Orang Pendek Track Photo Released

Posted by: Loren Coleman on October 1st, 2009

Richard Freeman (CFZ) has released the following alleged Orang Pendek footprint photograph to the UK’s Sun:

Update: I have been informed that there were scale photos of the prints taken, which, now we know due to the print edition, were also passed on to the media. Since this was not discussed with the other three members of the expedition, who were not informed of the Sun publication, until after the fact, there has been some confusion.

Just for the record, the other members of the expedition, who are not mentioned in the Sun article, were leader Adam Davies (not CFZ), Chris Clark (CFZ), and Dave Archer (CFZ).

Davies, via his journal, shares the parameters of the evidence found:

1/ We have got both Rattan that the animal was probably chewing, and hair.

The Rattan + 1 hair was found at the location where Dave Archer and Sahar Didmus saw the Orang-Pendek. This was in a place I specifically chose to go, after finding tracks there on previous occasions, including the cast of the footprint I found in 2001.

2/ We also have numerous hairs found on a tree. This ran parallel to another Orang-Pendek track I found on the other side of the Lake.

3/ We found two separate Orang-Pendek trails which I photographed. These were identified by the Forest Rangers as originating from the OP. In terms of size and other specifics…, they match the print I found in 2001.

4/We have two eyewitnesses, and I also have a sworn affadavit from forest ranger Sahar Didmus as to what he saw. We do not have a photo.

Adam Davies will appear on the Mark Gary’s radio program tonight, October 1, 2009, from 9:00 PM to Midnight Eastern.

Orang Pendek Cast

Please click on the image for a larger version of the photograph.

Above is the Adam Davies-Andrew Sanderson-obtained Orang Pendek field cast, from September 2001. The original was displayed as part of the Bates College cryptozoology exhibition in 2006, held in conjunction with the International Cryptozoology Museum. A first generation copy of this cast will be shown in the new public location of the museum.

Join others in the community in supporting the International Cryptozoology Museum as it opens in downtown Portland, Maine.

Please click on the button below (not the one up top) to take you to PayPal to send in your museum donation.

If you wish to send in your donation via the mails, by way of an international money order or, for the USA, via a check (made out to “International Cryptozoology Museum”) or money order, please use this snail mail address:

Loren Coleman, Director
International Cryptozoology Museum
PO Box 360
Portland, ME 04112

Thank you, and come visit the museum at 661 Congress Street, Portland, Maine 04101, beginning November 1, 2009!!

Loren Coleman About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015. Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.

20 Responses to “Orang Pendek Track Photo Released”

  1. TheHighlandTiger responds:

    Very interesting print, however although it is ape like, its too indistinct to make any decent identification.

    It would have been better if a cast was made, where proper measurements could be obtained.

    And why oh why, is there nothing in the picture to show any scale. A tape measure or even a coin would at least indicate the size.

    An indistinct print of an ape with no measurements or cast made. Meaning we have only their word on the size of the print

    This is becoming a bit of a joke.

    Again, I’ll repeat myself, while I applaud anyone doing research in the field and spending their hard earned money doing so, (something that you have to praise the CFZ for, whatever their other faults). But if you are going to go on an expedition at least get the basics right.

  2. alanrb responds:

    Two witnesses on an organized expedition an no cameras on them?? I thought that would be standard issue, a small camera on your belt.

  3. Loren Coleman responds:

    Please see the update above, which contains a clarification of the use of scale in the track photos.

  4. praetorian responds:

    Poorly handled public dissemination of information seems to be a recurring theme in Cryptozoology (remember Robert Rines’ Nessie photos). If you’re going to go to the trouble of mounting an expedition, hiring a publicist or at least appointing a public information officer seems prudent.

  5. TheHighlandTiger responds:

    Thank you Loren for the update.

    It seems that not all of the CFZ are incompetent. All photos should have some scale as a matter of course.

    Although, like others I find it strange that a picture without a scale is passed to a lowly tabloid newspaper, (without informing other members of the team, and without a single mention of them by name either). They would have been better to have sent it to the Daily Mail, who take these matters more seriously and less sensationalistic

    I’ve now seen the press article in The Sun, and the paper article differs to the online one. In the paper one, a different image of the print is shown, where someones hand is photographed next to it for scale.

    I’ve emailed Loren a scan of the article.

