Update: Hunting Guide Finds (Bigfoot) Track in East Texas
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on October 11th, 2012
Bigfoot Researcher Rob Gaudet of Shreveport, LA followed up on this incident.
He will be giving a presentation on the track find next weekend at the Cryptomundo event Cryptopalooza.
Word is that the hunting guide may be there as well.
From facebook page for Hardcore Outdoors.
UPDATE!!!
We spent HOURS measuring , photographing & videoing these tracks. They whole scene was gone over with a fine toothed comb!
They will email me all the pics, video & info plus his finished link for youtube when it’s all done. He said he’d like to consult with his colleagues & present them with all the evidence gathered. I’ll post all this stuff when I get it but I will say this for now. The man said this is quite possibly the best evidence he’s seen in ten years of investigating from Lousiana to Quebec Canada! WOW!Hardcore Outdoors
Photo gallery of the tracks on facebook
When we found these tracks they came out of the water & you could see them clearly for about 10 feet out then the water was too deep to see them. There were several tracks on the bank after “IT” walked out of the water & onto the bank, it only took a few steps then hit hard ground then no more tracks. Today, we found where “IT” went into the water about 100 yards up the slough from where it came out of the water. What we were able to determine today was that it went into the water from some thick brush towards the back of the slough, walked about 100 yards through the water, turned right, walked onto the bank & stopped then took one more BIG step before hitting solid ground & stopped leaving tracks. I’m 5′ 10″ tall & weigh about 180 pounds, I lined my right foot up with the tracks then stepped as far as I could stretch & was still 2″ shy from stepping as far as “IT” did. We measured the distance between the tracks heal to heal & it had exactly a 47″ stride! The track was 12″ long & most tracks on record are from 14″ to 15″ long but these were deep & wide so he determined that this could’ve been a female or an immature creature. He also agreed that a human couldn’t have been responsible for these tracks because of how & when they got there as well as the location. I can tell you that I am VERY excited to hear his final analysis after reviewing all the evidence with the other investigaotrs! I’ve NEVER been a believer of “BIG FOOT” but after all this I’m starting to have a whole new attitude about it being a very real creature. You either believe or you don’t.Hardcore Outdoors
My friend & I found these tracks, we did NOT see OR hear anything else at anytime before, during or after finding the tracks. These tracks are REAL that’s all I can tell you, I did NOT see what made them so I can’t swear to anything. What I can tell you is that around 8:00 p.m. these tracks were NOT there & somewhere around 9:00 to 10:a.m. the next morning we found them. We were camped about a mile from this site & the ONLY way to get to where these tracks are is by boat or by walking & swimming countless miles through thick, nasty river bottoms. There were 3 boats parked at our camp that night & NONE of them were moved, not a single boat belonging to anyone else came by us that night either & they would’ve had to drive righ past our camp to get to these tracks. Not to mention there were 40 plus mile per hour winds that night causing the lake to be covered with 4 foot plus waves whitecapping relentlessly across the entire lake making it next to impossible for anyone to even get to our camp from anywhere. With all that said, add in the fact that somebody or something made those tracks by WALKING through a slough in water up to 4 feet deep for about 100 yards in 45 degree weather, at night, in the middle of nowhere LITERALLY, during a wind storm & rain in their bare feet. A logical person would agree that considering all these FACTS, those tracks shouldn’t exist if they were made by a human. I also made it very clear in the beginning that I do not believe in bigfoot or other creatures that haven’t been proven to exist. I also NEVER used the word BIG FOOT or any other related term in reference to these tracks in any of my posts untill today & that was after a very experienced researcher examined the site & the tracks relentlessly. I sure hope this has satisfied any & all curiosities about these tracks. Should some be skeptical? You betcha! I have been my whole life but this ordeal has made a big time believer out of me that some things just can’t be explained & no way we can say that these things DON”T exist untill it has been with out a doubt scientifically proven or disproven!Thanks, Scott Threlkeld
Hardcore Outdoors
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.
Great footprint. I know that it’s a real footprint!
Yep. That’s what he proved, eh, with the graphic embellishment.
No. That’s not the way it works. It is precisely those kinds of comments that push cryptozoology to the fringe. Science does not work that way. Everything upon which we have built technology, our understanding of biology, the universe, the whole of science was not based on you “believe” or you don’t.
It’s not about believing or not believing. You go out, collect the evidence, push at the edges of our understanding, try to analyze and understand, and hopefully get somewhat closer to the truth, which is independent of what you believe or don’t believe.
This is not an endeavor for belief and true believers. It does not hinge on whether you believe or don’t. This is not an attitude which cryptozoology needs or should value if we indeed want to be taken seriously.
I respect and acknowledge the work that has been put in to try and properly document this finding. I do think it is a curious find worthy of follow up. However this is somewhat sullied by comments like this. The numerous grammatical and spelling mistakes here do not instill confidence either.
As a wildlife researcher myself, I will say honestly that there are red flags here with the way this finding has been presented and handled. The enthusiasm here is apparent, but please, just investigate, observe, analyze, and record. Present the findings in a level-headed manner. Allow peer review and alternative viewpoints.
This is science here. We are on a quest for the truth. Do not bring “belief” into it.
mystery_man:
This guy being a Member of the Public, and taking the verbal tack that that animal frequently takes in talking about this, I’m inclined to cut him much slack, and focus on what he found, and what he says about what he found.
The track is interesting, for sure. It does not look human. For one thing, our tracks tend to a markedly narrow heel as compared to the measurement across the base of the toes. That is a very WIDE heel…a feature that is uniform to alleged sasquatch tracks that seem to bear the proper marks of an animated source.
From his account, I am extremely disinclined to simply accept either a hoax or a human as the source of those tracks.
Not until another possible source – a source for which much encounter literature closely hews to this account – has been investigated first.
This is one of the more compelling track finds I have read about.