- Class 1a
- Class 1, Corroboration: Reports involving a sighting, and accompanied by another form of support.1a A sasquatch/bigfoot specimen has been collected (alive or dead).
- Class 1b
- Class 1, Corroboration: Reports involving a sighting, and accompanied by another form of support.1b A report investigation results in a sasquatch observation or the documentation of clear tracks or other forms of physical evidence by an investigator.
- Class 1c
- Class 1, Corroboration: Reports involving a sighting, and accompanied by another form of support.1c An investigator determines that a visual encounter with a sasquatch/bigfoot by a very reliable observer is a distinct possibility, tangible corroborating evidence is documented, and all other sources can be reasonably ruled out.
- Class 1d
- Class 1, Corroboration: Reports involving a sighting, and accompanied by another form of support.1d A visual encounter with a sasquatch/bigfoot is a distinct possibility involving two or more reliable observers, and all other sources can be reasonably ruled out.
- Class 2
- Class 2, Competency: Reports involving sightings by professionally trained or highly skilled observers.2 Investigator determines that a visual encounter with a sasquatch/bigfoot is a distinct possibility, the observer is exceptionally trustworthy, professionally trained, and experienced in the outdoors and/or is accustomed to looking for and recording details (e.g., biologist, anthropologist/archaeologist, ranger, trapper/tracker/seasoned hunter, bird watcher, game warden, naturalist, law enforcement), and other explanations can be reasonably excluded.
- Class 3a
- Class 3, Credibility: Sightings or possible wood ape evidence reported by credible witnesses.3a Investigator determines that a visual encounter with a sasquatch/bigfoot is a distinct possibility, the observer is credible, and all other sources can be reasonably ruled out.
- Class 3b
- Class 3, Credibility: Sightings or possible wood ape evidence reported by credible witnesses.3b Unidentifiable vocalizations were reported and there is accompanying tangible evidence to possibly indicate the presence of a sasquatch/bigfoot, the observer is very reliable, and other sources can be reasonably ruled out.
- Class 3c
- Class 3, Credibility: Sightings or possible wood ape evidence reported by credible witnesses.3c No visual encounter occurred, but physical evidence was found to indicate the presence of a sasquatch/bigfoot (tracks, hair, scat, etc.), the observer is very reliable, and other sources can be reasonably ruled out.
Case: 01070001
Class 3bHunter hears strange vocalizations, finds tracks, and attempts to report incident to US Forest Service.
Report Details
Occurrence date: November/2006
Location: Montgomery County, TX
Nearby/Vicinity: Richards
Time / Conditions: 05:00 — National Forest.
# of Witnesses: 1
Location: Montgomery County, TX
Nearby/Vicinity: Richards
Time / Conditions: 05:00 — National Forest.
# of Witnesses: 1
Witness Account:
I am an outfitter from Central Texas. I am very familiar with known wildlife in all of Texas. What I heard and found while hunting deer in the Sam Houston National Forest was something I am NOT familiar with. I found two large tracks with a 5' step interval. They were clearly tracks - there is no mistaking that. There were only two in some sand because the rest of the area was covered with leaves etc. The tracks were about 16" long. I know because my boot is 13 inches long and the tracks were about 3 inches longer than my boots. I weigh over 300 pounds and the tracks were deeper than any of my boot prints. The toes and heels were real clear. The big toes on the tracks had a gap between them and the other four toes. The heel on the tracks was narrower than the front part of the tracks. At about 5am that morning, while in my ground blind, I started hearing a strange howl off and on until about 6am. Every time I heard it, it sounded like it had moved a little from the last spot. I wondered about it, but I didn't think too much about it until I found the weird tracks. I just don't know what else it could be. I called the Forest Service, but the man who answered the phone did not seem to take me too serious. He said they get reports about things like that, but he pretty much blew me off. That's why I didn't want to call them in the first place. I can see why people don't want to talk about it if they've seen something like what I saw and heard. People (Forest Service) that should take it serious just blow it off.
