This is something I've been thinking about for quite some time. While it appears that the vast majority of footprints attributed to bigfoot are five-toed, there have also been many finds (most notably the Fouke Monster) which show only three toes.

At first, the idea of a different species seemed plausible to me but after further research, I'm beginning to think that's not the case. (Even though I'm not arrogant enough to rule that out.)

A few years ago, my wife and I were watching a show on the Discovery Channel that was documenting a certain tribe in Africa (can't remember the name of the tribe or their exact location now, although if I remember correctly they were on a small island chain) that, due to a restricted gene pool and a certain amount of inner-breeding had developed a peculiar foot abnormality among almost all of the inhabitants. Their feet had become "two-toed". It was very bizarre to see and ironically there was mention of the fact that these people had begun to look at others of their tribe who did not exhibit this trait as being "abnormal".

The more I've thought about this, the more it would seem to make sense that a certain number of bigfoot could have become geographically isolated due to changes in environment and/or by human encroachment into their habitats which, in effect, could have caused the same thing to happen to them that happened with this African tribe.

I know this is only speculation but it seems to be a logical conclusion. I'd just like to know if any of you have thought about this and if so, what's your opinion?

Inquiring minds just gots ta' know!

Fishbone, this does sound plausible...I have a question about it.
Did these African people produce offspring with only 2 toes???

Yes they did.

And seeing little two-toed children running around was more bizarre than the adults for some reason.

It had actually become a dominant trait within the tribe.

I'm going to do some surfing and see if I can find any information about them. If so, I'll post a link.

Shibby!!!

I did find a mention of them on a Guinness Book of World Records site;

Fewest toes The two-toed syndrome exhibited by some members of the Wadomo tribe of the Zambezi Valley, Zimbabwe, and the Kalanga tribe of the eastern Kalahari Desert, Botswana, is hereditary, via a single mutated gene.

I've seen them on TV also, Fishbone. It seems like their toes were larger than normal, like their 5 toes had somehow grown together to become 2 larger toes. Like you say, something about dominant and recessive genes.

It seems to reason other species may exhibit similar anomalies as well.

At least they can get shoes to fit them.

I caught a show the other night that had a man from England on it that was polydachtal. He had six fingers on each hand. (Five fingers and a thumb) He claimed that he'd never really been bothered by it. In fact, it had come in handy (no pun intended). The only thing that had always bugged him was that he could never find a pair of gloves. Fortunately, a local leather worker had made a custom pair for him.

I saw that guy the other night on tv too. What was really strange in his situation is that he had 6 digits on each hand, but only 5 on each foot.

I am sure I am displaying my ignorance on this subject, but of course I will just wade right it anyway ...

Couldn't the reports of less than five toes be 1)partial tracks or 2) hoaxes?

Both of those could be possibilities, Msfit. But to the best of my knowledge, the Fouke prints weren't partial, they were complete. (Evidenced by the outline of the prints made on soft, muddy soil.)

As far as hoaxing, that's definitely in the realm of possibility, no doubt.

The tracks on our land were not partial. They were very good imprints.
There were several over a period of years and even baby prints as well. All with 3 toes. They weren't hoaxed either, because my grandmother clearly saw what made them as it crossed the dirt well road in our backyard and stepped over a barbed wire fence like it wasn't even there.

And there you have it! A witness to the prints and the creature that made them.

Which still leaves me at square one as to why the difference.

You and me both Fishbone, I just know they are....not why they are!
That has been bugging me for years!

I ran into a an old guy the other day who told a "wild" story I don't know if his story is true, but thats another thread. Any way he told me he was from Arkansas and that he and his friends followed a trail of BF tracks for about a half a mile and that the left footprint was missing the pinky toe and part of the left foot. I didn't ask if the print had 3 or 5 toes I just assumed it had 5.



Later
Jesse

Jesse I want to hear the details of this story! Can you e-mail me at this address???

arbf@voltage.net

I want to know where it took place too if you know that!