  6. TheHighlandTiger responds:

    What I would say though, is that the print is a lot smaller than I imagined, when measured against a hand.

    Possibly too small for an alleged 5 foot tall ape (Between 3″-4″ long) . But I’ll leave others more knowledgeable than me to discuss that

  7. Noncentz responds:

    Is it just me, or do the two photos above not resemble each other at ALL (But yet they’re both alleged OP prints)?…why does the newly released Freeman photo look like a “regular” footprint of a human, whereas the photo from 2001 looks like an obvious ape/chimp print with the protruding toe off the side?

  8. sschaper responds:

    To my eye, that track is all wrong. I’m thinking one of those (need coffee) not-quite-cats that live in that part of the world. If I saw it here, I’d think ‘coyote’.

  9. Alton Higgins responds:

    Looks like a jumbled mess to me. I can see dog tracks.

  10. korollocke responds:

    Why all these fake “tracks”? They never show scale or are detailed enough to really be of any real use. All they saw or thought they saw was probably a Gibbon. You must remember that they wanted to see something fantastic so there mind made it appear so.

  11. whiteriverfisherman responds:

    This story has not had an affect my excitement meter at all. In order to prove these animals exist one will need to be captured or find a dead one. I find it difficult to believe that this animal was a mere 100 feet from the witnesses and they did not even attempt to take a photo. Why? Because the camera may not have focused properly…what the hell? I am pretty sure most people would have taken as many pics as possible.

    I see nothing in the print pictures that help prove anything either.

    The DNA samples will not help prove anything and will probably end up testing inconclusive or unknown.

    Sorry, nothing here to get exited about.

  12. TheHighlandTiger responds:

    Now I’ve had a good look at the first print, I don’t think there is any indication that there is an ape track there. It looks to me as though it is a mass of several tracks overlaying a small dip in the ground.

    I can see canine, feline and hoofed tracks, which is to be expected on a natural trackway in the forest. But I cannot see any clear primate tracks.


  13. JMonkey responds:

    I have to agree with everyone else. If the DNA was unknown or inconclusive even a fuzzy photo would have helped to back up this claim. The footprint is hard to make out, and when you get a close look at it, you have that many more questions. I would have to say Gibbon as well, especially when I add in the sketch, which sort of looks like one.

  14. greatanarch responds:

    No worries, we took several photos of the track with a steel rule alongside for scale. The Sun (for the benefit of non-UK readers) is a tabloid newspaper best known for half-naked girls, and doesn’t select photos for their scientific value.

    And personally, I am much happier when my name does not appear in The Sun.

    Chris Clark

  15. cryptidsrus responds:

    It would have been better had they hired a good publicist. And the lack of scale is troubling. The lack of cameras has already been explained, though.

    On the other hand, the “evidence” presented here is at least encouraging. More good stuff should come to light after agood accounting of what is avaliable as “evidence” is sifted through here—

    I do have to say this—
    Alton Higgins—

    Dog tracks? Call me “Dog Illiterate,” but those do not look “Doglike” to me.

    Mildly Indistinct, yes. But Dog-Like, not quite.
    I guess the lack of scale enforces the indistinct quality and enables one to see “whatever one wants to.”

  16. cryptidsrus responds:

    Mr. Clark—

    Thanks for the update.

    That was funny. I ALSO would not want my name in The Sun. 🙂

  17. Loren Coleman responds:

    Folks, please read more carefully. There are photos with scale (not shown), and even one published here, with a hand (shown), as well as one or more without (shown).

    The Sun having published one of the ones without scale does not mean that they all were without scale.

    As to the question of why no casts were taken, well, that’s another matter entirely.

  18. Hoytshooter responds:

    The only difference between the Sun and the National Enquirer, here in the US, is the Sun is famous for its half-naked girls. I don’t know why anyone in their right mind would use it as a way to release any kind of real information to the world. Makes me wonder more and more if the real reason for this expedition wasn’t for making a quick buck (pound?) or two.

  19. korollocke responds:

    Oh come on now! None of three look the same let alone big enough to have come from a man sized homind/ape/monkey/primate/etc… They had cameras to take pics of the so called tracks, but not the living “thing” they claim to have seen in the trees?

  20. TheHighlandTiger responds:


    There are canine tracks visible in the top photo.

    They can be seen at about “6 O’clock” just inside the red circle, and at “5 O’clock” just outside the red circle

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.