>> Editor's Note:

This could, quite possibly, be the LONGEST newsletter I've ever published. Got your coffee cup handy? :)

There's a couple of articles in here I'd really like you to read. The first one discusses Mom's book, Valley of the Skookum, that is now available. I know many of you have been waiting for this for a long time - since I announced it's pending publication about two years ago, in fact. Before you order, please read the enclosed article. It expresses where I stand on several issues - and that's important to me, since the publication of Mom's book is likely going to raise a few questions about that.

On to the next order of business... The actual film site of the 1967 Patterson/Gimlin film is considered by some to be the Holy Grail of Bigfoot Research. But how do you find the exact spot 39 years after the fact? We tried, during the filming of Mysterious Encounters... Researcher "D" has prepared a lengthy article with accompanying photographs detailing his many trips back to Bluff Creek in an attempt to discover the exact location of the filming. Many researchers believe it's in one spot... "D" thinks they're wrong. What do YOU think?

Finally, we've got a fun and educational story from reader Sid Tracy about the ruins in Arizona and some footprint-shaped petroglyphs there.

Additional bonus features, including 8 video interviews and surveillance camera footage that I didn't have room for on the DVD, are now available in the Oregonbigfoot.com member's section, along with many other audio and video files you won't find anywhere else.

The Sci-Fi Investigates: Bigfoot episode, which Skye and I participated in, is scheduled to air again on November 29th. Check your local listings for exact dates and times, since it varies depending whether you have cable or satellite.

And finally... the belly update. Egads. Almost to the end of 32 weeks... the pregnancy is supposed to last until 40 weeks, but I don't know if I can handle getting much bigger. I already feel like I'm going to tip forward permanently at any moment. :)

I wanted to thank all of you for the kind wishes you've emailed over the last few months. For those of you who have expressed an interest in sending something along for the pending bundle, we've registered at Target Online.

Halloween... it's hard to find a costume when you're pregnant. What could I be? An eggplant? Nah. Too purple. Pumpkin? Too predictable... We went out with Mom for Halloween to our favorite karaoke spot, though we didn't stay long. Mom designed the costumes and did an amazing job as usual, though I was a little worried that some people might be offended... I guess it was slightly better than if I'd dressed up as a nun, though not by much. <grin> Skye shaved his head in honor of the occasion in order to get his horns to stick and I spent the evening trying to wind my way up to the karaoke stage with large feathered wings protruding from the back and the belly poking out the front. I've never taken up so much room in my life! :)

Autumn Williams
Oregonbigfoot.com
Your comments are always welcome.

The legend lives

Bigfoot research makes professor a campus outcast
"Is the theory of exploration dead?" he asked. "I'm not out to proselytize that Bigfoot exists. I place legend under scrutiny and my conclusion is, absolutely, Bigfoot exists."

Editorial: Does Bigfoot Scare You?

New Skunk Ape Photo (The guys at Cryptomundo are on top of it as usual. Looks like a monkey suit to me...)

What Americans Believe About Cryptozoology

Explorer hopes plaster cast will raise funds to search for Bigfoot

'It's time for your close up, Mr. Du Pont monster'

Film crew says something’s afoot, hunting for Bigfoot

The Rood Bigfoot

For years, many of you have asked about my family's ongoing experiences with Bigfoot when I was a child. The funny thing is, for years, I had been asking the same question of my mother.

In the late 1970's, we lived in the foothills of Mt. Rainier in Washington State. Our home was a small cabin nestled along the banks of the Carbon River. During the course of several years, my family and neighbors experienced ongoing encounters with large, hairy manlike creatures.

While I was a young girl at the time, I clearly remember certain events that occurred during that period: A red racer snake that hissed at me when I tried to pick him up (I went running into the house, terrified that he was on my heels), gathering termites from a large log on the path to feed the anoles - lizards - we kept in a glass cage, a sighting that my mother and I had while picking up sticks on the trail behind our house. There were two upright, hairy creatures standing near the path that day. I was little more than a toddler, but I remember the size of the creatures, the larger one's BIG eyes, and my mother's reaction. And wondering WHY she was so afraid of the Big Hairy People who apparently walked around in our back yard.

A box full of mystery... and a reluctant witness

When I was in my early teens, I discovered a box of letters my mother had written to a researcher about the events at the time and some photographs of footprints she'd found on the riverbed. The information contained within these files was but a brief snapshot of what occurred during those years. Passages in the letters alluded to other events which were not clearly documented within the articles in the box. I began to ask Mom questions about our years in Orting and she adamantly refused to talk about it. "We moved away from there to get away from what was happening. I've put it behind me and I want it to stay there."

Needless to say, all adolescents love a "Mystery" and that's exactly what this was. I thought, "If she won't talk about it, it MUST be good!" I continued to press her, sometimes gently, sometimes not, over the years. And she continued to refuse to tell me the details about what had happened.

By the time I was 16, the Mystery had consumed me. I had devoured every book on the subject and began going out into the field - hoping for my own encounters and interviewing others who'd had them. Still, no matter how many times I asked, Mom would not talk about Orting. She gave me the box of letters and photographs, probably in an attempt to shut me up, and they sat in my closet AND in the back of my mind. I would dig them out from time to time, searching for clues, for understanding.

