http://www.bigfootencounters.com/

Howdy folks...

Very interesting pics to say the least...

IMHO they are consistant ( at least to me ) with bipedal heel to toe tracks going up hill ( ie: the heel will sink deeper than the rest of the foot ) in deep snow ( at least with my prints they do )...

Good find ...

Jedi - I gotta ask,,

How can you tell the heel is sinking deeper?

Well...

This is what I'm seeing...



Now I could very well be wrong, but this is the foot print I see ...

Now the snow looks wet too me, and when I walk in wet snow ( you know the kind that makes good snow b*lls, and packs very good ) my heel will make a deeper impression than the rest of my foot...

JMO...

Thunder Bay is where I am.

Im ready to go searching if anyone wants to go. Ive been in this area before.

Question. How do we know this isn't a bear? There's at least one track that appears odd.

Please dont misunderstand me -- im not saying your wrong. Im just not sure how to tell the difference between this type of print, from a human wearing big bulky snow boots.. Thats all..

Exactly, Melissa. These pictures show tracks of something. Could be bear, could be human, could be sasquatch. Without a picture or video of the creature actually making them, there's no real way to tell by these pictures alone. I think jimf said it best, something like, "look at all the nothing I have".

Still, they are very interesting. If I had been out in the woods and come across these and taken the pictures I would be kind of excited. But I would certainly not claim that they were definitely made by a bigfoot. Unless, of course, I had actually seen the bigfoot make them in which case I would have made for darn sure I got a picture of the bigfoot and his autograph, of course.

edited for tiepoze

5 feet seems too big for a human, especially up a gradient.

Just my opinion.

Well, why are the pictures so dang far away -- why didnt the photographer get over top of the track?

Just my opinion

Im no expert tracker, but I did some trapping in my life, and I dont see anything bear about these. I think the bears are sleeping right now.

Id expect to see some disturbance between the prints in this much snow unless its a super tall bear.

I wish there was some more details on the location. Its time to go looking.

Hello all
I was the one who took the pictures, and the snow wasn't wet.
The snow was 13" deep with an ice layer in the middle.
The snow was chuncky, because of the snow that was thrown on top by the snow plow.
Dave
Heh racer, if your from Thunder Bay , give me a call, I'm in the book.

Well, I will say this.. because I know this. I grew up in an area where snow could get very deep.. And it has always been my experience, the deeper the snow the wider your own steps will be between each step. For some reason when you step out of a large bank or deep snow, its like your leg over compensates for the height of the snow. Now, could I create this distance between tracks - nope. Im sure I couldnt, I am 5'6.

That could be very well be true, all I said it was a bipeadal walking heel to toe...

You see, a bipeadal walking heel to toe will sink it's heel in first, then shift it's weight to it's toes ( which is wider than it's heel ) thus compacting the wet snow ( and it looks wet too me ) and making an imprint that is less deep than it's heel...

I'm not saying it's BF, but the stride is interesting...

See I don't say it's BF, just consistant with a bipedal creature ( in my thoughts maybe human as well )...



Maybe I confused you with this statment?




If I did I'm sorry :doh:...

If any one has questions ?
fire away
Dave

Well...that new info still doesn't negate my observations, still looks like a bipedal walking heel to toe...

The heel is still going to be deeper...

Did you notice any toe marks? Claw marks? Mid-tarsal breaks? Do you have a good clear close-up of any prints?

It's possible, there was new snow in the prints ,and besides, the snow caves in a bit when I was making myown ptracks beside.
There was no way of getting , say a detailed print.

Dave

can you give me a more specific location? I worked in this area for a summer a decade ago. I'll give you a call sometime over the next few days. I look forward to talking to someone in this area about this subject.

I havent really decided anything just yet - still trying to make up my mind.. But, Jedi, what you said makes sense to me. I just wish the pictures were much closer..

To the person who took these pics - did you follow the tracks? if so, where did they go? If not, why not? Do you have pictures that are much closer?
Edited to add: What about toe marks, like Ivy mentioned? Were there any?

Hi superd!

Great to have you share this find!

This is unique to me, in that we not only have one potential bigfoot track, we have several in the same area, that are obviously related to one another (being made by one creature). Snow also clears up alot of the BS, with regards to hoaxes, if it was a hoax, the snow would show some evidence of this. Clear print definitions may not be likely, but this is in many ways greater evidence, purely for the reasons I've stated. Snow acts like a natural pool of plaster, but unlike the plaster, the bigfoot wouldn't avoid the snow. Unfortunately this evidence is easily lost by environmental reasons.

How deep were the tracks approximately?
Could you tell the orientation of the foot?
i.e. in which direction was the heel and toes facing? Perhaps that would clarify whether the creature was moving up or down the slope.
Do you have other photos? The ones you have a great, however, from the angle its difficult to judge distances.
If you find any more tracks in the snow, could you jump to your greatest stride length alongside the purported bigfoot tracks, this in my opinion would yield more significance to your findings.

Just my opinion.

