New Bigfoot Video From Northeast Ohio

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on August 22nd, 2012

Bigfoot in Ohio clear video of the creature 2012

taken in north east ohio grand river area april 2012Published on Apr 21, 2012 by HowTo101Channel

What do the Cryptomundians think of this video?

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.

49 Responses to “New Bigfoot Video From Northeast Ohio”

  1. Evil_Monkey responds:

    Very brief, not very clear. The length of arms, length of legs etc look like they could well fall within human proportions. Another video to add to the hmmm pile…. Seriously guys after all these years of folks searching is there really a single piece of evidence to support Bigfoot’s existence? The PG film fascinates me but the general lack of proof makes me wonder if it isn’t just another fake. I want to believe but am finding it harder and harder even with an open mind 🙁

  2. rkkombrinck responds:

    It’s an interesting video…I like that the driver seems startled and turns the other way upon being faced with a sasquatch…of course, a clever hoaxer, one who reads comments and sees how other hoaxes are taken apart, might create that reaction to give it a more realistic feel so, its really hard to say. I’m not a naturalist so I can’t really comment on the anatomy or gait of the supposed creature. It’s carrying something (a stick?) in its hand which is kind of neat. I’m from Ohio and have family in Northeastern OH that I visit frequently and everytime I’m up there I’m on the lookout. There are a lot of bigfoot sightings up that way. Its a good looking video at first glance. I hope some of you cryptomundians get commenting on this, I’m interested to see what the general concensus is.

  3. cakelaw responds:

    Looks like a kid in a suit to me….the arm swing looks all too human

  4. Fhqwhgads responds:

    This is more interesting than most such videos. There is a reason for the camera being pointed where it was: It was mounted to the handlebars of the ATV. Crashing into the bushes makes sense, as does turning around; we may regret it later, but I think this is what most of us would do instinctively. Also, the “Bigfoot” turns to face the camera just as it disappears behind some bushes. If I were setting up a hoax, I’d make sure the face never looked into the camera; a mask or makeup is most likely to be visible there.

    On the other hand, if I were startled enough to crash my ATV and turn around, I think I would have said something like, “Holy crap!” I don’t hear anything in the video but the motor and the sound of the ATV running into bushes. Also, the stride looks a little too much like a deliberate imitation of Patty. Finally, an animal this elusive would probably have the sense to either remain still or to move AWAY FROM the path, not ACROSS the path. (Yeah, deer and the like often panic and run across the road, but they’re not exactly elusive, either.)

  5. Kenji responds:

    Guy in a suit, the legs are the tip off for me, I see guys running around all the time with that stride, it’s called the pants are too big and are sliding off the butt.

  6. Austin Morrow responds:

    100% hoax in my opinion.

    For one, the whole, “Sasquatch always run out into the road right before a person or vehicle passes by” just doesn’t jive very well, Why in the world wouldn’t a Sasquatch wait in the brush for the person to pass and then make a getaway for the other side of the forest, why risk being seen by a person? It just screams hoax. That, and…

    1. The arms are tiny
    2. The stride length looks very small
    3. It’s running like a human.

    To me, looks like a man in a suit.

    Oh, and nice effect at the end there. Run into the trees to make it looks like you were so frozen with fright and couldn’t control your vehicle…

  7. Jeff Cook via Facebook responds:

    Though I believe in Sasquatch and the circumstance this video was shot in is totally plausible, I’m not convinced this isnt a hoax. An expert with better video editing and review equipment can probably determine otherwise. It is intriguing though.

  8. weaponx88 responds:

    Seems fake……the arms look too short and the feet (briefly seen) don’t look “right”.
    Why does this person have a camera??? Why turn and go the other way? Why sound from the motor but no sound from the driver (reaction) when he/she sees the “creature”? One might say he has a camera mounted “just in case” but would a real “just in case” person turn and run the other away when it finally happens??
    Too many questions…….I say fake………..

  9. Alan Clark Huffines via Facebook responds:

    “Fake, fake, fake, fake, fake.”


  10. Ragnar responds:

    A number of problems with this video, some of which have already been mentioned.

    1. Looks way human in proportions and movement.

    2. I hear motor noises from the ATV, but no “holy crap! what was that?” from the driver when this “thing” comes leaping across the trail. Really?

    3. Bigfoot, whose reputation (and only real protection) is that he hides well, just jumps right out in front of the ATV? Really? BF didn’t hear it coming down the trail?

    Hoax. Driver may or may not have been involved in it, but still a hoax.

  11. weaponx88 responds:

    One more thing…..that “slow mo” at the end looks like it is different footage altogether as if the scene was filmed twice. Seems like it is supposed to be “close up/zoomed” but still looks different.

  12. Slapnut Ayala via Facebook responds:


  13. hoodoorocket responds:

    Yawn, yet another bell-bottom carpet suiter, complete with a kid having trouble seeing through his halloween mask eye-holes.

    Sure these videos break up the boredom, but you think kids could be a little more convincing if they put their minds to it.

    Meanwhile, the true mysteries of the woods remain alert, alive, and elusive.

  14. Steve Porterfield via Facebook responds:

    Not a big fan of this video!!

  15. Desertdweller responds:

    Is the Bigfoot the one in the gorilla suit or the one in the baseball cap?

  16. hoodoorocket responds:

    The funniest part is the kid’s body weight is probably about equal to the weight of the costume. He sure seems to be putting a lot of effort into huffing it across the road, lol.

    I would hope a being of ponderous weight would move with fluid grace (like patty does) instead of putting everything he’s got into each hopping step. Why does that remind me of the office when they had the races with cartons of paper strapped to their feet?

    Classic bell-bottom carpet suit walking technique: elbows up and out (so hands can adjust mask frequesntly and also so hands are ready to break your fall when you trip). Head forward with constant dipping down to see where you are going in your mask. Sweeping dragging gait because, well, bell-bottom carpet suit. Hopping motion because the dang suit gets heavy and tends to sag downward. Quick walk with a pause at the end because you don’t realize you are still in camera range.

    Somebody needs to write a hoaxers handbook- hey, I could be filthy rich!

    Anyway I always watch the patterson film after seeing these pranks, just to remind myself what the real thing looks like.

  17. cryptokellie responds:

    This figure is most definitely running like a man…freeze frame 0:08 and look at the right arm swing crossing in front of the body. As the figure bolts upright and moves forward, the right arm has to moving aggressively to the left to help balance and propel the body. The ensuing arm swings are a dead give-away. The last step is a little leap to reach the other side of road – very, very human-like. Also, look at the slow-motion sequence at the end of the video. At 0.26 – 0.31 the suit aspects of the right leg are very apparent in that the lower leg is flowing into the foot and getting wider as opposed to getting narrower at the ankle. Looks like a suit with a baggy belly and no chest definition. The slight crash into the bushes was well thought out but really, no exclamation of any kind from seeing the “Bigfoot” or piling into the bushes? A little gasp or explicative would have been more realistic or does this happen this to person every day.

  18. Stadtusquo responds:

    I concur with “hoax”… The stride seems small AND, like mentioned above, the lack of a vocal response from driver of ATV seems odd. Smells like a hoax… nice to see something new, it’s been awhile.

  19. Roy D. Sandoval via Facebook responds:

    Let’s go hunt fer it! Tankqulize it that is, why not?

  20. Dereka Erickson via Facebook responds:

    Fake, guy in a suit.

  21. Ty Semaka via Facebook responds:

    Looks pretty short for a Bigfoot.

  22. mike_noodles responds:

    I wonder if it’s a case of the ATVer not being in on the hoax. A couple of kids spending their Saturday afternoon screwing with the trail users.

  23. John Savoy responds:

    I watched this video many times and all i can say is that i find nothing to make me believe it’s real the “creature” was running and took 3 steps to cross the road which would make it kind of short i can base this on the fact that i’m 6’10” and judging by the width of the atv i could cross it in about a step and a half walking also again by the normal size of a atv the brush along the side of the road it would be between 3′ and 4′ tall which seeems the “creature” would be only 5′ to 6′ tall ………maybe i’m wrong

  24. Fred Janssen via Facebook responds:

    Elusive primates don’t wait trailside for the perfect moment to burst from cover across the path of a camera-wielding ATV rider, but dudes in gorilla suits do.

  25. stevedoug0 responds:

    Really? The saddest part is not that its such an obvious fraud but that some of you psuedo crypto goofballs are giving it analysis as though you know its a fake but you aren’t willing to admit it “just in case”. Give me a break!

  26. Kopite responds:

    hoodoorocket wrote:

    Anyway I always watch the patterson film after seeing these pranks, just to remind myself what the real thing looks like.

    Yup. A world of difference. When I watch all these hoaxes and then watch the Patterson/Gimlin Film it’s like chalk and cheese. Further rams home the point that the Patterson/Gimlin Film is authentic.

  27. john5 responds:

    I would be surprised if this turned out to be faked. It appears to be a juvenile holding a stick. Possibly it was digging out food of some kind and when it realized the ATV was getting too close for comfort it bolted clearing the road in one leap.

    At first it looked faked given the grainy quality of the footage. But after watching the close up footage a few dozen times, pausing and starting, some details become clear. The chin is definitely set well below the shoulders (compared to a human or a human in a costume). Also ~32 sec mark the extended foot can be seen to be arched down slightly as it is stepping down on the right side of the road. That would be difficult for someone in a costumed foot or foot ware to accomplish.

    The length of the arms may be longer than what appears as the right hand is holding a stick with arm bent and the left arm is bent in while assisting its rapid locomotion (bolting) across the road as any human sprinters’ arms do when in full rapid motion. It is difficult to tell on my old non-hi definition computer and grainy film but it looks like it quickly glances once at the ATV just before it jumps into the woods. One of the more interesting videos to have appeared in the last little while 🙂

  28. john5 responds:

    It does appear to look very quickly at the ATV just after it steps onto the road and before it leap strides across. I am viewing the 360p setting!

  29. PhotoExpert responds:

    Kid in a suit.

  30. G. de La Hoya responds:

    2 strides to clear a 4-wheeler trail? Thought they were “horse speed” fast too. Must be a sick one that needs a death panel.

  31. DWA responds:

    Well, dunno. My general rule of thumb though is that if it moves like a human and has human proportions, it’s probably human.

    That turn into the bushes looks awfully non-spontaneous.

    But once again: no followup = who cares?

    Not that I’m racing out that way if I’m an investigator.

    A note about “elusive” animals: the full range of responses – fleeing; starting when surprised; charging; chasing; curiosity; aggression; unhurried departure; threat display; you name it – has been reported in sasquatch encounters. As it has for just about everything else we know about. (Including, in my very considerable experience, deer and bears.)

    What keeps this animal so “elusive” is the lack of mainstream scientific attention to the evidence.

    One more thing.

    “Seriously guys after all these years of folks searching is there really a single piece of evidence to support Bigfoot’s existence?”

    First, hardly anyone is searching, for hardly any time. Not in the way science looks for things it expects to find. Everything you see is scattergun, very part-time, wildcatting by people with competing agendas and half-baked theories (with one or two exceptions, and they have real jobs so don’t get to spend the required time).

    Second, there is copious evidence. It doesn’t add up to proof yet, owing to the lack of mainstream scientific attention to it.

    Third, if there were “proof” – the only difference between proof and evidence is that science accepts the former – we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

    There will be no proof until the mainstream starts paying serious attention. Ask yourself: how many animals have been confirmed by some random hunter or motorist killing one? Right.


    Oh. Forget “wanting to believe.” Review the evidence and decide whether it merits followup. That’s how scientific inquiry works.

  32. mijbil9 responds:

    Chupacabra… case closed…. NEXT !

  33. Goodfoot responds:

    How many guys ride those trails with cameras strapped to the front, I wonder? My guts screams, “The Ol’ Fakeroo!” That’s a VERY human stride length – three steps to cross the trail. I’m 64 and FAR from tall, and I can do that!

  34. lowrider responds:

    I live in Northeast Ohio and do some Squatch’n along the Grand River. There definitely are Squatches there but this thing in the video isn’t one of them. I gotta go with 100% fake on this one.

  35. Fhqwhgads responds:

    There will be no proof until the mainstream starts paying serious attention. Ask yourself: how many animals have been confirmed by some random hunter or motorist killing one? Right.

    Ever hear of the coelacanth? Who bagged that. Right: a fisherman.

    How about the Laotian rock rat? Same basic story: it was being sold as meat at a market?

    Or Walter’s Duiker? Also described only after being found in a bushmeat market.


  36. Fhqwhgads responds:

    In fact, if one of the defining characteristics of a cryptid is that it be “ethnoknown”, the people doing the “ethnoknowing” are frequently hunters and fishermen. In the three real-world, non-celebrity cases above, though, it might be said to be “ethnoknown”, but not “ethnorecognized” as being of any particular interest.

  37. Bob K. responds:

    I’d pretty much echo Austin Morrows’ sentiments.
    Nice try, but no cigar.