The letters - a diary of sorts, really - bothered me. They contained references to things that were occasionally mentioned in other Bigfoot reports I'd read; things that were STRANGE and didn't fit what most researchers seemed to believe about the phenomenon. Most reports in the Bigfoot books I read by John Green, Rene Dahinden and others included brief, transient sightings of a creature crossing a road... It occurred to me that these witnesses had little opportunity to interact with the creatures as the letters indicated my family and neighbors had. I wondered if the reports included in these books were all there were, or whether the investigators and authors had simply shunned others who, like my family, claimed to experience ongoing encounters... had the authors simply refused to include their stories in the books due to their own incredulity?

What's logic got to do with it?

I began to read between the lines and kept my ear to the ground, searching for others who claimed similar experiences. And I found them. Apparently, there were people here and there around the country who told of ongoing encounters. And the fact that many of them recited certain details about the creatures' behavior that mimicked what was in my mother's letters gave me pause. The details of her encounters had never been published... heck, she wouldn't even talk to me about them... but here were other people describing similar events.

Years passed and I continued on my quest. I interviewed witnesses, paying particular attention to those "long-term witnesses" who claimed ongoing encounters. I spent time in the field and even returned several times to the old homestead in Orting... during which times I found evidence that the creatures were still around and experienced strange encounters of my own. All the while, the events in the 70's lingered in the back of my mind and I found myself frustrated by the fact that most researchers refused to consider even the possibility that long-term witnesses may posses valuable information. These witnesses were inevitably cast aside as "kooks" because they would relate details and experiences that didn't fit the mold of what the researchers themselves BELIEVED the bigfoot phenomenon to be.

Here's the trouble with this reasoning, as I understood it: most researchers would agree that if 20 incidental witnesses claimed to have seen different creatures cross the road, that each was in the neighborhood of 7-8' tall, hair covered, and usually some variation of brown or black, that the witnesses had likely seen something real and that one's story would corroborate another's. Therefore, that would be considered pretty compelling anecdotal evidence for the existence of bigfoot.

By the same token then, if several LTW'S (long-term witnesses) indicated that they had ongoing encounters, and that those encounters had consisted of X,Y, and Z... and these witnesses had NO contact with one another... wouldn't those stories corroborate one other as well? I was at least open to the possibility that they might.

But when I joined a listserve years ago and began to exchange these ideas with other researchers, I found that they were OFFENDED by the notion, and were quick to not only dismiss the witnesses, but ME for listening to them.

Wow.

Granted, it was likely difficult for these veteran researchers to take me seriously because I was young, female, and coming from a place most of them had never been... I was a witness myself, my family had obviously experienced SOMETHING strange, and having been a part of it I was blessed with an open-mindedness born of experience that none of the others seemed to possess. So I don't necessarily blame them for dismissing me OR my interests.

But it seemed to me that these researchers were busy chasing their tails. Following up on a transient road-crossing sighting, if you got there early enough, might net you a couple of footprints. But the creature was most likely on his or her way to somewhere, meaning not there, when you get there. Wouldn't it make more sense, I thought, to follow up with some of these witnesses who claimed that the creatures hung around near their residence for one reason or another? These people claimed to be HABITUATING these creatures. Why not check it out? What have you got to lose?

Well, I discovered what you had to lose... your CREDIBILITY with others in the research field. Apparently, my peers weren't ready for that kind of forward thinking, especially from a little whippet like me. So, rather than hanging around arguing with other researchers who refused to consider a different way of thinking, I left the listserve and did my own thing.

A different approach to the same old problem

I continued to work with LTWs. And, as a result, I've had some amazing experiences. I've seen some VERY compelling evidence that these witnesses really may have Bigfoot hanging out in their backyards on a fairly regular basis. And while these witnesses aren't as numerous as incidental ones, I feel that these are the IDEAL research scenarios... if a researcher can get over the idea that she may not win a popularity contest with her peers this week.

Now, on to the "stranger" side of these reports. What I found by interviewing LTWs is that many of them report other anomalies along with their Bigfoot encounters. Little lights in the trees. Underground rumblings. Lights in the sky. Gift exchanges (they leave food or items out for the creatures and receive natural items in return, sometimes displayed in a patterned formation). There are others, as well, that I won't go into here. What these witnesses describe is rather moot. The FACT that they are describing additional phenomena leads one to take a certain approach to these reports.

First, I've talked before about how eyewitness testimony, whether it's from an incidental or long-term witness, is SUBJECTIVE. But the problem that most researchers have with LTW testimony is that it's much more detailed and inclusive than that of incidental witnesses. Someone who reports a road-crossing may give details about color, height, maybe weight, the creature's gait... most researchers are comfortable with this information because it APPEARS objective and does not particularly offend anyone's sensibilities - unless, of course, the witness reports that the creature had bright pink hair and wore a tutu. <grin> But LTW information is usually much more detailed and often includes more subtle interactions. This is where it gets sticky. These witnesses tend to INTERPRET more, simply because they have more information available to them to interpret.

But just because a witness may interpret certain events based upon their own slant or dogma, it doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have Bigfoot creatures roaming around in their back yards at night. I'm simply not comfortable throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

As I researched LTWs, I began to develop a SKEPTICAL OPEN-MINDEDNESS. Logic suggested to me that there were several possibilities:

A) The witness was delusional and seeking attention - in which case I was still interested in exploring what personality type and motivations might cause someone to report these things in order to more easily identify them.

B) The witness was experiencing SOME of the things they claimed and interpreting the rest, creating correlations between the presence of Bigfoot creatures and other phenomena where there was none - in this case, I figured the witness STILL may have Bigfoot in their backyard and it was a great place to do some field work.

C) The witness was incredibly observant, was experiencing MULTIPLE phenomena, and Bigfoot might be a stranger critter than we give it credit for. If this was true, it would make itself apparent eventually - but only if I had the fortitude to research those scenarios which others wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole.

Don't believe it for a minute...

Now, let's get something straight: I didn't believe any of the witnesses I interviewed. Still don't.

Huh? That might stop a lot of you dead in your tracks. "Whaddaya mean, you don't believe them? Then why bother?"

Because I don't "believe" ANY witness. Eyewitnesses, whether reporting a road-crossing or an intricate interaction with a creature, will INTERPRET their encounters. And wholeheartedly believing a witnesses' subjective report throws your objectivity as a researcher right out the window. With any witness, I will examine the testimony, the supporting evidence, and come to a tentative conclusion about whether or not I feel the witness may be relating, interpreted in their own way, actual events that occurred... and whether those events may or may not be related to Bigfoot activity. This helps to determine whether or not I feel that there is value in conducting field research in an area.

Nor do I BELIEVE any one particular thing about the Bigfoot phenomenon. I've discussed this here before... BIGFOOT IS WHATEVER IT IS. It might be a garden-variety great ape, an animal, relatively stupid and unintelligent. It might be some sort of pre-human ancestor, gallivanting along on its own branch of our family tree. It might be something weirder than that. It might be smarter than us. The point is, I don't KNOW... and neither do you. But if you really want to know WHAT it is, at this early stage in the game you really have to allow yourself to keep an open mind and examine ALL of the evidence.

Remember I said earlier that many researchers avoid certain aspects of Bigfoot research because it doesn't fit in with what they BELIEVE bigfoot to be?

We differ in that respect. I don't CARE what Bigfoot is and I don't presume to know... I only hope to understand it in my lifetime.

I'm not a Satanist... are you?

Recently, one of those researchers from the old listserve referred to me as a "Paranormalist" because, early on, I had expressed an interest in understanding these odd reports.

The dictionary defines the suffix "-ist" as "One who follows a principal". It infers a specific belief system... like "Satanist". I explained that simply because I choose to investigate and explore the fact that people REPORT other strange phenomena in conjunction with Bigfoot sightings, it does not make me anything... other than a researcher who refuses to be so arrogant as to BELIEVE that they know what Bigfoot is and what it is not.

If you read Science and Health by Mary Baker Eddy in an attempt to understand what that belief system entails, does that automatically make you a "Christian Scientist"? If you read books about Satanic Cults in order to understand the beliefs and rituals, does that make you a "Satanist"?

Of course, the dictionary also states that it's "a member of a profession or one interested in something". Okay... I'll allow for that. But if you read a Stephen Hawking book, are you suddenly a "Quantum Physicist"? <grin> Let's see... following that line of logic, and the books I've read or topics I've studied, that would make me a "Psychologist", a "Biologist", a "Gynecologist"...

I don't appreciate being pigeonholed... especially when the intent is to discredit and stigmatize. See, the trouble is, real Paranormalists fervently BELIEVE that Bigfoot is "interdimensional" or "ethereal" or "spirit energy" or "a demon" or "an alien" or whatever and will argue the point with all the intensity of one devoted to a religious cause...

Unfortunately, people who have their own steadfast beliefs about Bigfoot have a hard time understanding that I DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING ABOUT THE NATURE OF SASQUATCH.

How different, really, are the "Flesh and Blood-ists"? <grin> They cling to a belief system as well... one that guides their actions and causes them to shun ANY report that even REMOTELY suggests that Bigfoot might be a "strange" phenomenon, rather than a plain-old biological animal running around in the woods. Nevermind the fact that the reports that might suggest otherwise are there and have been for years. And how are these reports handled? They're simply ignored in light of a more "scientific" approach to the subject.

Trouble is, any scientist will tell you that subjectively ignoring data from the get-go is a surefire way to ensure that your findings, and therefore your conclusions, are inaccurate. That's why I'm not comfortable simply dimissing these other types of reports.

For the record, I DO NOT BELONG TO EITHER CAMP. I am a... Researcher. I research. Period. I don't believe. I don't know. I wonder. I ponder. I question. Therefore, I research. Thoroughly. All aspects of the subject. With an open, AND THEREFORE TRULY SKEPTICAL AND OBJECTIVE, mind.

The pot calls the kettle ignorant....

Blanket dismissal of an idea in spite of evidence to the contrary, just because it makes you uncomfortable and doesn't fit with your "beliefs", is NOT skepticism. It's not science. It's religion.

Recently, on the Sci-Fi Investigates program that Skye and I were involved with, many researchers and laypersons alike were annoyed with Boston Rob Mariano because of his "skepticism". So was I. It wasn't skepticism. It was IGNORANCE and I told him so. He was confronted with evidence. He chose to IGNORE the evidence and maintain his "belief" that Bigfoot probably doesn't exist.

By the same token, there are anecdotal reports from eyewitnesses - also known as anecdotal evidence - that indicate that Bigfoot might be a little weirder than we think. You might not like it. But the FACT is, those reports are out there. LOTS of them. Many proudly self-proclaimed "Flesh and Blood" researchers aren't comfortable with this, so they tend to IGNORE those reports and DISMISS the witnesses. Sound familiar?

Let's read that again:

Blanket dismissal of an idea in spite of evidence to the contrary, just because it makes you uncomfortable and doesn't fit with your "beliefs", is NOT skepticism. It's not science. It's religion.

Hm.

