressions are usually just the tips of the claws, and you distinguish grizzly from black bear prints by observing the claw marks are much further away. Black bear claw tips are right next to the toes.

But I don't see why it would be surprising to find tracks in clay or mud. The first thing they do in the morning is get up and pee, then go get a drink. The get a drink before bedding down. In coastal areas they'll go down to lick the minerals at the intertidal zone.

In all these cases they are going over ground that is either sandy or muddy (or gravel) because it is a water body. Up in the glaciated areas it is all glacial silt and makes for superb tracks.

In the daytime the glaciated rivers really surge, and in the nighttime or with cloudy days they subside, and when the water drops the silt or mud has ideal conditions for deep tracks with a lot more detail. A dry hard-pack sun-baked trail isn't going to leave much of anything.

So sure that level of detail is possible. The claws being so complete is unusual, but in some really soft stuff I could see it happening. Geez, you can follow one for miles and pick the best tracks out of a huge number.

The only bear paws I have handeld are the five I shot, killed, and skinned. I don't know how you'd stand the bear up to make the impression go into the mud. They're a little heavy. (!) You have to work the hide off one leg, then another, up the belly, then the forelegs, up to the neck, and roll them one way and the other to get it off the back. The head and paws are the most intricate work and you're out there in the field, not on an elevated table. The ears, eyes, and nose and going around the claws you have to be very careful.

So just remember that leg is attached to the bear. To push the paw into a mold on the ground you'd need the whole leg standing up normally because you can't bend the paw like that.

Maybe you'd make a square thing to put mud in and press the paw into it upside-down. You'd need some kind of special casting material that wouldn't drip out.

I dunno. I have never made a plaster cast of anything my whole life. But I do see a problem you have to solve if you are making one from a bear you shot.
 
I dunno. I have never made a plaster cast of anything my whole life. But I do see a problem you have to solve if you are making one from a bear you shot.


So, you can't really say if this looks like (or actually is) a field casting, or if there is a backstory scam going on?
 
So, you can't really say if this looks like (or actually is) a field casting, or if there is a backstory scam going on?

That's right. It is unusual but not impossible for a field print. I'll dig one of my pictures up for you. On a different computer...

If it is a tranquilized or dead bear then you need some kind of gooey stuff to make the print of first (holding it upside down or sideways and pressing it onto the paw) and then making a plaster cast of it afterwards.
 
So, you can't really say if this looks like (or actually is) a field casting, or if there is a backstory scam going on?

Here is a very typical fresh grizzly track, in somewhat sandier stuff on the top with a clay-like glacial silt underneath. I was tracking this guy and his buddy for a couple of miles, and found him on a hillside. They don't get much fresher than this.

bearprint.jpg


One trick to know how fresh they are is to get down on your hands and knees and blow on the little bits of sand you see the claws have dislodged.

If the tracks have just been made, those little sandy thingies will blow away with your breath. After some hours, they will adhere more to the ground. Same with snow. Flick the bigger pieces with your finger. See if they are attached or completely loose.

Another thing to look for is if there has been a light rain since the tracks have been made, then those littel crater-like features from the rain drops hitting the ground are going to be both in the tracks themselves in addition to being on the ground around them. Fresh tracks will have pressed the ground smoothe.

See how the claw tips are the only evidence of the claws? That's how I most often find them.

In tracks that are older or made in a little harder ground they are going to look more like this:


100_1003.jpg


Those are the front and back tracks, the front ones being the smaller one.

See how you can't even detect the claws? These would be the usual examples. I can say that I remember more of the claws being visible in really mucky stuff like this:

100_1001.jpg


That's a wolf print, and like I was saying when the water drops in a glacial stream the edge of the stream is going to be really mucky and a bear print will sink down more, so the claws are going to show more.

But the thing that I also usually see with that is the prints are kind of slipping a little, like the claws are not making perfectly straight imprints. Sorry I don't have a picture of it, as it isn't something I was ever interested in taking pictures of.

But it's like they are leaving a squiggle-type effect as they sink in, and sometimes the pad will slip a little.

I can see conditions on a long set of tracks in the right ground conditions leaving some remarkable prints.

I have not seen them as clear as the ones shown in those casts to my recollection, but I'm not claiming to be an expert. Just your garden-variety mountain man.

I'm not the legendary tracker like old Bob Gimlin, the indian tracker eh?
 
Never seen one like it in the field, Will

Definitely real though, or else a really amazing artist.

Check out the claws for example. See how they have those hollowed-out parts in the middle? A dead giveaway for the real McCoy. Yowza.

Then check out the pads. Spot-on. The little cracks and such - I don't know how to describe what they feel like when you handle them. Drier on the outside and really thick with a tough rubbery-type inside. They look just like that.

That's a front paw. You never see the part shown on the bottom with all the hair around it. What you see is the toes, claw tips, and the big upper lobe seen in that cast. Sometimes just a whisper of that round thing on the lower left, yeah. Kind of like the dew claws in a moose print. You only see them if they are really sinking in.

Never seen anything like that. Amazing.
 
The foot was probably sprayed with hairspray, the dipped in latex, or some similar method.
 
I'm thinking it was cast, and then touched up for detail.

Hollowing out those claws in Clay would be no problem for a sculptor, same with the hair details, and the claws being independently carved so they are sticking out from the cast.

Click here to see a photo of a real Grizzly bear track casting.
http://www.glacierhikers.com/images/wildlife/grizzly-cast.jpg

Note the lack of hair, and the claws pulling straight out of the mold.
 
Last edited:
Bigfoot is a hoax ,set up by Philip Morris and Bob Heironimus.They have admitted that Philip Morris,Magician and largest costume wholesaler in the USA ,set up the sighting of BF with Bob's help.Bigsuit was sold to Roger Patterson by Philip,and worn by Bob Hieronimus.The costume consisted of hip boots,pillows,shoulder pads,long arms attached to a stick,and football helmet,the muscle movement was simply the fur sliding over the pads that moved underneath.The BF gait was Bob H's own....but I guess the believers and the media really don't want to hear this.
Footprints,language,hair samples,recorded sounds,scats[?]are nothing but fabrication by people who make money from perpetuating this myth.
 
Wow, and I always thought it was the brainchild of Roger Patterson.
Learn something new every day!
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom