Mike Jay finds tracks, describes which areas in Oregon are best for Bigfoot research

Oregonbigfoot.com file# 00282

REPORT OVERVIEW

Date: , 1985 -ish
Lane county, OR
Nearest town:
McKenzie Bridge
Nearest road:
Scott Creek Rd
Conditions:

Time:

Location:

REPORT DETAIL

Description of event: From Ray Crowe's Track Record:

As to other Lane County occurrences, the majority that I've been able to document over the years have primarily come from three areas-the McKenzie River country east of Springfield, OR, particularly the upper McKenzie; the Salmon Creek/ Black Creek/ Hills Creek drainage's east of Oakridge, and portions of the Siuslaw National Forest in the Coast Range west of Eugene.

I'd stress that, in comparison to many locales, Lane County never has had a lot of BF reports; you'd certainly think we should have, but they've been pretty sporadic and for the most part, seemingly unrelated...and this not due to any lack of effort on the part of investigators. Lee and Ben Trippet were active down here for several years, not to mention former Patterson associate Ron Olson, Gordon Kliewer, myself and at least a couple of others...just not a great deal of data here to ferret out, for some reason. That's the biggest reason I always concentrated most of my efforts elsewhere, in places where things seemed to happen with more consistency.

I'd guess, were I to make a serious effort at Sasquatch sleuthing out this direction, I'd probably head for the Cascades somewhere in the general vicinity of Scott Creek, Robinson Lake, Cupelo, et cetera, in the aforementioned Upper McKenzie region. Have had some decent-sounding unconfirmed reports from up that way, including one from a former in-law, and once about ten years or so ago, during one of my annual deer-chasing escapades, I encountered 70 or 80 yards' worth of barefoot, scarcely-larger-than-human-sized footprints wandering along in the deep dust of a logging road just off the main Scott Creek thoroughfare. These could well have been human, but they exhibited at least a couple of traits more usually associated with BF prints...width disproportionate to length, no trace of an arch, and toes displaced out-of-line with the foot. BF? Could be, unless some nutty hunter was trolling along a logging road barefoot in an October rainstorm. Thought I'd simply mention the above, for the edification of any of your readers interested in "Rockbadger's" reports and in the possibility of perhaps exploring some largely-overlooked new territory.

Source: The Track Record
record updated:2002-07-10 00:00:00