Yet those same researchers grumble about those in the scientific community or general population who refuse to consider that Bigfoot even exists, despite evidence to the contrary. People like Boston Rob. Or Dr. Jeff Meldrum's associates.

It makes my head spin.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not a supporter of the idea that the Bigfoot phenomenon is "paranormal" and I certainly don't believe that it is. Remember? I HAVE NO BELIEFS ABOUT IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. I'm simply trying to point out the glaring double-standard held by many researchers and why it's irritating when others try to label and discredit me simply because I refuse to muddy up my thinking with their particular belief system. Flesh and Blood? Paranormal? No thanks. It's like the battle between Creation and Evolution. What if you don't buy either of them?

The difference between an idea and a belief is that I DON'T FEEL THE NEED TO DEFEND PARTICULAR IDEAS... only my right to have them, study them, and not be pigeonholed or bullied into someone else's belief system.

Separating the researcher from the witness

Recently, other researchers have begun to see the light; folks like Thom Powell, author of The Locals. I was thrilled to see Thom paying attention to these habituation scenarios and recognizing the potential value in them.

Several years ago, Mom began writing down all of the events that she remembered in Orting. I didn't know why she had changed her mind but I wasn't going to question it. This was a big deal to me... the Mystery was finally going to be revealed. :)

After I read the book, I understood why she didn't want to talk about it for all those years.

Mom's written several children's books and four novels but had never been published. She chose to write the story in book form, for my benefit, to explain what happened. It was never intended to be published. Three years ago or so, a publisher approached me, asking if I had a Bigfoot book available. I told him no, I hadn't written a book yet, wasn't sure I was going to... but my Mom had. He asked to see it. My mother is a wonderful writer, and I wasn't surprised when he said he wanted to publish it...

As nonfiction.

I began to have misgivings. The book tells the story, from Mom's perspective, of what happened when we lived in Orting. It's non-fiction, yes. But it's also a subjective account. I realized that I had worked a LONG 16 years to establish my credibility in the research field and, with the research community as dogmatic as it is about shunning LTWs and stories of the stranger side of Bigfoot, that credibility might very well take a nosedive when the book came out. I was concerned that my peers might not be able to separate me from my mother... the researcher from the witness. God knows they've had a hard enough time with it in the past.

So, just for the record:

I'm pleased that Mom's work is finally being published. She's a talented writer and her ability to take you there, in the moment, is truly a gift.

The book is a detailed example of a LTW situation. It describes specific events, behaviors and evidence. It is written by a witness and therefore also provides a classic demonstration of the challenges a researcher faces when separating fact from interpretation in a LTW case.

I'm aware that some people, particularly certain researchers, will be critical and I'm concerned about that. After all, this is my mom, I love her dearly and I'd hate to see her subjected to the type of ridicule heaped on other witnesses who have chosen to come forward. (And researchers wonder why witnesses are reluctant...)

Those who found this article enjoyable and are not personally offended by the notion of LTW encounters will GREATLY enjoy the book and may learn something from it. Those who felt this article hit a little too close to home will probably not... you'll find several things in the book to complain about, and I won't be surprised if you do so loudly and publicly.

However, please remember that this is not MY story. This is my MOTHER'S story, written from HER perspective. Mom is a witness. I am a researcher, an adult individual with experiences and a mind of my own that does not necessarily reflect those ideas or beliefs to which my mother subscribes. I do not "believe" it one way or another. I simply find it fascinating, and I examine it with the same objective open-mindedness that I maintain with other witnesses. While I was there and I remember some of the events, I was too young to fathom what was going on. Therefore, I cannot comment on my mother's interpretation of the events.

If you have questions about the book, you may contact her directly.

If you would like to order the book, you may print a mail-order form and send it directly to Mom.

Autumn Williams
October 30, 2006

Please feel free to email me your thoughts and feedback.

In September 2003, I - along with many other fellow BigFooters - attended the Willow Creek Symposium held in Willow Creek, California. For me, the event was very memorable and rewarding. For the first time, I was able to meet many well-known people who have been doing Bigfoot research for many years. I especially enjoyed meeting Bob Gimlin (in person) for the first time, and having the opportunity to talk with him.

Now as many of you who were able to attend the Willow Creek event know, the Symposium was unique! This was not only because it was held in Willow Creek, but also because it exposed us to so many different speakers and well known researchers who shared with us a plethora of information.

I especially enjoyed a meal that was prepared for us by local Native People. They cooked fresh Klamath River salmon they had personally caught earlier in the day, slow cooking it in an open pit over a bed of wood coals on skewers. I even went back for seconds though I was already full - it was that good! I also bought a one-of-a-kind wind chime created by a local Native woman that she had made with abalone shells, obsidian, and glass beads.

For me, a major highlight of the Symposium was the many interesting knowledgeable people and fellow researchers I met and still maintain communication with.

After a couple of very educational days filled with many speakers sharing their ideas, theories and information gathered over the years, and meeting many unique individuals from all walks of life and many different parts of the country, the day arrived for a trip to the "Patterson/Gimlin" film site.

A number of us were bussed from Willow Creek to a drop off point near Highway 96. From there, we were shuttled into smaller vehicles and driven a number of miles where we eventually ended up at the "bat boxes" located a short distance from "Bluff Creek" and a few miles north of the Bluff Creek Bridge. We were then taken to what we were told was the famous "Patterson/Gimlin film site".