  38. john5 responds:

    Those who are quick to judge this as a fake based on the apparent costumed look it should be considered that we cannot expect to look at these hominids as we do with most human beings. Their legs and arms are going to be larger boned in juveniles, given the great size and height of the adults, and therefore thicker than what human juvenile limbs would be. This can lend to a potential for them looking like a costumed human with funny looking thick limbs, especially forearms and lower legs and ankles. Also the fast movement of the subject combined with the movement/speed of the ATV have combined to blur the video lending to the odd look of the subject at some points of the footage.

    Those who are claiming this individual needed more than one step or leap to make it across the ATV trail need to look more closely as the video as it appears to make it in one great leap. This would also be difficult for a person in a costume to leap this 6-7 feet as smoothly.

    If viewing at the 360p speed on YouTube itself look at the leading foot of its leap at the 30-31 second mark of the slow motion footage. ( I found it easiest to have the cursor at the 29 sec mark of the footage counter bar to quick rewind the video after it reaches ~32 sec point, by simply clicking the cursor on the bar, so I could review the footage continuously. Stopping the video at exact moments between each second is more challenging. ) Looking at the foot as it leaves the ground it appears to flex downward before extending out towards its next step. Just before the footage pans over to the foliage (~31s) the foot again appears to curve slightly downwards. This foot looks to be more of a barefoot than a foot covered by some kind of shoe, boot or a hairy costume.

    The chin is significantly lower then the shoulders reminding me of the head of Patty on the Patterson footage. Could the shoulders of a costume be so padded to provide this illusion and still allow flexibility and dexterity of the person within?

    It would be helpful if someone with a better computer and monitor than mine would look at the few features I have pointed out here and in my earlier posts to see if these observations have merit. Again if this is a hoax I would still be surprised!

  39. Jocko Wainwright responds:

    It looks like a hunter CARRYING A GUN. Seriously, I sometimes wonder if you folks are blind. It doesn’t even look like an attempted hoax. There is no bigfoot “suit” here. Please consult your nearest optometrist before viewing more videos.

  40. Goodfoot responds:

    I agree, Jocko! There’s a hood of some sort, and maybe a sweatsuit, but it’s NOT hunting season in Ohio, to the best of my knowledge. And THERE ARE THREE STEPS across the trail, using the exact same methodology you described. It’s time to believe your lying eyes, John5!!

  41. bobhelferstay responds:

    I think it’s a hoax. A real Sas. would have heard the engine and avoided the area. The arms and legs are too short as well.

    It’s a guy in a suit.

  42. DWA responds:

    “Ever hear of the coelacanth? Who bagged that. Right: a fisherman.

    How about the Laotian rock rat? Same basic story: it was being sold as meat at a market?

    Or Walter’s Duiker? Also described only after being found in a bushmeat market.”

    Those aren’t contradicting my statement; they’re emphasizing it.

    All of those animals were described by scientists, paying attention, who just happened to be at the right place at the right time.

    (And weren’t afraid they’d be adjudged crazy. Like the scientists who have – anonymously – reported sasquatch sightings.)

    In other words, they were lottery scores. They were the “exceptions that prove the rule,” not at all the rule.

    They were also kinds of animals (fish; rodent; duiker) that science already knew about, not a kind that scientists adamantly insist isn’t real.


    There will be no proof until the mainstream starts paying serious attention. Ask yourself: how many animals have been confirmed by some random hunter or motorist killing one? Right.

    Unless you are willing to wait for Powerball.

  43. DWA responds:

    Memo to Jocko Wainwright and stevedoug0:

    Adjust your meds.

  44. Fhqwhgads responds:

    @Jocko — Um, no. That thing he (she?) is carrying looks nothing like a rifle or a shotgun, and whoever/whatever it is is completely black. It could be the world’s worst ninja, though: graceless, obvious, and in the middle of nowhere, he has broken his bamboo blowgun and is carrying it with him.

    There are 11 other ninjas in the same film. You know they’re ninjas because you can’t see them.

  45. Fhqwhgads responds:


    There’s no exception there, only the rule. Get the evidence first, then announce the discovery; don’t be utterly convinced in something before the evidence warrants it. Announce the discovery of the coelacanth when you have physical evidence, not just stories. It’s the same with the others: the key thing is to have quality evidence!

