Knollenbergs’ Flap: It Was A Peahen
Posted by: Loren Coleman on October 8th, 2006
A peahen, shown here, is the female of the peafowl, which can refer to any of three species of bird in the genera Pavo and Afropavo of the pheasant family.
Scott Maruna, the new energetic editor of The Anomalist (www.anomalist.com), treks into uncomfortable country on October 8, 2006. With an unfortunate blog on the Lawndale Thunderbird, here, Maruna introduces some details of the July 25, 1977 event where a large bird reportedly lifted Marlon Lowe into the air, then writes:
One particular contemporary event that has been complete [sic – LC] ignored might just hold the clue that could explain the crazy events of that summer.
On July 22th, just three days prior to the now infamous Lawndale incident, a rural New Holland man [New Holland IL is 20 miles from Lawndale] saw an exotic bird on their farm. An account from the Lincoln Courier described it as such:
“It was larger than a turkey,” said Kenneth Knollenburg, describing the bird on his farm. “I’d guess it weighed 25 pounds or so.” He said the bird was a dull gray with a white neck, small beak and a crest of feathers on its head, hee [sic] added. The bird’s wingspan was estimated at four feet.
“It wasn’t afraid of people,” the New Holland farmer explained. “We wondered at the time if it hadn’t escaped from a zoo.”
Knollenberg, who lives tem miles west of Lincoln on Fifth St. Road, said his family first noticed the strange bird at their farm around 7 p.m. Friday. “It was sitting on top of the barn,” he said. The bird was making a “loud, trumpeting noise,” he added.
Knollenberg said the bird, which flew from rooftop to rooftop of his farm buildings, came down to the ground to eat some corn which the family had thrown out for it to eat.
“It acted like it was used to having people around,” the farmer said. “You could walk up to it, within 50 or 60 feet, and it wouldn’t fly away. It wasn’t afraid of people.”
Knollenberg said the bird flew away sometime after nightfall. He and his wife, by looking in the encyclopedia, said the bird closely matched the identity of an African crested crane.
Looking for something exotic, despite the eventual identification, the New Holland eyewitnesses found a picture of an African crested crane (above) and thought that’s what they had seen. I can certainly, with kindness, understand how initially the Knollenbergs first saw this bird in the one they were seeing – with its crest and making those noises that peacocks make.
Scott further writes:
…this forgotten New Holland account testifies to the fact that exotic birds were on the loose in central Illinois in late July of 1977. Had a dealer in illegal wildlife accidentally (or on purpose) released a number of exotics?
And…
These puzzle pieces seem to infer that perhaps young Marlon was indeed “attacked” by a California condor. The “attack” though was far more likely an attempted shoulder landing, modified by a rightfully panicked boy. These California condors and African crested cranes were perhaps escapees or releasees and—finding themselves in the foreign environment of central Illinois—didn’t live long enough to create but the small collection of sightings we have today from the latter weeks of July 1977.
Oh my goodness! This case has neither been forgotten nor long under-examined.
Mark A. Hall has discussed this case, for years, in his writings on the central Illinois events of 1977. Indeed, it is right there in the very accessible retelling and examinations of this case in Hall’s 2004 Paraview Press book, Thunderbirds: America’s Living Legends of Giant Birds.
As Hall points out on page 19, the Knollenbergs – who said it happened on July 22 and was a very different bird than seen by the Lowes – came forward after the media flap (excuse the pun) caused by the Lawndale incident of July 25. Many people wanted to get their 15 minutes of fame in the rush to "tell stories" about every large bird sighting in central Illinois. I am not saying this is why the Knollenbergs told their tale, but within the context of the media circus after the Lowe’s airlift experience, the Knollenbergs’ story was one of many appearing in the press. The Knollenbergs – in 1977 – gave a description and even showed a photograph of the bird.
The species the Knollenbergs saw and photographed was easily and positively identified as a female peacock, a peahen. Hall also mentions: "This specimen was probably among some loose peafowl reported by construction workers at nearby Middleton. Those birds were thought to have originated with a tame group of peafowl kept by a landowner in Corwin Township.
Scott Maruna’s notion that escaped birds were behind the Thunderbird reports of 1977 is something that those of us, including Jerry Coleman, Mark A. Hall, and myself, checked out in 1977. All of the reports of escapees had nothing to do with the giant birds seen by the Lowes and others. Such stories, however, are good examples of what Charles Fort called the "Wipe," an attempt by the media to kill the story and move on to the next three or nine day wonder. If you examine the Mothman flap, you will note many common and exotic known bird reports are in the mix, including, once again, cranes.