Upon being guided to the area which is located north from the "bat boxes" (or up stream), and walking around for a short period of time, it didn't take long for me to conclude that what we were seeing was not the actual film site. The location just didn't feel right? However, I did feel that the actual P/G film site was within a reasonable distance from where we were at. This was based on prior research I had done.

Because of my research, I knew the particular area we were taken to looked too narrow. More precisely - the topography of the land and hill sides just didn't fit! The slopes of the hills on both sides where they meet the stream itself are very steep in comparison to what can be seen in the original film footage. Not to mention what is estimated in Peter Byrne's book: Bigfoot (dated early 70s) that the distance at the original site at that time from one side of the stream at the base of each hill to the other is approximately one hundred yards across.

The length of the site we were taken to appeared to be considerably shorter in distance from north to south and I didn't see anything that remotely resembled certain landmarks already known by researchers (especially the "old timer's") to have existed. For instance: there was no part of the old temporary logging road that ran along the stream, the stumps seen in the film were not evident nor was there any evidence of the bluff/slide.

Of course, I was aware at the time that thirty-six years (36) years of varying weather patterns in the region, coupled by local earthquakes, land erosion, etc., could have a considerable effect and change the original topography of the stream, even diverting the course of the stream itself. This is inevitable as you can see in the pictures I have personally taken over the past three years. This is especially true when compared to what the stream looked like at the time the film was taken on October 20th, 1967 and what it looks like today. However, I still felt that the location we were in was not in fact the actual P/G film site.

Therefore, based on my own research and the studies I had made of the film, I made the decision to break from the group and head downstream in a southerly direction towards Bluff Creek Bridge.

After hiking some distance, I passed a very large rock out-cropping to the left. After walking a little further, I no longer heard the many sounds being made by the group of people I had been with earlier. Then I noticed, to my right, what appeared to be the remnants of an old logging road. Farther down, I came upon an area of the stream that widened considerably. I continued a little further to where the topography of Bluff Creek and the hillsides opened up even more and I noticed three old stumps near one another also to my right. In the distance I could see a bluff/slide and a number of trees barring a resemblance to some of the trees seen in the back ground of the film.

It was at this juncture that I felt I was really in the area where the infamous film was made. Call it a "gut feeling" but it just felt right! In particular the area hillsides that meet the creek bed at this location are gradually sloping and not as steep as the sides of the hills at the location where we were taken to and this seemed to coincide with the film. Questionable? Just look at frame 352 behind "Patty" and you will see the gradual contour of the hill where it meets the stream. Also, the distance from one side of the creek - where the hillsides meet - to the other correlates with the distance noted in the well known researcher's book from the early 70s that I mentioned earlier where he estimates the distance is approximately one hundred yards across. And even though thirty plus years of under growth and aspen trees have sprung up within and around the creek bed I still feel confident that where I hiked to was in fact the original film site. After taking a few pictures, and writing down my notes - I decided to hike back to the group.

Upon arriving, I approached some fellow researchers whom I knew, to share with them what I had found. After a brief discussion, I was unable to convince any of them to hike back with me to where I felt the actual film site was located. Unfortunately, none of them were interested in going out of the way to at least take a look and investigate my findings let alone to discount the area where we had been taken and told was the film site. Because of their disinterest, I decided to keep my findings to myself for the duration of the trip.

On a number of occasions during the months that followed the Symposium, I tried to discuss (and share) my findings with a few other researchers. Unfortunately, I was the recipient of a lack of interest mostly due to a number of Bigfooters who still believe the actual film site is the area we had been taken to during the Willow Creek Symposium.

Still convinced of my findings, I headed back to Bluff Creek during the summer of 2004 with an associate. At Louse Camp, we met up with a friend who had directions from a well known researcher to where he believed the P/G film site was located. Although skeptical, I decided to wait and see where he wanted to hike while keeping to myself what I had found the previous year. The next day we drove down to the "Bat Boxes" and began hiking north toward the area associated with the 2003 Symposium. From there we hiked in the opposite direction for a short time. Unfortunately, we stopped a considerable distance from where I had hiked and surmised was the actual P/G film site back in 2003.

After spending some time in what I considered to be the wrong location, I decided to mention my findings. Regrettably, I was again the recipient of less than a positive response. My fellow Bigfooters did not seem interested in hiking a little further to see the area I had told them about. We only camped at Louse Camp a couple of days and due to this being a somewhat short trip I didn't make it back to "the spot" until the following year.

October 20th, 2005 (the 38th year anniversary of the Patterson/Gimlin film) I found myself back at Louse Camp with four associates. Two of whom are well known researchers in their respective fields within the Bigfoot community: MK Davis and Don Monroe. As most of you know, MK has done extensive work on enhancing frame by frame the Patterson/Gimlin film and can recognize from his work certain landmarks that the average person viewing the film might probably overlook. Don on the other hand is very field savvy and can recognize a print of a Sasquatch when he sees one. I had been in contact with MK and Don frequently since shortly after the last expedition the previous year, and I had shared my findings/research with them - receiving their positive feedback. From the start, both MK and Don were very interested in having me guide them to where I felt the film site was located once the expedition was confirmed. Both of them traveled some distance to be a part of this trip. MK Davis came cross country with Don Monroe. MK came from Mississippi and Don from Idaho.

The next day, we drove from Louse Camp down to the "Bat Boxes". From there, I guided MK and Don towards the area where I believed the P/G film site was located while the other two in the group decided to hike in the opposite direction to where everyone was taken in 2003. As we continued down stream just passing the large rock out cropping, MK asked me where the partial logging road was. I pointed to my right where we could see just above the creekbed what would later be confirmed by MK as being what is left of the old logging road from 1967 and he also said that is where it should be located. Further on, MK asked about the old tree stumps which I pointed out and were located on the right as well. Finally we reached the area where the creek bed opened up considerably and I also pointed out the Bluff/Slide.

