Finding Bigfoot: “Buckeye Bigfoot” Tonight

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on January 29th, 2012

Tonight, the next episode of Animal Planet’s Finding Bigfoot series premieres at 10 pm Eastern.

Tonight’s episode, “Buckeye Bigfoot” deals with Bigfoot reports and evidence from Ohio and includes encounters from Salt Fork State Park.

The team travels to Ohio to investigate an alleged close encounter with a bigfoot caught on tape. They assemble a group of volunteers to search a notorious forest for evidence, in hopes of proving bigfoots exist in Ohio.

Be sure to come back after the episode airs to share your thoughts about it with the other Cryptomundians!

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 “Finding Bigfoot: “Buckeye Bigfoot” Tonight”

  1. Budman030 responds:

    Did I just hear him say a squatch hunting blind? The show just went into a break, lol a hunting blind…

  2. hype_kid responds:

    I am watching Finding Bigfoot right now, and I have to say that it is nice having a show about Bigfoot even though it may not yield many satisfying results. People really want to see this elusive bipedal creature so it’s tough for them to believe. One thing I have noticed though it has sparked interest in few of my friends. One of them bought a book by Loren at Barnes and Noble. “Bigfoot!” One other also checked out BFRO and read about sightings and reports in the State of Wisconsin and Illinois. Kind of cool. I think that it is getting more popular as a debated topic.

  3. springheeledjack responds:

    Well, it’s becoming more obvious with each episode that Ranae and the rest of the group (at least Matt, and Bobo of late) are coming further and further apart on the outcome of “evidence.” And I’m afraid I have to side with Ranae the last few weeks because it seems like every episode anymore, everything is sasquatch…noises, prints, lean to’s, etc. (I’ll give them–they weren’t convinced of the video of the shape pulling on the tree).

    Sure it’s no fun to spend a week scouring the woods and come up with nothing, but sometimes, that’s what happens. I’d rather have them come out and say, “well that sucked,” and move on rather than have all of these positive upnotes at the end…call me a downer. 🙂

    For the positives: they are investigating areas that have a high number of sightings. None of them are afraid to get dirty and even go hunting by themselves for a couple of days. AND they are trying different methods to get some evidence. And, for once, Ranae got to fill in as Sasquatch model (when they talked with the woman who had seen one while out with her kids on the merry-go-round), instead of Bobo…

  4. MediumFoot responds:

    Usually, Matt and Bobo agree that even a shadow is a Bigfoot.

    On this episode, what looks like something somewhat suspicious, the whole team agrees that it is NOT likely to be Sasquatch.

    Hmmmm. Do you think they still have Todd Standing on their minds?

    The tree that figure is shaking like a toy is 6 inches in diameter, and frozen in winter. In the first pull, the figure pulls it so that the top of the tree moves about 10 feet. I couldn’t do that. What do you think?

  5. CDC responds:

    Wow, nothing left to say.

    In my opinion…this show is a hoax to generate money.

    Getting pretty terrible to watch.

    How can they cash their paychecks?

  6. Lack of Evidence responds:

    I have been pretty critical of the show in the past, but this episode wasn’t too bad.

  7. Eric Potts via Facebook responds:

    Giving props to this show takes everything thats been worked for away. Its a joke. I find my self having doubts about bigfoot when i watch it.

  8. Justin31p responds:

    I think this might have been the worst episode yet. First, the group that sees bigfoot everywhere says that the figure moving the tree isn’t a bigfoot since Bobo is bigger. I had never seen that video but it was certainly interesting especially its broad shoulders and un-human like movement. The question I wanted answered was not is Bobo bigger than the figure, but that size of a tree, could a human move it back and forth so violently as the figure in the video did? Bobo moved it but it was already broken, I wanted to see if he could move a similar size tree still in the ground like that.

    After that the episode devolves from there. They clearly hear something call them back and it’s on the mic, yet no frequency dissecting or anything else, just the usual “what was that”. One thing’s for sure, if bigfoot exists these guys are not going to be the ones to find him.

