following 6-page paper was found in a British Library.
Believing in the paleontological existence of Gigantopithecus (and actually possessing an ash tray said to be made from a cast of its jaw) we decided to deal with the phenomena of the Sasquatch in two parts; first of all to briefly review current literature on the subject, secondly to give the result of our extensive examination of the three recent Sasquatch casts, loaned to us for a year by Professor Krantz.
THE SASQUATCH IN
If the film is genuine, surely that would be the end of the matter......a huge unknown hairy primate, a female Gigantopithecus -- for that's what it must have been -- exists in North America. But in his absolutely fascinating ANATOMY AND DERMATOGLYPHICS OF THREE SASQUATCH FOOTPRINTS. Professor Krantz does not even mention the Patterson footage. A report by two Doctors of the Academy of Sciences, Moscow, in 1972, balancing the evidence of the Patterson film, photographs, casts and an article by Professor Krantz concluded:
'So our conclusion at this stage is the following: though it is not yet clear in what relation North American hominoids stand in the making of man, it is pretty clear now that they are not man-made'.
The same report, apropos the Patterson film, mentions 'an unnaturally protruding heel which may, to a casual observer seem a sticking out edge of an artificial sole'. Professor John Napier in his 1973 publication BIGFOOT points out that the Patterson film of the 'so-called' female Sasquatch and tracks found by Patterson at the same locus are not in accord with the stature estimated by the film.
We believe that the fact that the Patterson film is not taken as subjective proof of the existence of Sasquatch must indicate a hoax. Professor Napier was much taken with the Bossburg (Washington State) casts of alleged Sasquatch footprints.
Rene Dahinden informed Professor Napier that he had found 1,089 footprints in the Bossburg area, and amongst them was evidence of the existence of a crippled Sasquatch, the unfortunate creature having a club foot, a condition known as Tapiles-equino-varus. Professor Napier states: 'It is very difficult to conceive of a hoaxer, so subtle, so knowledgeable -- so sick -- who would deliberately fake a footprint of this nature'.
Kenneth Wylie in his BIGFOOT (1980) claims the Bossburg tracks were faked by Ray Pickens, an admission apparently made by Mr. Pickens during a B.B.C. Interview. Apropos the Bossburg fake, Mr. Wylie states:
'The scramble among the many investigators to delete this example from their lists, and to condemn the hoax, is instructive'. On page 212, he states: '...fakery is almost never impossible when we are dealing with human ingenuity.'
Recently we met an American from the West Coast who is an inveterate hunter in the Northwest region. He always shoots his yearly quota of two deer... he also owns a large tract of uninhabited hunting ground. We questioned him about Sasquatch... he states it is a myth, and that all films, photographs, sightings and tracks are faked. He also states that he has never met a member of the hunting fraternity who believes in Sasquatch. He was absolutely amazed when informed that as many as 2,000 Sasquatch may exist in the Pacific Northwest, a maximum figure given to interviewer Patrick Huyghe. Our American deerstalker stated that men of his ilk would have seen a Sasquatch if it existed.
We also find it pertinent that although Sasquatch tracks appear to be extremely numerous over the years, the author of FIELD GUIDE TO ANIMAL TRACKS had to attend San Francisco zoo to obtain a jaguar's paw print, and this animal does live in the wilds of the USA.
We must always remember the Coelacanth... if an authority had stated in 1937 that they were still swimming and breeding off the east coast of South Africa, he or she would have been ridiculed and lampooned all over the world, for it was said to be extinct during the Cretaceous Period. A living specimen was caught in 1938, as have numerous examples subsequently.
From our researches in the Sasquatch literature, to which we have but briefly referred, we find almost universal skepticism. We admire Professor Krantz for his persistence against all the available observations of continual hoaxing. A phrase made by Professor Napier, re the Bossburg cripple, we find particularly poignant, and we repeat it: - 'It is very difficult to conceive of a hoaxer so subtle, so knowledgeable - so sick...' But such a hoaxer did exist.
Examination of Three
1982 Sasquatch Casts.
The footprints were made in soft, fine-grained soil in the State of Washington on the border with Oregon, and were tracked by Forest Rangers over some 3/4 of a mile in 1982. Three only casts have reached us but measurements taken between these and other footprints at the same location have revealed details concerning the likely size, weight and type of locomotion used by the "creature".
For the reader's interest, the Sasquatch (Amerindian word for "Big Foot") from this and other "evidence" is reckoned to be of humanoid shape, hair covered, bipedal creature, 2.5 metres tall, weighing about 400 Kg, and with short toes, collapsed arches and the ankle a little further forward on the foot than in humans. The Sasquatch is roughly twice the size of an adult gorilla, which is the nearest known creature with which to liken it. We do not know if the casts we have seen are genuine or fake and we have not interviewed any of the people involved in the finding or recording of these fascinating imprints, nor do we think a positive decision could be made anyway without visiting the site of such tracks and examining and casting the footprints ourselves together with other experts. We know only too well that anything can be faked if there is sufficient motive to do so and the Sasquatch is as big a "crowd-puller" in the U.S.A. as is the Loch Ness Monster in Scotland. Only a fool would confirm or deny the existence of either positively, without a shred of evidence.