Physical evidence:
Two footprints, as I mentioned above about 16" long. I didn't have a camera or plaster. Didn't have a tape measure, but I know my own boots are about 13 inches long and these tracks were about 3 inches longer than mine.
Sounds:
Heard the strange howls - they sounded like the howls on the website called the Ohio howls.
Additional observations:
Smelled musky smell off and on that morning. Don't know if it was connected or not.
Investigator's Observations
Investigator(s): Daryl Colyer
This investigation was conducted as a result of a reported incident that allegedly occurred in Montgomery County, Texas, November, 2006.
The witness initially reported this incident very briefly on the NAWAC's toll-free hotline. I responded to the message that he had left, and subsequently interviewed him at length, and had two separate conversations with him about the reported incident. I found him straightforward, knowledgeable and seemingly honest. He told me that he is an outfitter, and routinely takes others on hunts. The reported incident, conversely, involved only him.
The witness reportedly arrived at his hunting spot in the Sam Houston National Forest sometime just after 4:30 A.M. He set up a ground blind in preparation for his hunt. He had on occasion this particular morning, smelled a strong musky smell. He was not sure what the source of the smell was. He wondered if a large male hog was responsible.
The witness recalled hearing, a short time after 5:00 A.M., some strange vocalizations (howls) that sounded, in his judgment, to be maybe 500 yards away through the forest. By his own admission, judging distance of sounds heard in the forest is extremely difficult, but nonetheless, he held to his estimate.
According to the witness, the strange vocalizations continued intermittently, over the course of the next hour. The witness said that he would hear one or two of the long drawn out howls and then would hear nothing for ten or fifteen minutes. He would then hear the howls again, from a slightly different position, giving him the impression that whatever was creating the howls was moving.
It was not until later when the witness found the tracks that he began to seriously consider that the howls and tracks were made by the same species and possibly the same individual.
The witness reportedly found two large footprints that appeared human-like in a very primitive way, but were much larger, in a small patch of sand that was surrounded by the typical leaf litter that is so prevalent in East Texas forests. Because of the leaf litter, the witness reportedly could find no additional tracks. The tracks appeared perhaps 3 inches longer than his boots, which are approximately 13 inches in length. Not having a tape measure, the witness used his boots as a measuring tool and concluded that the tracks were approximately 16 inches in length. The width, at the widest point, appeared at least six inches. The heel, according to the witness, was considerably narrower.
The witness attempted to replicate the step-to-step interval of the tracks, and could not do so; the witness is 6 feet, 1-inches tall, and weighs approximately 325 pounds. The witness could not match the depth of the tracks; his deepest boot impression was not as deep as either track by at least one-quarter inch, according to the witness.
The witness described both tracks as having divergent large toes, with a gap of over an inch between the large toes and the second toes. Both tracks, according to the witness, clearly had five toes, and clear heel impressions. The witness had no casting material nor did he have a camera. He simply made the best mental picture possible of what he saw.
The witness was confused and amazed. His outdoor experience enabled him to discern without doubt that he was seeing real tracks of a real creature. However, his deductive reasoning told him that what he believed was responsible for making the tracks was not officially real.
His first thought was to call the Forest Service or a game warden, but he was certain that he would not be taken seriously. As it turned out, when he later attempted to report the incident to the Forest Service, his intuition about how he would be treated proved correct. In fact, it was very much his impression that he was greeted with derision and sarcasm by a male individual who took the call at the US Forest Service headquarters for the Sam Houston National Forest. The witness told me that as he began to talk about the tracks that he had found, the Forest Service representative apparently snickered. The witness knew then that he was not being taken seriously. The witness remembered being told that the Forest Service did receive similar reports from time to time, but that what he had experienced was "probably just some people messing around." The witness said that the individual told him that it would be mentioned to the Forest Service biologist, and there the conversation ended. The witness knew he was being dismissed.