As far as Maruna’s theory that what might have been seen was an illegal captive of a California condor that had escaped, well, such a solution is almost as incredible as a living Thunderbird. Every living condor is given a number, tracked, and its location is known specifically, from day to day. In 1977, no more than 30 California condors were in existence and none were escapees from anywhere or stolen illegals. Releases of California condors in California and Arizona are not ever "lost." Releases or escapees of Andean condors, ditto.
Sorry, from the uncomfortable nature of how well-known the Knollenbergs report is, to when and how it surfaced, to the fact their "bird" is known to be a peahen, all the way to the illogic of an "escaped condor" explanation, Scott Maruna’s blog "Neglected Event May Reveal Much About Illinois’ Giant Birds of ’77" merely reveals he didn’t do his homework.
Mark A. Hall authored the apparently under-read book, Thunderbirds: America’s Living Legends of Giant Birds.
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.
I’m a little surprised that someone living on a farm doesn’t know what a peahen looks/sounds like. Maybe the coloring threw them off. But the head crest should be a dead giveaway.
Not everyone that lives on a farm is a farmer or familiar with wildlife, farm animals, or even peafowl.
The crested cranes have a head crest, and so the “head crest” was not a dead giveaway if you are talking to the papers in the middle of a media circus and looking for exotic and strange answers.
The day I see a peahen pick up a boy is the day I stop drinking… the annoying things can’t even really FLY! It’s kind of an imitation of flying, and not a good one at that.
I agree with sky king. How can someone confuse a peacock with a giant condor like bird? How does a peacock pick someone up? That’s a peacock on roids.
I have read before, perhaps even on this site, that Condors and other members of the vulture family do not have the grasping strength to lift up large prey. Only raptors such as eagles, hawks, and presumably thunderbirds, are able to do this.
Peacocks/hens can indeed fly. I capture several dozen each year for golf courses and gated communities. If something is bothering them they typically run first, but are also capable of true flight and even vertical take off. Max altitude I’ve witnessed was 50+ feet, max distance at minimum 1/2 mile.
In my opinion there is no way a peacock/hen could lift any more than 50lbs , and even then I doubt they have the grasping ability to hold on to such a load.
How much does a grown peahen weigh, trapster? 25 pounds? Nah, don’t think they could pick up twice their own weight, “unless they were on ‘roids”, as Giant_Catfish says!
The article did, though, make the point that an attempted shoulder-landing could easily be confused for an attempt to pick the boy up. If its claws got caught in the kid’s clothing and it tried to take off, it would certainly feel to a panicking child that the bird was trying to carry him off. If the kid stumbled a bit, especially in the same direction as the bird, it could even look that way to spectators.
While there’s a lot of evidence against the peahen theory, including their general clumsiness when flying and overall recognizability (or at least distinctive enough features that somebody leafing through a bird book would likely recognize it later), the responsible bird needn’t necessarily have had the strength and bulk to carry a child off, just enough to make it look like it’s seriously trying to.
Please do your homework before criticizing the Lowe account by trying to come up with theories about how it “looked like” some shoulder-landing birds were only “seriously trying to” carry off a boy. He was carried.
Marlon Lowe, according to multiple witnesses, was lifted 2 feet off the ground and carried 35 feet from the backyard to the frontyard!
I think that a really big eagle could pick up a child and carry him 35 feet. After all, some of the giant eagles are known to prey on small deer and full-grown monkeys, and they are about the same size as a child.
Giant tropical eagles are not native to Illinois, but one could have either escaped from captivity, or maybe could have ended up out-of-place in Illinois through some other means. There are Harpy eagles in South America and they can hunt prey up to the size of large monkeys. Maybe one was somehow displaced north.
I’m sorry Loren but I think a terrified kid’s story, even confirmed by his hysterical mother is not very good evidence.
That they thought he was being carried off I can believe. But their descriptions of a bird with a 6 foot wingspan speaks against it.
Skepticism, logical rebuttals, and related comments are welcome. What I find is unfortunate is to read comments such as busterggi’s in which the debunking is based on an apparent lack of reading of the facts.
Three children and four adults (you can look up their names – I could write them down but it is clear to me people need to read the original accounts) reported two birds that had wingspans of 8-10 ft across on a 4 ft long body. That’s much different than what is written here about a “terrified kid” and “hysterical mother” (please note the loaded language used) seeing a “bird with a 6 foot wingspan.”
Well, if there was a bird that carried someone off like that, it was certainly not a Peahen, nor any other bird that I know to exist. I think the fact that this peahen was sighted is just a curious coincidence. I agree with the notion that escaped exotic birds would have had nothing to do with the cryptid that was witnessed carrying the boy away. A 10 foot wingspan does not have much to do with a 25 pound peahen, as far as I’m concerned.