In this instance,
the case for the Sasquatch is stronger than for the Loch Ness Monster
because we do have these casts not bones or teeth or a skull, but footprints
at least, of an alleged very shy and completely overlooked species of
ape. As we have already said, just enough ridge detail is visible in these
casts to grab our attention but there is not enough to give a full account
of the plantar surfaces from a ridge-by-ridge point of view. We agree
entirely with Olsen when he says that if these are fakes then they are
brilliant fakes by someone well versed in our science in addition to anthropology,
zoology, biology and any other "ology" necessary to fool all
According to Professor Krantz, the three casts reveal a foot 38 cm long approximately and about 17 cm wide at the toe and 1O cm at the heel. The toes are more "squared-off" than in a human foot and there is very little size difference in the toes; the "big" toe being only slightly larger than the "little" toe. Another curiosity common to all 3 casts is the apparent lack of flexion creases in the short toes.
At least, none appear in the casts and this may or may not mean that they do not exist on the foot that made the indentations in the soil. For instance, a print taken with ink from a human foot will show little of the toes apart from the big toe and quite often, it will not be possible even to see what patterns exist, let alone see signs of flexion creases.
In an ape, the toes
are as long as fingers and would be fairly represented in a print but
the Sasquatch casts are nothing like an ape's foot print, do not have
an opposing 1st digit and appear
The dermal ridges present appear to us of "normal" type and size and not larger than one would expect on any human or ape hand or foot. Sweat pores also appear and these too are normally spaced along the ridge summits. The difference between the pores and bubbles in the latex-casting medium can easily be distinguished.
Individually, the casts are named by Professor Krantz as "Full Left", "Full Right" and "Short Right" (so called because the heel end is missing).
Full Left: This cast reveals the best example of sweat pores at the base of digit 2 and most of the apparent toe patterns can be seen. The patterns are set fairly low on the digit (as we believe is the case in human toes) and Prof. Krantz lists digit 1 (big toe) as being a loop, although we can also see it as an arch. Digit 2 is a low count loop, or arch, there being a diagonal mark in the cast right where the recurve in the loop appears to be. Digit 3 cannot be clearly seen and nor can "Digit 6". Digit 4 is another possible arch with what may be a diagonal scar and Digit 5 is an arch or small count loop with its ridges continuing to flow on to the apparent extra digit 6.
It still concerns
us that if this was a cast of a human foot, only the tips of the 4 toes
may show and if one assumed that this was the imprint of the whole toe
then naturally, all the patterns would appear to be arches when in fact,
the actual pattern is lower down and not recorded. The toes would also
appear short, when in reality they are not. This "Full Left"
cast also reveals a few ridges on the sole about half way down, below
Digits 5 and 6, and a few more on the heel apparently running straight
across. The mid-sole ridges appear to us to be somewhat diagonal from
heel to big toe, which is at variance with Prof. Krantz's finding that
these ridges are "transverse" as in a
Full Right:- Patterns, or apparent patterns on the digits of this cast are all a little obscure but as ridges can be seen running straight across the digits, they could well be arches. Again, mid-sole ridges are recorded and seem to us to be diagonal from heel to little toe and more reminiscent of the skin at a human elbow crease than of a plantar impression. However, this is probably just a trick of the casting medium and/or wear on the sole of the foot that made the imprint. Some ridges are also visible on the edge and side of the heel on the little toe side. The main points of interest on this cast are firstly, the impression of a large stone in the center of the cast indicating a thick fatty pad on the sole of the foot and pliable enough to assume the shape of the stone which has been stepped on. This pad must be, according to Prof. Krantz, at least 2 cm thick. Secondly, the Professor mentions ridge dysplasia on some toe tips and fore part of the sole. We can see what he means but feel that this too could merely be a trick of the cast or wear. We did note a few other possible areas of "dysplasia" on the Full Left cast. We do not like the term "dysplasia" either, as in dermatoglyphics dysplasia is a very ill defined term and different to "ridge dissociation" which is what we think the Professor is describing. Certainly, most fingerprint experts will understand what is meant by ridge dissociation and this is a much better defined term. It is also very rare and this is the first time that we have seen anything like it on a foot.
Short Right:- There is not much for the fingerprint man in this case. Digits 1 and 2 are not clear, 3, 4 and 5 appear to be arches. Some indistinct ridges can be seen on the sole.
Together, these casts
appear to represent the foot of a highly unusual creature, flatfooted
in the extreme and with a congenital disorder -- ridge dissociation. There
is also the matter of the extra digit. As we said, it could well be faked
and if so, the "culprit" is worthy of the Lewis Minshall Award.
Copyrighted to John
Berry, FFS and Stephen Haylocle FFS (Herts) January 1985
Portions of this website are reprinted under the Fair Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law as educational material without benefit of financial gain. This proviso is applicable throughout the entire website at www.bigfootencounters.com