What Was In The ABC Champ Video?

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on February 28th, 2006

Here’s a couple of screen shots from the Champ video that aired, finally, last week on ABCs Good Morning America. John Kirk talked about this subject also here on Cryptomundo.

In the video, it shows what some say appears to be a serpentine shape moving at or just below the surface of the water. Myself, I think that it is merely a wake.

Then there’s the object that appears from beneath and beside the boat. Whatever that is, it looks really strange. Of course, there could be some distortion looking through the water. But what the heck is it? People have mentioned sturgeon or a pike as a candidate, but it doesn’t look like either to me.




What do the astute readers of Cryptomundo think is in the video?

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

20 Responses to “What Was In The ABC Champ Video?”

  1. shovethenos responds:

    The top frame could include another part of the body, like a flipper or leg, under the “head/neck”.

    In any case this, along with the recent expert-supported echolocation recordings, tends to support the notion that there is something unidentified there. (The video here was also authenticated by formed FBI analysts.) I was pretty dismissive of this kind of cryptid before, this evidence is pretty convincing.

  2. stompy responds:

    Eel or fish.

  3. Doug responds:

    That is most interesting. This is the first I have seen of it. My tendency would go with stompy on eel or fish, but then again…who knows!

  4. shovethenos responds:

    An eel or fish is a possibility, but the witnesses seem like avid fishermen, and they said what was actually swimming there wasn’t like anything they had ever seen. So they know the score about eels, sturgeon, various species of pike, otters, etc, etc, etc…. And one would expect them to recognize anything known but not normally seen in the area – like seals, whales, etc.

    And of course eels and fish don’t echolocate.

  5. Benjamin Radford responds:

    Shovethenos seems quite impressed with the video: “this evidence is pretty convincing.”

    I’m puzzled by what standard of evidence is being used here. I agree that the video is convincing that some animal was probably in the water——that’s it.

    Shovethenos also makes much of the echolocation, and dismisses the eel or fish explanations because “of course eels and fish don’t echolocate.”

    The logical flaw, of course, is obvious: we don’t know that the animal the fishermen filmed (if it was an animal) DID echolocate… The echolocation readings shovethenos is referring to were taken well over a year before this sighting. There is no reason to think that whatever made the echolocation is the same animal.

  6. Arkansan_88 responds:

    Well I’m glad they finally aired it. I didn’t get to see it though. The stills arent very convicing. It looks more like a cloud reflection to me. I know it’s not….there is something there. It is very distorted though. I think it could be champ.

  7. swol responds:

    I’d go for the eel explanation.

    Speaking of which, anybody read Steve Alten’s “The Loch”? Interesting hypothesis.

  8. shovethenos responds:

    Mr. Radford-

    As someone else stressed the video was just a small part of what the men saw, and unforunately the equipment couldn’t do a good job of showing what was under the surface of the water due to reflection, refraction, etc. The eyewitnesses only had a digital camera that could make short video recordings.

    However, both men were experienced fishermen and stated that what they observed, in motion, for a relatively long period of time was not like anything they had ever seen before. Also note that at times this was at very close range – the footage by the side of the boat seems to put parts of the animal within 25ft. or closer to the eyewitnesses.

    Both men seem to be relatively experienced fishermen and hence familiar with whatever sturgeon, pike, eels, and other species are indigenous to the area. One presumes that as middle-aged adults growing up in this country they have also been exposed to the usual aquariums, books, nature documentaries, etc. featuring various other exotic aquatic animals from around the world. Yet they stated that this was not like anything they had ever seen.

    Addressing my reference to the echolocation evidence: yes, it is a bit of a logical leap to assume that the animal filmed is the animal that makes the unidentified echolocations that have been recorded in Lake Champlain. But you seem to be making more of a logical leap – that there is more than one cryptid or misidentified animal in Lake Champlain. One that makes unidentified echolocations and one that fairly experienced fishermen who have probably seen all of the usual nature documentaries for decades cannot identify. (I realize that assuming they have seen the usual nature documentaries is also a logical leap, but I believe its a fairly safe assumption.)

    So while I admit it is a logical leap to assume the animal in the video is also the one that makes the unidentified echolocations, I don’t think it’s a very egregious or farfetched one. To speculate that an unidentified animal that hundreds of people have seen in a body of water is also the one making unidentified echolocations within that body of water doesn’t seem to be that much of a jump to me. Of course I admit that I could be wrong and that either the eyewitnesses or the sound experts, or both, could be mistaken. I just don’t see that as a strong possibility – and a possibility that seems to be growing weaker as more, and more credible, evidence is being collected.

  9. shovethenos responds:


    I haven’t read “The Loch” but I think I caught his appearance on Coast 2 Coast. He’s the guy that thinks Nessie is a kind of eel, correct? He also referenced the “tooth” that had been discovered as part of the evidence supporting his theory, which I think has been now identified as a young deer’s antler or “spike” as one-pointed antlers are called. Did you know that the identification of the “tooth” was being disputed?

    I don’t know much about his eel theory, but it could be a possibility. What seems most convincing about it?

  10. CryptoInformant responds:

    Probably not a plesiosaur. As soon as I can figure out my digital camera(not to mention find it) I’ll get the drawing of the Oregon washup and this thing in. Sorry for the ongoing delay.

    P.S. I think I see a blowhole, but that doesn’t do a whole lot of narrowing. My best two guesses are Basilosaur or Tanystropheid.

  11. shovethenos responds:

    Blowhole? Where do you see that?

  12. dontgd responds:

    I am not familiar with the echolocation evidence, but that thing int he few seconds of photo appears to have a fluke-like horizontal tail and reminds me of the look of a narwhal, but without the horn. the downside to my theory is the white underbelly showing to the right, which looks like a fish, sideways. However, you can also see that the sun is coming from the left and could be shining on scales. I’m not expert enough to determine the lighting.

    I am a firm believer in seiche waves, but this video is way too interesting to dismiss.

    Digital cameras will change everything.


  13. dontgd responds:

    sorry, the underbelly is showing to our left or the animal’s right.

  14. denisluebke responds:

    I’d have to guess some sort of squid like animal, from what I see is a cylindrical body (top left of the video captures) and a tentacle-like object with suction cup like objects on an elongated arm.

  15. CryptoInformant responds:

    Right behind the whitish dot in the last still, there is what appears to be a lump with two symmetrical holes.

  16. quill responds:

    I don’t see it. To me, it looks like a big glob of seaweed or something. I’m not saying that I don’t believe there’s something in Lake Champlain- I just don’t think that’s it in the photos.

  17. CryptoInformant responds:

    I have my digital camera, and have updated the washup drawing, but can’t quite figure out how to send the pic in an e-mail. This thing appears to move from side to side, and does fit the Tacochelys description.

  18. quill responds:

    This continues to intrigue me the longer I look at it. Does anyone know if the video is hosted anywhere else? I can’t find it anywhere.

  19. expuxg responds:

    It looks to me like the reflection of a rope suspended over the water

  20. wart responds:

    It looks like a very large “Mud Puppy” or catfish to me, but I can’t get enough details to see it. The Mud Puppy can get enormous in the Mississippi river and could be mistaken for something else.

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.