Friday 22 Sep 2000
Conditions: Weather clear, windy, night clear, windy, freezing (24F), frost heave on dirt tracking areas.
On scene: Moneymaker, Bambenek, Fish, Lemley, Lee, Mort, Noll, Powell, Pugsley, Randles, Terry, Searle
Activities
Check and monitor fruit placement, kind of fruit eaten, determine tracks and visitation of cache locations.
Broadcast Sasquatch calls around midnight. Every person stays at base camp.
Use boom box to broadcast tapes of children playing and baby crying.
Place additional fruit and peanuts at baiting sites.
Observations & Results
Fish, Noll and Randles leave camp near 9:00am to check bait sites. Fruit gone from gravel pit bank, still present in wet area of gravel pit. Fruit gone from roadside. Mud site has fruit missing, 3 out of six apples gone. Melons pecked by birds, probably ravens. Old tracks in mud include elk, deer, bear, coyote. The most obvious fresh tracks were coyote and undetermined deep marks. Noll, Randles, and Fish notice an unusual impression in the transition mud at the edge of the muddy pool area. The three trackers discuss the strange imprint, then suddenly it dawns what animal caused it. Fish and Randles note the shock on Noll's face. Each tracker comes closer to have another look, discussions follow for 2-3 minutes. The three observe and note the various parts of the impression, and the chunks of chewed apple apparently spewed about over the imprint.
The base camp is alerted. Everyone comes to see the impression. All conclude the animal sat down at the edge of the mud, then leaned down on its left forearm and reaching out over the soft mud to grab the fruit with its right hand a distance of about three feet. The group discusses the possible reasons why the animal might have done this, instead of simply walking into the wet mud to grab the fruit, as the other animals may have done. The mud is only a few inches deep. One possible explanation is immediately apparent -- the animal did not want to leave tracks. The marks it did leave are much less distinct than footprints -- relatively shallow and easy to miss from even a short distance away. There was speculation about why it didn't want to leave obvious footprints in the mud. Another possible explanation involves the animal also being cautious by simply sitting down to observe the new situation before taking overt action.
The mud site is within earshot of our camp. If the animals had been generally circling our camp for the past few nights, they would have walked passed or near this mud site more than once. The general area sees a lot of hunters at certain times of year. It seems that even a less intelligent species inhabiting this area would try to avoid humans. It's not a stretch to think this rather intelligent primate species would not want to leave its distinctive tracks at a spot where hunters would likely pass by. If these animals have been avoiding confrontations with humans for thousands of years, might this behavior -- avoidance of leaving distinctive footprints -- be an ancient survival strategy?
Several experienced Sasquatch field researchers in the group noted that they had likely seen this behavior before -- track patterns suggesting the animals did not want to leave obvious tracks behind -- relatively consistent avoidance of soils that would have left the most clear track impressions. This is in contrast to most other large mammals, which usually don't make special efforts, or take special paths, to avoid leaving tracks behind. We also noted that in cases where lots of clear Sasquatch tracks have been found, the locations were usually in very remote areas that saw little to no human human traffic -- such as Bluff Creek in the late 1950's.
Light coyote tracks are observed on the surface of the rump and thigh of the body print, suggesting that coyotes arrived sometime after the Sasquatch left or were kept at bay during the primate visit. A second pile of chewed up apple is found on a different part of the mud pool, indicating there may have been more than one Sasquatch present or a single individual could have moved. It is noted that an elk, deer, coyote, etc., would probably have eaten the entire apple and not spewed out the seeds or core.
Two other important things noted:
The evidence indicated the impression must have been left sometime between 3:00am and 9:00am.
The distant scream heard the night before came from the general direction of this mud area, which is why some fruit piles were placed in this direction from camp.
As photos and videos and measurements are taken of the body print by various BFRO people, discussion shifts to physically preserving the imprint. The imprint must first be protected against drying in the sun. The print is already starting to dry out. If the mud dries completely the impression will crack and crumble as the casting materials are applied. The fine details will turn to dust. A make-shift cover is constructed from large rocks holding up a sheet of plywood to protect the mud from drying in the morning sun.
A full tally of available plaster and other casting materials is calculated to see if one large cast can be made of the body imprint. Among the group there is about 150 pounds of Hydrocal B-11 and some 50 plus pounds of Plaster of Paris. Aluminum tent poles are offered to reinforce the large cast. Sleeping bag pads and air mattresses are offered to cushion the cast for transport off the mountain.
Noll directs the casting process. The various people document the entire process of making the cast with their camcorders.
A cast is produced that is roughly 3.5X4.5 feet, weighing a few hundred pounds. Several people are required to lift the cast out of the mud. Several pounds of mud are removed from the underside of the cast before it is lifted onto a pile of sleeping bag pads in the back of a truck.
The apple pieces are collected prior to casting, with the hope that saliva with buccal, cheek, and gum cells will be present on the apple pieces and can be used for DNA analysis.
, people saying it was an elk, etc.