International Cryptozoology ConferenceWholeBeastBanner

New Mt. Hood Mystery Video

Posted by: Loren Coleman on August 28th, 2008

Dianna Martin sends along this latest trailcam footage from near Mt. Hood. She says they placed the camera a bit higher than normal, and then got these images. What do you think?

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.

55 Responses to “New Mt. Hood Mystery Video”

  1. the_jedi responds:

    I am wondering where on hood that is and how long ago right now they have fires going on the mt. on the east side new mt. hood medows and sky cap so if it is near there it may be a fire fighter. If it is not near there then who knows it may be a bird or a small animal

  2. one4show responds:

    Maybe biscardi is wearing that $50,000 gorilla suite

  3. bill green responds:

    this is a very interesting new possible mt.hood sasquatch creature filmfootage but more research etc needs to be done to it. the people who took this filmfootage need to interviewed by researchers. thanks bill green

  4. Lupus78 responds:

    I guess it depends somewhat on what ”a bit higher than normal” is.

  5. glendoor42 responds:

    Looks to me like something climbing up and down the tree and on the camera, maybe a squirrel or not.

  6. Gary the Cat responds:

    “Sigh”-inconclusive brown blobs again.

    Why does nothing ever stop in front of these cams dead centre-even if it is a bear or opossum or whatever?

  7. YourPTR! responds:

    Could be anything, but I think most likely a bear! But who knows? Far too little here to go on to make any definite conclusion, but a bear must surely be the most likely culprit.

  8. Lyndon responds:

    Is it me or does the outline look a little smooth? Like clothing material as opposed to hair/fur??

  9. Bob K. responds:

    Quite intriguing. If this is “on the level”, it certainly looks like a large beast, covered in the type of black hair described in reports I’ve read [no, never had the privilege of seeing one myself-yet], and gives the impression of moving naturally. Could it be examining the camera?
    Was the camera set too high for it to be a black bear?

  10. swnoel responds:

    When the object first appears it looks like the muzzle of a bear.

    My instincts are… black bear.

  11. Braindead responds:

    Could be everything – did he left some hair? Seems big, it is interested in the camera :)

  12. drjon responds:

    How much are these damned Trailcams? Too expensive to have two of them pointing at each other with a few metres distance between them?? *sigh*

    What do I think of the footage? Interesting, but conclusively inconclusive.

  13. mystery_man responds:

    Honestly, this could be anything from a bear playing around to a squirrel, to a fur rug being waved in front of the camera. I don’t even see anything obvious to suggest it is large.

  14. captiannemo responds:

    It looks like someone trying to clean off the lens with a cloth.

  15. mojo responds:

    DANG! Far too ambiguous. You could get the same sort of footage with a camera in a gerbil’s cage.
    All of that forest and whatever it is HAD to be all up the camera’s grill!

  16. tomdee27 responds:

    Looks to me like a bear thinking the camera is a meal.

  17. mojo responds:

    Must have touched the camera though. If you look at the frame at 15 secs and compare to 20 secs, you see a smudge appear in the upper right quadrant of the frame. Still hard to say what it really is and it could be a thousand different things.

  18. mojo responds:

    …sigh…that “smudge” could also be the sun behind some clouds….tough one, folks!

  19. krvega responds:

    Y’all ever heard of this neet animal called a bear? From what I hear they enjoy using Mt. Hood and its surrounding area as, I don’t know, a home!

  20. cliffhanger042002 responds:

    It looks to me like a small tree-dwelling animal giving the camera a bit of an inspection due to how close to the camera it is. I’m not ruling the bear theory out, but I kinda think that the camera would have caught an image of the bear either walking up to or away from the camera. It could have came up on the side I know, but I’m leaning more towards curious squirrel or raccoon, etc. inspecting the camera.

  21. DWA responds:

    That is a whatsit.

    I only have one question and it might have been answered earlier in the history of this videocam.

    Are they looking for other evidence around the camera site?

    Sure doesn’t look like a 911 to Bigfoot Central to me.

  22. Artist responds:

    drjon responds: “What do I think of the footage? Interesting, but conclusively inconclusive.”

    But what have we learned here? Perhaps that, as drjon points out, when installing Trailcams, we should always have “two of them pointing at each other with a few metres distance between them”?

    If there had been another cam installed high up on one of those other trees, looking down at this scene, MAYBE WE WOULD HAVE GATHERED SOME EVIDENCE, instead of this 42nd FurBlob!!

    Useless images, except to indicate that there MAY be something more interesting than bears in those woods.

    I pray thee, Try Again!

  23. Cryptoraptor responds:

    Why is anything that blurs in front of a camera have to be considered as a possible bigfoot? Mabey it’s an elf, unicorn, martian, or tooth fairy.

  24. planettom responds:

    I think this one falls into the “cone of uncertainty.”


    Too ambiguous. Possibly a bear as others have stated or a small mammal crawling up/around the tree.

  25. Galea responds:

    Honestly. If you look straight across and see the tree where it seems to be even with this camera. It looks like the camera is 2-3ft off the ground.

    Its probably a squirrel

  26. darkshines responds:

    How big in the lens? Could be be something like a moth? They can be brown, their wings would have a smoothish outline, they would live in the forest…..

  27. cryptid enthusiast responds:

    This footage is eerily similar to a series of trail-cam footage shown on a history channel Bigfoot special a few weeks ago. The first shot showed a hairy, red “arm”, but the subsequent shots revealed it to be a bear climbing the tree to snag some elevated bait. I would bet that this footage is of a bear climbing up to sniff out the trail-cam. It looks too similar to not be.

  28. DontCryBigfoot responds:

    It’s a Lumberjack! Anyone else notice the faint hint of red flannel in a few frames??? And in an area with a few downed trees clearly visible and what appears to be a couple cleanly cut stumps???

  29. olejason responds:

    It could literally be anything. There is really no point in even speculating other than for fun.

  30. cabochris responds:

    Looks like a very poor attempt at another Hoax. What are the odds that Bigfoot would wave his/her arm across the camera lens? Think about it. With all that Wilderness, Bigfoot gets caught nearly touching the camera trap? Perhaps Bigfoot is having some fun here? Hey, if you want to see a Bigfoot, get a bag of jerky! We all know that now.

    With that said, I am going to look into and buy some camera traps. When I was in Jr. High, I made my own camera trap. It was an old 120 B&W camera found at Goodwill. I set the camera and a 1 X use flash bulb on a tripod, and rigged a fishing sinker within a tube above the shutter. The heavy sinker was tied to an elaborate trip-line, and it actually worked. At night in my yard I walked like a Bigfoot and tripped the line. The sinker fell to the shutter, the camera snapped and in my darkroom I developed a pretty good photo! As a teen my intent was to capture Bigfoot on film!

    I think if more people purchased camera traps in search of Bigfoot, eventually someone will get a clear photo/s! It would just be a matter of time as the odds grew with more cameras. How many camera traps would it take? 100, 1,000, 5,000? Might be a good way to get proof and Loren should offer a camera for sale at this site.

  31. gridbug responds:

    How about FOUR cameras on the same tree, each cam facing N, S, E and W. That way, you’re gonna see whatever’s coming from any direction. Except up, of course. Although that could yield our first glimpse of the mega-elusive Hoversquatch! :)

  32. lerxst responds:

    Why doesn’t anybody point two trail cams at each other?

  33. whiteriverfisherman responds:

    The camera does not look very high off the ground to me. From what I can see if it is an animal we are seeing the legs? My guess is bear. Perhaps someone needs to place a trail cam over head in an over hanging branch of a large tree. This would get a nice 360 degree field of view. That would eliminate capturing images like this one or at least the vast majority of them. Just a thought.

  34. ShefZ28 responds:

    # lerxst responds: August 28th, 2008 at 12:40 pm

    Why doesn’t anybody point two trail cams at each other?

    My thoughts exactly.

  35. hudgeliberal responds:

    This almost looked like a jacket if you pause it about half way through the vid. Take care fellas.

  36. hlw responds:

    The only surprise to me was the fact that when you see the still picture, the log down on the left looks like it has two monkeys on it. Now if they started moving around this would have been interesting.

  37. Richard888 responds:

    I am 6-foot-1 and that is the angle I would view a fallen log from. So the height of the camera must be around 6 feet. At 14:00-15:00 a black mass passes from right to left. At 17:00-20:00 a redish-brown mass passes from right to left and then reverses. They look bigger than a small mammal such as a squirrel or marten. They look separate indicating two individuals. The outline has mostly vertical lines. These observations tell us that the animals are large and walk in the upright position. Two conclusions follow: 1) Bear (common animal walking in an unusual way or upright); 2) Sasquatch (uncommon animal walking in the usual way or upright).

  38. zigoapex responds:

    Wrong color hair for black bear or squirrel and hair to long for a squirrel.
    my guess would be an elk.Color and hair lenth are about the same and
    they have a good size herd there in mt hood.
    or it maybe the big guy himself !?!

  39. DWA responds:

    lerxst: “Why doesn’t anybody point two trail cams at each other?”

    I am not sure there is a single trailcam whatsit I have ever seen that would not have been resolved by that simple expedient.

    If you have many of them, territorial coverage may be the way to go. What you miss on cam 1, you may catch on cam 13. *

    But if you only have two of them, do this.

    * Or point cam 13 at cam 1.

  40. PhotoExpert responds:

    Just another ambiguous pixelated photo. I can actually see the individaul pixels in this one. This doesn’t even peak my interest to give it a second look.

  41. cryptidsrus responds:

    I agree it is too indistinct and frutratingly ambiguous, but I feel it is still fun to at least speculate on it.

    Let’s back off the poor lady a bit, OK???

  42. korollocke responds:

    just a squirel judging from the movements.

  43. wdsasquatch responds:

    Probably a bear or a small animal close to the camera
    We’ll probably never know for sure.
    Could be Sasqatch, Who knows.

  44. Exactly Squatch responds:

    I know exactly what that is: a waste of time.

    Seriously though, that footage does nothing to advance this field and gives skeptics more anti-Bigfoot ammunition to fire at the believers. I am conflicted, however, knowing that information – regardless of how inconclusive or controversial it is – should be shared. But, in these post-Georgia hoax times, I think a little more caution should be exercised when it comes to displaying obviously questionable media.

  45. BigTruth responds:


    Does anyone know how many Frames/Sec on the Trail Cam? It seems
    non fluid.

    Seems like Bigfoot is Camera Shy 😉


  46. Camera Trapper responds:


    I’m quite familiar with this type of footage, as the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC) has many of the same recorded videos.
    That looks to be a bear in the recorded clip. Do you know if the camera is inside a protected bear box of any kind?
    Bears have visited our cameras since day one that we have deployed in Area X one of our areas of year round research. I can send you about a hundred similar video clips and pictures to compare to this one. Most of the bears in Area X try and pull the cameras off the trees, so we have them all housed in custom heavy steel boxes to keep them secure and safe where they are deployed.

    Chris Buntenbah
    Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy
    Operation Forest Vigil Project Leader

  47. okielabrat responds:

    The “smudge” seems to be kicking the branches around quite a bit, or it could just be the wind. Maybe it was a botched pickup or dropoff.

  48. Artist responds:

    Exactly Squatch responds: “I know exactly what that is: a waste of time… that footage does nothing to advance this field.”

    Not “exactly”. Serious enthusiasts reading this post and ALL these comments can pick up (and — USE, presumably) several good ideas:

    …the people who took this film footage need to interviewed by researchers.

    …a bear must surely be the most likely culprit.