I tried to brush some of th new snow out of the track, but it wasn't going to help.
I've had people tell me it could have been a moose looping up the bank and onto thee road, and the hind hooves going into the same holes as the front hooves.
And I agree that this is a possiblity, so no I'm not even close to even 70% sure it's bigfoot.
When I first saw the track, I'm thinking moose maybe.
So I circled around them and into the bush to see if there was signs of a 4 footed creature. I didn't find any, even as it went around bushes and trees.
But like you've said, unless you've seen it make the tracks and got it's autograph/photograph, no 100%.
Dave

You do understand that is most opinions is that BF walks heel to toe ?

All I'm saying is that the prints to me are walking heel to toe up hill...

That's all I'm saying...



Thank you...I wish they were more clear, and that I was there to view them...

From the pics they appear to be going up hill...

But...

They could be also be running downhill as well, without clearer pics it's hard to tell...

But...my first instinct was that they were going up hill ( and that's the one I usually trust )...

JMHO...

From bush line to road side would be roughly 25 feet. and in that distance, maybe 6 to 8 feet incline.

What do you base the five foot stride length on?
Is it based on the total length of the area from the bush to the road, as you said being 25 feet? If so, a five foot estimate of stride length would seem logical.

The tracks were going east to west.
I did see moose tracks about 1/2 km to the north at the side of the road, and could compare the tracks ( no pics sorry) but a rounder track and with lots of drag in and out of tracks.

Did you see any tracks atthe top of the hill ?

Or did they dissapper ?

Did you see any tracks on the other side of the road?

Looks to me like tracks of a large human biped wearing Sorel winter boots.

After viewing the below provided photo I noticed that whatever made these tracks knocked the snow off the limbs up pretty high as whatever passed through making the tracks. Just an observation...

I had a tape measure with me ,and from left print to right print (step) was on average 60", and left to left (stride) 120" or 10 feet. You can see marks of my tape measure in the snow in this picture.
My step was around 2 - 2.5 feet . I was wearing work boots that measured 13x5 inches, and the tracks were about 3 to 4 inches longer.
I weigh 170 lbs and am 6 foot tall.

That may be true if running downhill, I can't see a 5' stride for a human going up hill...

That's why I wish a shot was taken closer, maybe straight down, not at an angle on the print...

JMHO...

But anyway interesting shots...

I can tell you that these tracks are not a hoax 100%.
But I cann't give you the same that it wasn't a misidentification.
I'm always looking for tracks when I drive out of Thunder Bay,
and I see moose tracks all the time, so you can see why these caught my, attention. I've looked at lots of tracks on the web on different bigfoot sites,and these looked way too similar.
So take it for what it is, pictures of tracks of an animal unknown.
I plan on doing some follow up in the area.
Dave

If you were really meassuring the tracks, wouldn't there be more disturbance in the surrounding snow? Could you clarify this point, please?

[QUOTE=Harry55,Dec 18 2005, 05:41 PM]After viewing the below provided photo I noticed that whatever made these tracks knocked the snow off the limbs up pretty high as whatever passed through making the tracks. Just an observation...



QUOTE]
Yea I knoticed that too...

But...

If the snow was ice covered, the knocked off snow wouldn't make inpressions inthe snow like we see here...



So when were these impressions made that I circled, and among the others ?

I mean the impresions in the snow seems to come from snow from the trees, if the snow had a crust of ice on it then these impresions wouldn't be there...

This is why I thought the snow was wet...

But it was said that the snow had a crust of Ice...

Now it could be argued that the snow was wet then had a freeze after the prints were made...[/

Heh guys , read a bit,
The impressions are from snow that was thrown by a snow plow clearing the road, and the ice layer is in the middle of 13 " of snow.

Hey man sorry for that...so the snow could've been knocked off the trees by the plow?

My tape will extend 9 feet, and I came around from the bush to measure as noto disturb the tracks , and after I took some pics , I took more measurements,
Dave

the tracks appear to me to be made in warmer weather, with soft snow, then frozen. We did have some very windy weather around the time these tracks were found. That would explain the snow depressions seen in the photos.

The only question I can see is what made the tracks. Im hoping to show them to a trapper I know, but hes MIA right now. He may see/know something I dont here.

No the plow didn't do it, probably the animal that passed by.
The best I can figure , the tracks were 2 to 5 days old.

Ive got 2 trapper friends myself that I plan on showing them to.

I never thought they were...

I take them for a bipedal ( a large bipedal ) with from what you say is a 5' stride uphill, if this is wrong then please correct me...

Good find superd. Thanks for sharing and answering questions.

Did you happen to notice how high the snow was knocked off the limbs of the tree as the animal passed through? If not no need to answer.

Please keep us posted if anything else turns up.

I'm sorry...but how far from the road were these tracks found, again?

Just making a general statement.

The road runs north and south, and the tracks run east TO west.here's an pic of the road heading north and the tracks where 20 feet in front of my truck.

WOW...

That is a beutifull picture, I love winter pictures, but I hate winter ( go figure ) ...

What I'm asking did you look to the other side of the road for prints ?

If no no big deal, these pics you posted, like I said shows a bipeadal to me running up hill...

To you was it going uphill or down hill ?

Up hill and yes there were tracks on the opposite side of the road.