    You know very well that biologists do in fact go out into the woods all the time, though less often than hunters do. Now it’s true that they are much more likely to be looking at the impact of mining on mussels in the local watershed than to be looking for Bigfoot, but if you’re teaching a bunch of undergrads, ridiculously high risk / ridiculously high reward is not the way to go. But the important thing is that they *are* in the woods. Then there are the biologists from the timber companies, the state and federal agencies, and private foundations. There are as many real biologists in the field at any time as there are weekend Bigfoot hobbyists.

    If Bigfoot is real, as the coelacanth is real, eventually adequate evidence will turn up and he will be scientifically confirmed. It’s a sure bet. In the meantime, complaining that scientists are not as impressed by the existing evidence as you are DOES NOTHING GOOD. Let’s say that I’m on the fence as to whether you’re a complete crackpot — and then you go off (as some enthusiasts do!) on how even though you haven’t studied science since freshman year, you clearly understand it better than the Ph.D.s, who are either lazy, stupid, or in on a conspiracy. At that point I would stop wondering if you’re a crackpot; I would have evidence of it, and if hanging around with Bigfoot witnesses would put me in contact with people like you, I would find something else to do.

  46. DWA responds:


    And you continue to argue with me – frustrating ain’t it?

    …instead of with the scientists who know you’re wrong.

    Um, good luck with that, while we’re on “crackpot.”

  47. DWA responds:

    ….and give a listen.

    Exposing oneself to the evidence really is much more fun than what you are doing.

  48. DWA responds:

    And because, well, I can:

    ” Let’s say that I’m on the fence as to whether you’re a complete crackpot — and then you go off (as some enthusiasts do!) on how even though you haven’t studied science since freshman year, you clearly understand it better than the Ph.D.s, who are either lazy, stupid, or in on a conspiracy.”

    The arrogance – and the ignorance – in that statement goes so deep you probably aren’t aware of it. Here, let me enlighten you.


    1. Spend a damn long time learning a lot of boring and difficult stuff so that they can make the world more interesting, fun and livable for the rest of us.
    2. Are the people, more than any others in the society, under pressure to be the expert, even on things of which they know nothing. They probably feel that pressure every time they are asked a question.

    We owe them a big debt for that. But some of them – actually, make that many – tend to go overboard with their positions of responsibility and authority. And make statements like that one you did.

    I don’t have a science degree (too boring and difficult for someone who wanted to do other things with his life. School is for girls and beer. OK, occasionally for allnighters and coffee). But I think like one. And I’m a pretty smart cookie, even if I may sometimes be the only one who thinks so. And I gotta tell ya, what I think of the mainstream on the sasquatch question has nothing to do with that nest of quadratic equations up there (thanks for taking THAT bullet for me), or passing PHYS 899, You Are Now Smarter Than Anybody So Wear Non-Matching Socks With Sandals It’s OK.

    It has to do with literature that it takes a solid high-school reading level, max, to peruse; NOT reading it; and pronouncing on it as if one has, having no idea that the pronouncements themselves scream IZE IGNANT, in huge block letters, to anyone with a solid high-school education who has.

    I can say, with extreme comfort, that I know more about the sasquatch – OK, I have read more and understand more based on that reading of the state of the evidence – than, oh, say, 99% of the world’s zoologists. OK, more than 99% of them who have bothered to speak to the public on the subject. How do I know? WHAT THEY SAY. If I told you two plus two was cleearly 22, I couldn’t display my ignorance more clearly than they do. When you say what you think, to me, you must say WHY. These guys/gals either don’t, or give reasons that transparently DO NOT SCAN to anyone with that high-school-reading-level command of the evidence.


    The argument from authority does not work with me. Give me a 25-word-or-less statement of your opinion on this specific topic, and I need not scan Credential One. I will have an instant read on where you stand relative to me in terms of knowledge on this topic. Hint: it will probably not be good news to you.

    If I told you that I had more physics knowledge in my little finger than exists in your family, or if you actually wear non-matching socks with sandals, you could consider yourself approximately equally insulted to what you are doing here.

    (Non-matching socks with sandals may actually be In now. But then, it appears that everything is.)

    Don’t lecture anyone who can read your words and say, um, he knows a lot less than me about this.


  49. Goodfoot responds:

    I see the video has been removed “due to a copyright claim”. Ain’t it always the way everytime we get that ONE PERFECT blobsquatch footage? BTW… you can see a band of white along the midriff… Biggie’s t-shirt is showing!!!

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.