With such a prevailing mindset, it is not difficult to imagine how one might feel intimidated into not reporting such an incident to governmental authorities. If attitudes such as the one apparently demonstrated by the unnamed governmental employee pervade the ranks, it is somewhat easier to understand how there has been no formal investigation of the phenomenon, nor might there be in the immediate future, barring some unforeseen earth-shattering piece of evidence.
This investigation was conducted as a result of a reported incident that allegedly occurred in Montgomery County, Texas, November, 2006.
The witness initially reported this incident very briefly on the NAWAC's toll-free hotline. I responded to the message that he had left, and subsequently interviewed him at length, and had two separate conversations with him about the reported incident. I found him straightforward, knowledgeable and seemingly honest. He told me that he is an outfitter, and routinely takes others on hunts. The reported incident, conversely, involved only him.
The witness reportedly arrived at his hunting spot in the Sam Houston National Forest sometime just after 4:30 A.M. He set up a ground blind in preparation for his hunt. He had on occasion this particular morning, smelled a strong musky smell. He was not sure what the source of the smell was. He wondered if a large male hog was responsible.
The witness recalled hearing, a short time after 5:00 A.M., some strange vocalizations (howls) that sounded, in his judgment, to be maybe 500 yards away through the forest. By his own admission, judging distance of sounds heard in the forest is extremely difficult, but nonetheless, he held to his estimate.
According to the witness, the strange vocalizations continued intermittently, over the course of the next hour. The witness said that he would hear one or two of the long drawn out howls and then would hear nothing for ten or fifteen minutes. He would then hear the howls again, from a slightly different position, giving him the impression that whatever was creating the howls was moving.
It was not until later when the witness found the tracks that he began to seriously consider that the howls and tracks were made by the same species and possibly the same individual.
The witness reportedly found two large footprints that appeared human-like in a very primitive way, but were much larger, in a small patch of sand that was surrounded by the typical leaf litter that is so prevalent in East Texas forests. Because of the leaf litter, the witness reportedly could find no additional tracks. The tracks appeared perhaps 3 inches longer than his boots, which are approximately 13 inches in length. Not having a tape measure, the witness used his boots as a measuring tool and concluded that the tracks were approximately 16 inches in length. The width, at the widest point, appeared at least six inches. The heel, according to the witness, was considerably narrower.
The witness attempted to replicate the step-to-step interval of the tracks, and could not do so; the witness is 6 feet, 1-inches tall, and weighs approximately 325 pounds. The witness could not match the depth of the tracks; his deepest boot impression was not as deep as either track by at least one-quarter inch, according to the witness.
The witness described both tracks as having divergent large toes, with a gap of over an inch between the large toes and the second toes. Both tracks, according to the witness, clearly had five toes, and clear heel impressions. The witness had no casting material nor did he have a camera. He simply made the best mental picture possible of what he saw.
The witness was confused and amazed. His outdoor experience enabled him to discern without doubt that he was seeing real tracks of a real creature. However, his deductive reasoning told him that what he believed was responsible for making the tracks was not officially real.
His first thought was to call the Forest Service or a game warden, but he was certain that he would not be taken seriously. As it turned out, when he later attempted to report the incident to the Forest Service, his intuition about how he would be treated proved correct. In fact, it was very much his impression that he was greeted with derision and sarcasm by a male individual who took the call at the US Forest Service headquarters for the Sam Houston National Forest. The witness told me that as he began to talk about the tracks that he had found, the Forest Service representative apparently snickered. The witness knew then that he was not being taken seriously. The witness remembered being told that the Forest Service did receive similar reports from time to time, but that what he had experienced was "probably just some people messing around." The witness said that the individual told him that it would be mentioned to the Forest Service biologist, and there the conversation ended. The witness knew he was being dismissed.
With such a prevailing mindset, it is not difficult to imagine how one might feel intimidated into not reporting such an incident to governmental authorities. If attitudes such as the one apparently demonstrated by the unnamed governmental employee pervade the ranks, it is somewhat easier to understand how there has been no formal investigation of the phenomenon, nor might there be in the immediate future, barring some unforeseen earth-shattering piece of evidence.