Arkansan as soon as you get that information I want it too......I would like to hear more too.

I wonder if that would be similar to the bossburg tracks as possible evidence of a crippled BF?

That's why I was interested. Seems like an unusual trait like that would actually help to authenticate the tracks...just my opinion, but I don't think a hoaxer would make footprints with a missing pinky toe.

So I'm not the only insomniac huh? yeah that was my first thought .it seems a hoaxer would want the track to be as anatomically correct as possible.

Yes I am an insomniac too!

It seems to me they would want it to be perfectly formed too if they went through the trouble of hoaxing one. What good would faking a print be if it is deformed and someone might not take notice of it for that reason???
Just seems to make sense to me. I would think they would want to make sure someone noticed it for what it was "supposed" to be. Like the person who faked those prints in that thread about the park ranger/tracker (http://www.humboldtredwoods.org/rangercam/ranger.htm), the culprit placed them in mud and formed them perfectly in order to be sure someone would find them.

Yuck! I hate reports of hoaxing like that....the person who reported the tracks must have been the one who made them as the ranger did not find any other tracks around and who else would go way over there? A hoaxer should be more careful to place the prints in a more obvious area next time....still it makes me start wondering about alot of "track" finds again

Dont'et it shake ya Msfit,most of the hoaxers usually get caught by someone and there were a few hoaxes with good intentions in the late 70's one guy made bigfoot tracks through the snow to throw off the hunters to keep hem from shooting BF(or everything else that moved)and like Arky and I said its the ones that are"too"perfect that usually are hoaxed.and arky your park ranger friend was none other than Paul Freeman also of dubious video fame.

I want to start off by saying I didn't believe this guy's story. I was on my way to Austin when I saw this old pick up truck with a lady and 2 kids on the side of the road so I stopped to see if they needed help. When I got off this old guy and his son got out he pick up they said their jack was broken and their spare was flat. So I took the old guy to get the tires fixed. I had a book called "THE WORLD'S GREATEST MYSTERIES"
in the front seat and I had the chapter about BF marked with a book marker. Thats when he asked me if I believed in BF. I told him I had never seen one. He told me flat out that "they exist",I sort of chuckled.
"I've seen them." he says. I asked where and he replied inArkansas.He told me he belongs to a secret hunting club in Arkansas and that he has been on six hunting trips with his group. He says they are about 20 members. Thats when he told me about the BF that was missing its pinky toe on the left foot and some of the foot also. He also said that he had been on a trip where they actually shot and hit a BF on the right shoulder and they chased it but lost it. He described BF as a" big smelly beast." There's a pack about 10 -15 of them he said.
If it is true I feel sorry for BF, because I asked the old guy if he had any pics or plaster casts. He told me that's something I see on a daily bases what I want is a trophy, like his head.
He never told me where they saw they tracks or where they shot BF.


Jesse

Yeah that is sad,but ignorance is everywhere so I guess we shouldn't be suprised by his attitude.

Toes, or lack there-of

There may be a couple reasons for the toe differentials in tracks.
It may be a recessive gene
It MAY be a sub-species or different species
It may also be that, due to their highly flexible foot, holding a toe or three above the ground (i have seen this, though not to a degree that i would see a 3 toed track, i have also seen tracks of them walking on thier heels, no toe impressions at all)
It may be a deformity. (fused toes or such)
I have also seen different hallux (big toe) positions. the tracks looking more hand-like than a foot.
and the final reason i can think of; some dumba** hoaxer didnt go look what a sasquatch foot is "supposed" to look like

I seen those three toed tracks myself, and I really don't think they were made by any one person, because their was too many in a period of time and they were different sizes. Some looked like they might have been youngs ones there. We also witnessed bones neatly put in a pile in this area, completely stripped of flesh and a pile of feathers in a pile too. We also seen a place where it looked like they might have slept. We had this creature come up behind our house a few nights, and it really scared the you know what out of us.....