    …clothing material as opposed to hair/fur??

    …someone trying to clean off the lens with a cloth.

    …that “smudge” could also be the sun behind some clouds.

    …are they looking for other evidence around the camera site?

    …another cam installed high up on one of those other trees, looking down at this scene.

    …how many camera traps would it take? 100, 1,000, 5,000?

    …Loren should offer a camera for sale at this site.

    …place a trail cam overhead in a branch of a large tree.

    …most of the bears try to pull the cameras off the trees, so we have them all housed in custom heavy steel boxes.

    Most commenters contribute serious, sometimes profound, ideas, and most visitors are eager to learn anything they can about this Quest – let’s all try to learn and benefit from these thoughts, even the simplest and most obvious ones !

  49. Point Radix responds:

    Impossible to tell what it shows…

    But at least we know ONE thing — it was not “mangy” !


  50. Exactly Squatch responds:

    Re: Artist

    Your points are well taken. As a result of your thoughtful post, I won’t be as quick to dismiss future “mystery” Bigfoot footage.

    Thank you.

  51. Artist responds:

    My pleasure and honor.

  52. jefflemley responds:

    Has anyone noted that some of the frozen frames, especially around the 17-second mark, are strikingly similiar to the still photo submitted by Ms. Martin from April 30, 2006? The photo appears to show the same kind of reddish-brown hair.

  53. Artist responds:

    jefflemley responds: “Has anyone noted that some of the frozen frames etc…”

    Good observation, Jeff – we may be looking at a re-visit by the same animal, hanging around the same or nearby area. Both photos seem to show similar shaggy coats!

    We should encourage the Trailcam owner to continue her efforts in that area and, if possible, to install another camera overlooking this first one, to try to get a look at the visitor(s)!

  54. Randyman responds:

    Just a layman’s thoughts:

    Camera jiggle: IF this is a bear or Sasquatch checking out the trailcam, why no camera shake on impact? Is there Steadycam technology here? A bear swipe would have bumped the camera; a large bipedal primate would have surely poked or prodded it – normal curiosity behavior from a primate. Yet the ‘cam is stock-still.

    Movement: Looks like it’s only waving in front of the lens, not touching it. Due to lack of camera shake it was probably light and small, only brushing the lens. A bushy tail? My 1st guess: SQUIRREL – sniffing the ‘cam cuz it smells odd. 2nd guess: a GRIZZ scratchin’ his back. 3rd guess: ELK?

    More ideas…

    Trailcam placement: Try mounting SINGLE trailcams in places which are known to attract Sasquatch. Instead of scattering ‘cams in the woods (expensive), focus on must-go sites like streams, ponds, watering holes, feeding sites, and campground trash bins… as well as caves, shelters and/or nesting areas.

    Sasquatch sightings often occur at food scavenging sources like dumpsters, town dumps and henhouses. You can bait sites with dried salmon or apples. Think like a hungry, thirsty, elusive and smart primate, then put cameras there.

    Cameras & angles: 2 trailcams? 4 trailcams? Sheeesh! Just mount ONE trailcam high up in a tree, looking down. Nothing wrong with an aerial view, and you get better coverage the higher you go. And try extra-wide-angle or fisheye lenses.

    It amazes me that every time I visit the ATM or drive-thru I’m caught on video, but we still can’t get a decent Sasquatch image with all this new gear. Maybe BF’ers should be scanning surveillance videos from McD’s drive-thru. I’m just sayin’.

    And don’t waste money mounting up 2 or 3 trailcams at a site. Just mount one trailcam, and then mount a big round convex safety mirror facing it. Problem solved!

    To paraphrase Rene, “You can’t hunt Sasquatch. You have to let them hunt you.” So, find out where they forage and get ’em on tape.

  55. mystery_man responds:

    Randyman- Good ideas on what to do with trail cams. I agree.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!


Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


DFW Nites

Creatureplica Fouke Monster Everything Bigfoot


|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.