We spent some time looking around, taking notes and photographing the area specifically the landmarks I pointed out earlier so that MK could later compare the photos and confirm the data with what is in the film. While looking around, I decided to cross over an area where a "water bog" was located to our left. To my amazement, I looked down just as I crossed the bog and noticed what appeared to be a Sasquatch print. I called MK and Don over to look at what I had found. Both of them agreed it was in fact a print even though it was located in a "peat type" of soil with a lot of moisture and difficult to cast. The print measured 16-1/2". Don proceeded to mix up some plaster and poured the cast. I then located two more partial prints that were on hard pan soil and very shallow unfortunately all we could do with these was take measurements and photographs. Also, MK noticed what appeared to be a "tree break' right near the tracks which we also documented and photographed. We were very excited at what we had found not only because it was actual physical evidence but also because it was found on the 38th anniversary of the P/G film. And finding this type of physical evidence meant that the area still had Sasquatch activity thereby discounting claims to the contrary.

During the remainder of 2005 and into the summer of 2006, I spent considerable time via email and the phone communicating with fellow researchers. We discussed possible theories and 'what ifs' and I took a couple of trips up north while I planned the next big expedition into the Bluff Creek area. This ended up being the weekend of September 2nd, and 3rd, 2006. The expedition also included a couple of families and again the company of MK Davis and staying at Louse Camp. It was also the weekend of the annual Bigfoot days parade in Willow Creek and MK was asked to do a presentation of his work at the local BigFoot museum. We met a number of interesting people and fellow Bigfooters.

One of the agenda items was to hike from Bluff Creek Bridge to the area I believe is the P/G film site. I wanted to obtain a GPS reading and to track the distance to collaborate with older data, that the film site was located approximately 2 miles from Bluff Creek Bridge which would also confirm the area I feel is the actual site. The consensus was that this had not been done for a number of years - let alone actually acquiring a GPS coordinate with a tracked distance. We had been looking forward to the hike for several months and in mid afternoon on Sunday, September 3rd, we began our hike from Bluff Creek Bridge following Bluff Creek north - stopping from time to time to take photographs and video documentation.

Entrance to the film site

We continued North up stream toward the partial logging road. MK and I were strapped for time but wanted to complete documentation via photographs and video of certain land marks in the area and the course of the stream itself which we had photographed back in October of 2005. The reason for this was to show how much the topography of the creek had changed due to the heavy winter of 2005 into early 2006 when it was estimated that the water level in the creek was the second highest since the flood of 1964. This can be seen in photographs taken summer of 2004, and October 2005 at the large rock out-cropping where I am standing. Today there are huge log jams piled against the rock and the course of the stream through the Patterson site which flowed in 2005 on the right down stream as seen in the photograph with the tree stumps is now flowing directly through the site. Also, the stumps as seen in the photograph are now down stream approximately sixty yards where they were uprooted and deposited on the other side of the stream from the force of water that rushed through the creek in the winter of 2005. We feel that the collection of this type of data is important for future research if only to document the diversity and ever changing topography of the landscape for historical purposes.

Upon reaching the partial logging road, we stood in the center. I had my video camera in hand and was getting ready to tape MK talking about the significance of the road in relation to the P/G film. He was facing me in the direction down stream or south and I was facing him north or up stream when just before I pressed record on my video camera we heard a very loud "wood knocking" to my left up the hill approximately fifty yards! MK turned abruptly to his right then looked at me and I motioned to him to start talking while I pressed record trying to act like I didn't hear the sound and hoping I would get another chance to record the "wood knocking" on tape. It was very exciting - we had an encounter!

Unfortunately, we didn't experience another wood knocking sound but shortly after he completed his discussion I handed him the camcorder and while it was on pause I heard and could see movement in the bushes beneath the trees. This was coming from the area where we heard the wood knocking! Without thinking, I reacted by yelling an ancient Navajo word which means "stop!" This was to test a theory of mine that these creatures might understand ancient Native people's languages. To our surprise - it worked! Whatever was moving on the side of that hill actually stopped! Then I heard briefly what I can only describe as a very low mumbling gibberish? Unfortunately MK was unable to hear this due to his lower tonal hearing not being so good. Not to mention that when these occurrences happened, we weren't recording. That seems to be the case for so many who have had similar encounters.

We waited for a little while (camcorder ready) but no other occurrences happened and due to it being late in the afternoon and having to hike back out before it got dark we decided to head back to Bluff Creek Bridge where we were to meet the others and drive back to Willow Creek then home. This was a memorable trip for me and I look forward to the next expedition with MK.

A short time after I arrived back home, I received correspondence from a fellow Bigfooter, Ron Lorensen, whom I had met at the BigFoot museum the day of the BigFoot Day's parade in Willow Creek. We later spoke on the phone discussing BigFoot related topics and made arrangements to meet since we lived within a reasonable distance of each other. During our meeting, I shared with Ron what had transpired during the previous expedition and my thoughts regarding the P/G film site. After spending some time in discussion, the question arose about the possibility of going back up north in a few weeks to do more field work. Since Ron had never been to that area (Bluff Creek/Louse Camp), and lacked field experience (not to mention his wanting to see the area I believe is the actual film site) we decided to make arrangements to plan a four day trip from October 19th to the 22nd, which would put us at Bluff Creek on the 39th anniversary of the Patterson/Gimlin film. I hadn't planned on returning to the Bluff Creek area until next year but since the opportunity presented itself - I decided to jump at the prospect because the previous expedition (due to time constraints) did not allow me to achieve one of my goals which was to actually "map out" the course of Bluff Creek from Bluff Creek Bridge to the P/G film site. I was excited to have the opportunity to go back and accomplish the task sooner than I had anticipated.

