Two nights ago, I received an email about a recent footprint find:
I have found tracks that are quite large and flat-footed…about a foot long. Very clear- not blurred.
I need you to call me at 541-xxx-xxxx
I spotted them at the south end of Wickiup Lake.I could take you right where I spotted them.
Please call me first. I am experienced out-doorsman and knowledgable about the forest and such.
Thank you. Hope to hear from you soon.
Mel XXXXXXX
Normally when I receive word of a track find, I insist on receiving a photograph of the tracks prior to going out to investigate , unless it’s very close by. Experience has taught me that quite often witnesses, in their excitement, tend to make the tracks sound a lot more compelling than they turn out to be.
In this case, however, I decided to just pick up and go. Why? Because I wanted to prove to myself that I still could. *grin* Being a full-time single Mom makes it nearly impossible for me to get out the way I used to. Getting me ready, my stuff ready, Rowan ready, Rowan’s stuff ready, driving with a two-year old, wrangling said child while trying to interview a witness and document a find… it all makes for a daunting task. But I had to prove that I could do it. With a little help, of course.
I asked my dad to go with me. He doesn’t care much for bigfoot, but I think he liked the idea of being able to hang out with Rowan for the day, which was ok by me.
The witness was a retired, disabled vet who was fishing at the lake last Thursday. He said he took his walker and went to sit on a stump to fish, and noticed this line of clear tracks in the mud beside the lake. When I spoke with him on the phone, he said he hadn’t had a camera at the time, but emphasized that the tracks were very clear and had no arch, and were depressed deeply in the mud.
So we went. I stopped everything yesterday and packed up. Somehow, I managed to get everything and everyone ready and busted out the front door in record time – in a little over an hour.
We met the Mel in Lowell and stopped for lunch at the A&W in Oakridge. I liked Mel. He was a sweetheart… we talked and joked and laughed at Rowan’s antics over lunch, then we followed him out to the location. The drive itself took a total of three hours.
When we arrived at the location, I noticed dispersed campers in the area. He said there were many more people there than when he visited the area. Not a good sign. Mel pointed out the stump he was sitting on and I walked down to take a look.
I saw the tracks he was referring to. The substrate was a tracker’s dream. The mud was squishy and the dermal ridges in the bottom of the track were pristine. They were deep. They were clear.
They were also human. About a size 10 men’s.
The angle of the toes was a dead giveaway - as was the arch, the meandering stride, the fine dermals and the overall location of the tracks. They were surrounded by others: kids, dogs, shoe prints.
The moral of the story? Many times, when a witness finds tracks, they aren’t Bigfoot tracks. Even someone who has a lot of experience in the woods doesn’t necessarily have a trained eye when it comes to the differences between Sasquatch and human tracks. Often, a witness will see barefoot tracks somewhere and get excited, thinking they COULD be Sasquatch tracks, and they won’t pay attention to the subtle details. A clear barefoot track is a clear barefoot track and simply BECAUSE it’s barefoot, it conjures up visions on Bigfoot.
It’s up to the investigator to read the fine print (pun intended).
Despite my disappointment that I wasn’t able to cast clear Bigfoot prints in lake mud (which would have been a joy… our substrate over here in the coast range sucks for finding clear tracks), it was still an enjoyable experience. The witness was wonderful, the drive was beautiful and Dad and Rowan and I got to spend the day out of the house.
AND I proved to myself that being a mom doesn’t preclude being an investigator.
Next time, though, I’ll wait for a photo before I drive six hours in one day. *grin*