About the little old man who claimed he was in a "secret Bigfoot hunting club", I hope it's not true, but I tend to doubt that tall story. In the first place, if it was a secret, why would he tell a stranger about it? Also, you said he was pretty old. He probably wouldn't even qualify physically for such a club, if there was one. So I doubt his claim and hope it was just another tall story.

I hope you are right too Ella. I have never heard of a secret bigfoot hunting club in Arkansas. But (and I don't know if this is connected or not) I did come across a hunting club named "Bigfoot Hunting Club" way the heck out in the middle of nowhere. I was driving down dirt roads and came across it. I don't even at this point remember where I was or how to get back to it. It was behind a locked gate with just an old beat up sign that read the name of it.

Arky, I saw a picture of that same sign but can't remember what web site, it was either Chester's or Cliff's FOB, I think. But there is a 95 per cent chance, I believe, that the little old man was telling a tall tale. Plus, it's not all that easy to just go out and kill a Bigfoot! Many have tried and none have succeeded. Especially since most likely, all members of the alleged "hunting club" would be heavy drinkers and going into the woods in their chronically intoxicated state, they'd be more likely to kill each other than a Bigfoot.

Hi, I sure hope you guys have a sense of humor cause there is a lot of stuff to consider when first jumping into these forum things. I am sure curious about the different kind of footprints. I see where someone suggested maybe some are hoaxes and some are real. I like the idea that maybe genetics plays a factor in the kind of footprint. How many of these things can there be out there anyway? It sure is strange that sasquatches are not considered real by science yet !!

Welcome Laurah,we're always down to buisness and serious here(oh wait I was thinking of something else )well one theory I've always agreed with is that you have to have a breeding population. most estimates put the pacific NW alone at needing between 1000 to 3000 to attain that population.it is possible to have a smaller population and still suvive but then due to forced inbreeding you wind up with genetic disrders or an off branching or sub-species which we have several threads discussing all of the above located around here somewhere .

How many of them could there be? There could be thousands. But right now that is just speculation until we know more about their population numbers. Let's just say there are several.

Yes it is really strange that science doesn't accept their existence based on the current evidence. A whole lot of people are currently working hard to try and change that...myself included. :wink:

We do have a healthy sense of humor here, and by the way welcome to the bigfoot forums Laurah.
Are you a skeptic or have you had encounters of your own??? Would you mind telling us a little bit about yourself as far as bigfoot creatures are concerned?

Somewhere around here I have Big Footprints by Krantz. He speculates a number in there and I can't recall now what it is precisely, but it's in the thousands. He bases this on the numbers needed to breed, etc.

I think Fish has it right concerning the number of toes being related to genetic mutation. No way to know for sure, but it does make a certain amount of sense to me.

Hi, Laurah, and welcome to BFF! I can't answer your question about the different numbers of toes, but rest assured somebody will have some good theories. We've got lots of really dedicated people here, including Craig Woolheater, John Larsen, Ranshirl, Arkansan and MORE!

I noticed that the La BF has 3 toes, and the plaster cast I saw had 3 very thin toes. Now, the Yowie has 3 thick toes. Why the difference in thicknest. The La BF could be a young BF compared to an adult Yowie foot print. Or was the print I saw of the La BF a partial print? I don't know can someone shed some light on this?

Jesse

Jesse ,are you refering to the "honey Island swamp monster"?Arky or Ranshirl probably have more info on it than I do.

Gigantopithecus-- in order for the species to THRIVE (reproduce healthy family lines) it must ADAPT to its SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENT... Three toes versus five toes are the signs that we on the web kick around. But a major thread is about that tough thing called METABOLISM. Metabolism dictates so much of what we look for in finding SUITABLE HABITATS for our reclusive hairy brothers. Arkansas heat MUST PRODUCE adifferent survival trait than the upland Cascade version. All of us here are dealing with different mentalities, different calorie requirements, and different food gathering techniques. At its heart, this is what makes BFF so totally unique. ALL INFO HERE IS VALID!!!
This wonderful country composes so many excellent habitats for hiiding a prehistoric species, THAT WE REALLY DO HAVE TO GET OUT THERE AND EXPLORE... SO MUCH HIDDEN LAND... Science does not HAVE THE EQUIPMENT to honestly, AND I SAID HONESTLY, explore the limitless possible habitats available to affirm IF SASQUATCH EXISTS OR NOT !!!
i busted my a-- for my Bachelor's in Science (Bio. major) and the PHD.'s who are my friends, NEVER doubted the possibility of a remaining strain of Gigantopithecus. But their SCIENCE is provable in the lab, and most of it must generate revenue for the UNIVERSITIES to be considered relevant. Do you understand the dilemna here? Squatch is NOT A CASH COW (outside of a freak show mentality). I respect the experience of Elders who DON't NEED TO LIE. If it's real to them, I'll pick up that banner, and follow (maybe) the one hidden trail they missed. Because....
I will become next generation's Elder. ya' go for what ya' know. jeff

Wow Bio.Major?sorry more effort than I ever wanted to put into a classroom.impressive though.what did you minor in?is it a related field?Glad the "elders" have such open minds.and yeah i guess we will be the next genertion of elders,at least in this field.

Jesse, I don't very much at all about the Yowie, but from what I have heard it is a larger type creature than the bigfoot in Louisiana. I also didn't know the Yowie had 3 toes. I try to concentrate my efforts on the bigfoot we have here as best I can so as not to get my facts confused. I wish I could help you more.
From the footprints I saw that were 3 toed, they had a larger big toe and the other two were of the same size approx. The big one was only slightly larger than the other two. As far as thickness is concerned, I can't help you because the ones I saw are the ONLY 3 toed footprints I have ever seen.

Zack Clothier, a highly respected researcher, is reported to have determined that the alleged tracks of the "Honey Island Swamp Monster" are just alligator tracks. Which does not mean that a Bigfoot was not seen. But it sounds like just a plain, garden-variety Bigfoot to me, adorned and embellished with telling and retelling.

OK you Floridians, how many toes does an alligator have???????

If the answer is three than you know what I am thinkin'.

Three,but they also have webbing between the toes and non-retractable claws,really easy to tell what they are.and the largest size track depending on the size of the gator is usually 4-5"for a gator measuring 12-15 ' in length(gotta love the audobon societys books probably be handy for the in the field section too)

I am sorry, but doesn't anyone else think that "bigfoot" with only three toes are only found where alligators coincidently reside ?

Please don't be offended its just something that has to be considered.....

no offense taken,three toed tracks also show up in lots of other places(read loren colemans "mysteriuos america"if you can find it.)there were several in MI and alot in the 70's around indiana and ohio(mostly around a place called Rising Sun,Ohio.beside like I said to arky earlier question everything...even youself if it warrants.

Well, I am questioning it......Rising Sun, Ohio....maybe a hoaxer live there in the 70's....

I don't know I still find this different number of toes thingie really weird and hard to beleive.... It kinda gums up the whole works for me.....how many other animals have differences in toe #'s between species?

Does anyone know of examples.......?

my old cat has 6 toes does that count? i think that may go back to the subject of different species thread or (Bipto maybe )suggeted it may be due to inbreeding forced by population constraints.or based on habitat.woodland vs. swamplands and adaptaitions needed to survive in different enviorments.

Gators. Well, not only do they have four feet, they also have really big tails they drag around as they walk. These things in combination would make anything more than a single, isolated track pretty obviously not a biped. Even a single track would have webbing, claw marks, etc.

You've never heard of Ohio gators? 8)

LMAO.no but I have heard about Detroit gators and Arizona gators recently.

Bipto's right. The tail drag from a 'gator is the biggest tip off as to what made the tracks. Kinda' hard to miss actually.

Well, apparantly peeps do miss the obvious...look at all the bear tracks reported as "bigfoot"...and I have read about people casting alligators tracks as "bigfoot" too.