Loren, while trying to avoid your testy tone, I’d like to remark that critical reading (which is surely part of doing good “homework,” as opposed to merely memorizing the facts as stated) includes the concept that eyewitness accounts, particularly under certain circumstances, is highly fallible.
Basic “homework” in eyewitness unreliability research shows that witnesses typically distort size and speed of events, particularly under circumstances of reduced visbility (9:00 pm, while still light, is not full daylight); emotional trauma; and the tendency for witnesses who discuss the events among themselves (as these surely did) to exaggerate in later retellings.
I heartily recommend Eyewitness Reliability in Motor Vehicle Accident Reconstruction and Litigation by Robins as a good overview of how people remember and report events. There are other materials on the same topic, mostly dealing with recognition of individuals, but this one is particularly apt as it deals with motion.
Here is the original testimony of the witnesses.
Also, in my book “Strange Highways”, Chapter III, one could find a 25 year case study of the Lawndale Thunderbird event, complete with “on location” field notes.
The eagle theory also has another problem, a friend of mine hunts with falcons and has raised eagles and other LARGE birds of prey, when going to prey on a large animal (like a coyote) the bird swoops down at high speed and shreds the prey animal with its talons, sometimes breaking the neck or spine of the animal, then comes back to feed. I think if an eagle had been the culprit the boy would have been in very bad shape.
As far as the weight of a peahen, it’s a guess but somewhere around 10-12 lbs.
In my post afew paragraphs back I judged the amount of weight a peacock could lift by experience I’ve had trying to hold on to such a bird as it flapped and struggled to get away. A guess would be it could lift the 50LBS a couple of feet and then drop back down. Ha!.. not just ascending into the night with some weights in tow!
After reading the original testimony from Jerry Coleman’s link, I still think that it’s possible the birds were large eagles. Even the description “black body with white neck” and “large beak with a hook on the end” are descriptive of several species of eagles. Our native eagles are large birds, but there are tropical eagles that dwarf them. And several tropical eagles specialize in preying on primates. This link from National Geographic has a very interesting article.
I quote from the article: “African crowned eagles have been known to occasionally attack or eat human children, [Evolutionary biologist Susanne ]Schultz says.
“There’s one report from South Africa of a small child’s skull being found in a nest,” she added.
The article is about prehistoric eagles, some of which were larger than any modern eagle.
Even though eagles do attack mammalian prey in a devastating and dramatic fashion, not every animal they attack is killed or seriously injured – and most mammals don’t have removeable “skins” (clothes) like we humans do. If the bird grabbed young Marlon by the clothing, he would not necessarily suffer serious injury.
We do not know what bird or birds formed the basis of the Thunderbird legends. Maybe it was a species of large eagle. Maybe evn a species that survived the Pleistocene but is so rare that it has not been described by science.
I believe I may have spotted a thunderbird while I was driving through Northern Indiana on September 22nd. I’ve made 2 previous attempts to get in touch with Loren, but they don’t seem to have gone through.
The sighting took place near Williamsport, Indiana. I have the GPS coordinates for the spot. I’m not sure how helpful these would be, but they would at least enable you to pinpoint on a map where I saw it and see how it corresponds with other sightings.
This seems to have been a very big year for turkey vultures and buzzards in this area. I’ve seen many of them over the last several weeks and have lived in this area long enough that I’m familiar with what they look like. On the 22nd, I saw many turkey vultures flying high over the road.
However, what caught my attention was a bird that was considerably lower, just over the treetops to the side of the road. It was more of a mottled gray color, with what appeared to be a featherless head, which was also gray and a long bare neck. The beak was short, so I’m certain it wasn’t a heron, which area also popular in this area. It also didn’t have the characteristic long legs of a heron sticking out from behind.
The bird flew behind the trees and I whipped the Durango over to get a better look. I grabbed my camera and headed for the trees only to be met with an electric fence and several large No Trespassing signs. Thunderbird or not, I don’t like to cross those, so I waited to see if it reappeared.
A few seconds later it flew out from behind the trees for one more peek. I was considerably calmer and able to pay more attention. From my vantage point I would say the bird’s wingspan was between 8 and 10 feet across. While it looked a lot like a turkey vulture, the color was wrong and it just seemed a little too big.
Unfortunately, my digital camera works best with a still target. I wasn’t able to get a picture.
I’d appreciate any feedback I can get on this sighting. I’m not sure there’s any more information I could supply other than the coordinates. Please contact me if you would like those.
Thanks,
Bret