  9. viking0047 responds:

    They have to come up with some new techniques! I haven’t watched it since season 2 week 1 until last night but they pretty much do the same thing in every episode! It hasn’t brought along any results so far so why don’t they try deploying camera traps…and if they KNOW what “squatches” love to eat, then why don’t they place a bunch of food to their liking approximately 6 – 7 feet above the ground and set a couple of camera traps around. Mix it up guys…

  10. Sasquatch Up Close responds:

    In your second paragraph, you give the wrong title. “Peeping Bigfoot” was like two episodes ago. C’mon, Craig, don’t descend as low as the show itself, in terms of precision.

  11. Craig Woolheater responds:

    Sasquatch Up Close,

    The post initially did list the incorrect episode name.

    I corrected it last night after you initially pointed it out, for which I am grateful.

    I had cut and pasted it from the previously aired episode and had overlooked changing it.

    Thanks, Craig

  12. Wendigo Truth Force responds:

    While I would tend to agree with many of the criticisms that the show (Not the team) receives I DID find this episode to be a breath of fresh air. Perhaps I am biased, being an Ohio researcher myself but I loved hearing Matt express his love for the buckeye state referring to it as “a gem in the midwest” etc… and even recounting some close encounters that the team had in the past. I was really intrigued by the video evidence (I’d never seen it) and the audio recording played at the Salt Fork Lodge was really interesting. In fact I’m shocked that they didn’t pay it more attention. Got a chuckle out of Tim Stover (TCSJR Bigfoot himself). I used to catch his radio show on blog talk and also listen to the Bigfoottonightshow there as well. Also saw Mr. Keating in the front row. Matt was right when he said Ohio had alot of active researchers lol, I’m proud to be one of em.

  13. PhotoExpert responds:

    It is what it is! It is entertainment.

    For the common viewers, it is entertainment.

    For the cryptozoologists, it is entertainment.

    For the skeptics, it is entertainment.

    The only difference is that for the cryptozoologists and for the skeptics, it is humorous entertainment. And they are not laughing with them but rather, laughing at them.

    One thing can be said for this show, both recent and past episodes, that it is the one Bigfoot program that unites both the skeptics and the cryptozoologist, in that they both share common laughing ground. I wanted to be positive in my analysis of this episode, since we were asked what we thought about it. I have not posted any comments here before, about any of the Finding Bigfoot episodes. I did feel compelled this time to post because we were asked to come back and share our thoughts. And also, since there is a pattern growing with each episode. It’s Squatchy!

    The positives: So the show has appeal, but not for what it was originally intended. It has been a uniting factor for two oppositional camps. It is entertainment for many people. It is interesting as far as seeing old footage and some footage that may not have been seen before for some viewers. It has a unifying result for both skeptics and cryptozoologists. It is humorous. Hopefully, something beneficial will result from the program such as getting some more people interested in cryptozoology or in their own searches for Bigfoot. And that is a good thing! That is what I can say positively about this episode and the program in general.

    The negatives: I lost count of the number of times “Squatch”, “Squatchy”, or some other form of the word “Sasquatch” was thrown around. It was a bit too much for my liking. It makes me cringe every time I hear that terminology being used for a show that reports to be a “scientific” investigation. Enough said there! This episode as almost every episode is predictable! Before I even watched the show, I knew what the format would be and how the show would play out. I even could predict the end result and that was nothing was proven. I could even predict that some form of the word “Sasquatch” would be used. The unknown factor was how many times some form of the word would be used. It is predictable as well, in that there would be some squatchy calls by members of the team. It was predictable that with the exception of Ranae, that the team members talk about Sasquatch and a definite and proven animal. “Squatches are definitely here.” “That is what Squatches do”. So on and so on, they talk about Sasquatch as if it has been proven to exist. This is demeaning to true cryptozoologists both amateur and professional! It is also cannon fodder for skeptics who take delight in making fun of the entire cryptozoological community. It sets true research back many steps. The overuse of the word “Squatch” in it’s various forms is a huge negative. The “scientific methods” employed by the team members is truly not scientific at all. Everything is a “squatch” is tiring. Definitively repeating that this is a Squatch and this is what squatches do, is ludicrous. The predictability of the show is obvious to anyone that has watched even one episode. It sets real cryptozoological study back, many steps. And one last negative about the show, it is entertainment!

    I would rather it be much more scientific and objective in it’s approach, but apparently, that is not what the viewing public wants to see. So the show is what it is!