In the weeks prior to the trip, Ron and I spent time looking over Topography maps and planning the expedition. We both agreed it was important to utilize the time we would have taking into consideration travel distance from where we lived to Bluff Creek (round trip) and approximate driving time to other locations of interest we wanted to investigate. I really appreciated Ron's diligence when it came to our working together researching and planning the trip. We set out Thursday morning traveling Hwy 101 north, eventually stopping off in Eureka for a few supplies, drove to Willow Creek, then on to Louse Camp. We arrived in the late afternoon on Thursday the 19th and set up camp. Later that evening we discussed the agenda for the next day.

Friday morning, we packed up camp and set out to Bluff Creek Bridge to hike Bluff Creek into the P/G film site. Along the way - and approximately every one tenth of a mile - I stopped to take notes and draw a section of the creek, which I believe has never been done before. Ron and I also looked for possible evidence of Sasquatch activity (e.g., prints/tracks, tree breaks, fecal material hair etc.), taking more photographs and some video documentation as we hiked.

Before arriving at the southern most end of the P/G film site or the "entrance", we took a moment to look around at an area that quite possibly Roger's horse and pack animal ran off to after being spooked by "Patty". It is an open area of the creek with grassy plants growing in the center and to the sides with the stream meandering its way through. We then hiked further north covering the considerable distance between the "southern entrance" and the "Bat Boxes". Along the way, I pointed out to Ron the Bluff/Slide in the distance, the contours of the hillsides were they meet the creek and the widened distance from one side of the creek to the other. I also pointed out the tree stumps and where they were located prior to the 2005 winter storms and lastly the partial logging road.

We headed back to the "Southern entrance" of the P/G film site. I then completed my notes and mapping of Bluff Creek. Because it was so late in the day, we began the hike back to Bluff Creek Bridge arriving in the dark.

We ended up camping one more night at Louse Camp - taking the time to go over the next day's agenda. We spent most of the evening talking about the day's events and how fortunate we were to be in Bluff Creek and thankful that the weather was so favorable - blue skies and sunshine during the day even though the nights were a little cold. After breaking camp in the morning, we headed out spending the next day and a half investigating several other points of interest on our list, collecting data and camping overnight near Mosquito Lake. Finally, on Sunday afternoon we headed back home.

I am very thankful to have had a second opportunity to visit what I know is the P/G film site in such a short period of time and to have been able to show another fellow BigFooter the location plus receiving his positive feed back. Also, completing my "laymen" mapping of Bluff Creek was equally important to me, not to mention experiencing the "Whoop Call"! I also feel fortunate to have met Ron and look forward to continued correspondence and future expeditions with him.

In conclusion, I would like to thank Autumn Williams for giving me the opportunity to share my story with all of you. I know this is my hypothesis as to the location of the 'actual' Patterson/Gimlin film site; but I hope that with the data I have collected - and shared with you through this article - that I've tweaked your curiosity enough so you will consider that possibly (just possibly) the site we've been told is the P/G film site - is actually in another location.

"D"

Additional photos of what "D" believes to be the film site:

[Editor's note: The opinions expressed in reader-submitted articles are the reader's own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Oregonbigfoot.com researchers]

As I looked at the surroundings I did not think it was a good defensive site. While the perimeter walls were up to a foot thick and windowless they were only one story high. There were no deep canyons or other natural defensive features in the baron landscape. They did have a prominate hill for early warning and the river for water. They probably suffered raids from other tribes. This would have diminished their numbers. Their women and children would have been stolen into slavery. Their young men killed. Or, were they protected by another larger force that traded for their cotton and crops. Why did they finally leave? Was it the warfare, drought, disease Or did their leader one day simply take his dusky wife by her hand, say its time to go and lead them away? It is believed they remained longer than other prehistoric groups in the Southwest but then joined the ancestors of the Hopi and perhaps the Zuni.

* * * * * * *

I will never know the artists' intentions or thoughts. I do not have the knowledge or training to interpret these drawings. Perhaps the Native Americans do. Or perhaps only the artist knew what he was trying to express. Was he instructing the youth? Was he trying to give a warning? Perhaps he had had an encounter with a creature we know as Big Foot. The northern native's name of "Sasquatch" or "The Hairy Man" may not have penetrated this far South by this early date. But were the large footprints meant to be an unmistakable feature? As I stood there taking my pictures I could not help but feel the presence of the artist, his legacy and of his people.

Walking further along the asphalt trail I approached the stone wall that formed the outside of one of the plaza buildings. A baby Ruth candy bar wrapper lodged against the rockwork caught my eye. As I stepped over the single rail fence to retrieve the errant wrapper I felt the presence of ancient sprits.

The evening wind was a mere whisper now. It flowed through the sage, around the rocks, over the walls, pushing the dry arid scent of the early spring day ahead of it. The sun-warmed daytime air was leaving the desert; sweeping up from the dry riverbed. The cooler night air invaded the rock crevices, flowed through the rooms; filling the chambers of the ceremonial Kivas'. The chill of nighttime was coming and with it the nocturnal predators.