  14. painted8 responds:

    That footage shown in this episode was a helluva lot more compelling than the Rhode Island blogsquatch video they were so impressed with. It’s funny – if MM and the others want to believe a sighting, then Bobo’s comparable size is just evidence that it’s a juvenile or young adult sasquatch. But if they don’t, then Bobo’s comparable size just rules out the possibility that the footage is of sasquatch.

  15. Lack of Evidence responds:

    The only issue with these shows is like most TV shows people are used to watching, there is a story line and a definitive ending to the show. This is different. They are trying to find a creature many people don’t believe exists, and one for which rock solid proof hasn’t been brought forward. It’s easy to get into the mentality of wanting that big conclusion, but that won’t most likely come.

    The only bigfoot show that may be successful in this area, is if they took a group of trained marine snipers, packing barrett 50 cal sniper rifles and had them stalk a bigfoot. If bigfoots do exist, then the best way is to have someone who has training on stalking people find it. Also, if a show like this were to exist, you would have to shoot one to get the big ending you all want. I don’t think the BFRO will do this.

  16. DWA responds:

    PhotoExpert: well, yeah, the show is what it is.

    I think those of us who criticize it just see that sometimes better science is better TV.

    Ohio is a long-term hotbed of reports, one of the go-tos to show to everybody who thinks the Pacific Northwest is the only viable sasquatch habitat. It was one of the states that most impressed Dr. John Bindernagel with the availability of potential habitat (after he was drawn there in puzzlement at the volume of reports). Wildlife biologists like him quickly grasp the superiority of hardwood over conifer forests as wildlife habitat in general.

    That said: why not focus on that, rather than take a walk and everything’s a “squatch”? I know you’re pretty much agreeing in your post with what I’m about to say, but it’s an opportunity to Stress Important Stuff. A scientist might have problem with:

    1) An elusive cryptic animal signaling its presence everywhere (shoot, these guys are encountering more bigfoot than I do deer, and I’m in country loaded with deer);

    2) Stating things as facts that science doesn’t accept yet (sorry, guys, but it hurts your credibility. Read the TBRC website, which sometimes may err too much on the side of caution…which in science is always better than erring the other way);

    3) …then going “um….aaahhhhh….naaaaahhhhh” at what might ACTUALLY BE SOMETHING INTERESTING (the figure moving the tree).

    Clearly, these guys are driven to come up with something every show. That will be hard to do with something elusive. You won’t see a TV show (at least not a series) called “Finding the Wolverine” any time soon, because, well, basically people don’t. (Wolverines find us.) Bad TV there. But when you have a show called Finding Something, you better find something! So suddenly everything’s squatchy. And because a skeptical linchpin is All These Blobsquatch, video comes in for the hard-eye treatment, and they’re afraid to even say it might be interesting because, well, that’s playing into the skeptics’ hands, is what it is! But WE know what squatches eat, and sound like, so let’s have lots of that!

    And saying the figure moving the tree isn’t a bigfoot because Bobo is bigger? Reports show a range of sizes, and, you know, animals start small and grow, males and females frequently show size differences, juveniles like to have fun, etc. A scientist wouldn’t make that mistake if the video were otherwise interesting.

    Not only the seriousness quotient but the good-TV quotient would skyrocket if the producers trusted the audience. But haven’t we been here before. Who trusts the audience?

    And, well, yeah, you have to get a scientist or two interested first, and good luck there.

  17. painted8 responds:

    To be fair, Cliff goes into more detail as to why they did not believe the video footage in his Field Notes.

  18. Justin31p responds:

    Yeah I mean can we have a section about that video footage, since the last people on earth that are going to determine things are these clowns. Where did that video come from? I had never saw it, is there some kind of back story on the witness that would lead us to believe its not credible? And again, what about that tree he was moving, can a human move a tree the size of that one to the degree the figure in the video did?

  19. Redrose999 responds:

    I honestly haven’t had time to turn it on, and sadly I’m not compelled by curiosity to go back and watch it. I’ve gotten to the point where if I’ve seen one episode, I’ve seen them all.

  20. Peltboy25 responds:

    Nobody is ever going to get compelling evidence by running around the woods with a camera and sound crew chasing them. The whole premise is laughable. If Animal Planet wants some real attention, they should fund a long-term, low-impact expedition into norther CA or Oregon.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|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.