* * * * * * *

The coyote, the badger, the owl would be searching on silent wings and feet for small prey. The Ancient Ones would have been collecting their children, retrieving their water, and securing their doorways. I stood listening. Listening? Listening for what? Beneath the movement of the slight wind, and in addition to a distant coyote was an undertone. I strained to pick it up. Was it the sound of children's voices at play? Were their mothers calling them? Or was it the triumphant cry of a returning hunter? Straining, I heard it again, mixed in with the wind, people's voices in an ancient language.

A raven croaked distracting me from my thoughts. As I looked in his direction he hopped closer. Turning his head from side to side he hopped through the sage toward me weaving a crooked, evasive trail. He was smaller than our Northwest ravens and did not have their shiny feathers. His feathered coat was dusty, one tail feather askew and the remains of a forgotten meal on his beak. I knew this raven. I had seen him earlier a mile or so hence overlooking the Painted Desert. As he again hopped closer he cocked his head critically in my direction. His beady eyes fastened upon me searching and with authority questioning my intentions. Was he following me? Or was this just one of his programmed stops on his way to an evening refuge in this barren land? He was a tough looking guy. A street fighter. Where did he get his water? I looked at him with care. He looked at me with suspicion. He croaked again turning his head from side to side, his coal black, shiny, eyes searching for a handout.

"Hey buddy, what are you doing there?" Startled I turned. A National Parks Employee with more chins than a Chinese Telephone book stood looking at me. His thumbs hooked into his back pockets. His chest stuck out with his handgun in quick draw position. "What are you doing there?" He repeated.

"Oh, I am just retrieving this candy bar wrapper," I said, displaying the errant wrapper.

"I have been watching you," he replied. "You have just been standing there, for a long time."

"Yes I know, I was enjoying the evening." The coyote barked again, closer now. I looked for the raven but he had split, abandoning me to my fate.

* * * * * * *

"Who were you talking to?" the Ranger queried, still not quite certain that I was not one of the ten most wanted.

"I wasn't talking," I replied. "I was listening."
"Listening? What to?" His suspicion again aroused.

"I was just caught up in the moment," I answered, "and listening for voices."

"The moment? Voices? What are you some kind of a nut?"

"No officer, not a nut... just a tourist."

A movement caught my eye. The coyote had slipped in and stood not 30 feet away, blending into the sage and shrubs. Without the flick of his ear I would not have seen him. His gray and tan winter coat was shedding. New hair pushed out the old. Worn patches appeared where he had rubbed the itch. His tail was a fraction of its normal diameter. Clogged with burrs and bits of grass, it was not the carefully groomed brush we normally associate with these small canines. His unblinking amber eyes disdainfully stared at me. Straight into my soul they penetrated. I shivered as I felt his distrust and resentment. There he stood, old, worn, and yet defiant to my appraisal. As I stood there in my hardly worn shorts and almost clean shirt he sneered. My obligatory camera hanging around my neck marked me as a tourist. His eyes searched my waistline, tight and straining against my belt. He appraised me and scoffed. Saving him the discomfort of having his picture taken; I just pointed him out to the guard.

"Yes, I know, he replied. He comes here a lot. I usually save him something from my lunch," he continued.

"Is that his water at the parking lot I asked?" Having noted the water filled dog dish and presuming another tourist forgot it.

"Yes" the service employee, said. My image of the man softened. His compassion in the way of water and an occasional sandwich seemed out of place with his gruff manner. "He has been coming around for a couple of years. I can usually find him something to eat in the trashcans." Did this gruff man search the trashcans for his coyote?

* * * * * * *

"Well, there is a garbage can over there;" he pointed, once again assuming command. "We are getting ready to close. We can't have people climbing all over these walls, Besides I still have to clear the rest of the park." I was three feet from the closest wall. But he was more relaxed now. I was not going to make his day. I walked toward the garbage can and my distant truck, the wrapper in my hand. The moment was lost.

I returned early the next morning. Again I was the only one there. Hopefully I would have some time before other tourist arrived. I marveled at the dead calm. Not a breath of air moved in the ruins. There were no ancient voices. Dew hung on the sage releasing its fragrance, before the morning heat. The dew provided a spate of moisture for the tiny creatures that lived among the thorns. Spider webs stretched between branches with the morning dew reflecting the sun as if a thousand diamonds hung suspended. A few early season bees worked industriously among the spring blossoms. The silence was complete. The previous evening's coyote was gone. My friend the Raven was absent. Off on his early morning rounds searching for a morsel of food. Perhaps hunting grubs in some thicket of brambles. The dry riverbed stretched far into the distance. Already the heat radiated, whirling, shimmering ghost like in the sands. Had it been this dry when the Puerto people lived here? Was theirs a constant battle for water? Wise in the ways of the desert; they traveled between water sources, establishing routes that future generations could follow. As I reflected on the life they must have led I wondered at their tenacity. This was a time before the Spaniards had brought the horse; a time before the introduction of the wheel. Whatever had to be moved would have to have been carried in their hands or on their backs or in their minds. But yet they moved when they had to. Carrying their few possessions, their knowledge, their fears and customs. Spreading out across the dessert to new homes and new lives.

A car door slammed behind me. With it the laughter of children. The tranquility was lost. The moment was gone. It was time for me, also, to go.

Sidney L. Tracy, AKA 1Sunseeker

A quick, easy way to make spending money online!