RIDGWAY, PA. — It's furry and walks on all fours.
Beyond that, about the only thing certain about the critter photographed by a hunter's camera is that some people have gotten the notion it could be a Sasquatch, or Bigfoot. Others say it's just a bear with a bad skin infection.
Rick Jacobs says he got the pictures from a camera with an automatic trigger that he fastened to a tree in the Allegheny National Forest, about 115 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, hoping to photograph deer.
"We couldn't figure out what they were," Jacobs said of the images captured on Sept. 16. "I've been hunting for years and I've never seen anything like this." He contacted the Bigfoot Research Organization, which pursues reports of a legendary two-legged creature that some people believe lives in parts of the U.S. and Canada.
"It appears to be a primate-like animal. In my opinion, it appears to be a juvenile Sasquatch," said Paul Majeta of the bigfoot group.
However, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has a more conventional opinion. Agency spokesman Jerry Feaser said conservation officers routinely trap bears to be tagged and often see animals that look like the photos.
"There is no question it is a bear with a severe case of mange," Feaser told The Bradford Era.
Comment: I don't see a bear, unless it's anorexic and misshapen. Escaped Chimpanzee, maybe....but not a bear. Discussion?
3 comments:
I can see a case for both really. On one hand a bear could be likely because in the pics before hand you see young bear cubs. Then this pic of the animal. It seems very unlikely that the bear cubs would be by themselves without mom around. Also if you look at the feet they look like bear paws. On the other hand, the back legs look way to thin for a bear. Not to mention the front legs look to long. I think it looks more like a tree sloth. Stranger things could happen.
Being the bigfoot geek I am, I have of course read up on this. There are reports that young bf's do walk on all fours and run on just the two. Since this is supposedly a youngster, it would make sense. Either way, I suggest a road trip to PA sometime soon and we can find out!
Humm pics before? Sounds like Medusa propaganda to me. If there are these "before" pictures is there a time stamp on them? They could have been hours before this image. As for what it could be here's a link to PA's own Game commission showing the area's only indigenous bear. http://www.pgc.state.pa.us/pgc/lib/pgc/wildlife/photolib/black_bear_Adult.jpg
(wish I knew how to hyperlink that)There are no extremities long enough on a black bear to pose creative enough to make that picture. Deformed bear, possibly, some sort of shocking wildlife tableau where animals group together in order to form different shapes and that night they were trying out the human pose, doubtful (but if it is then we have bigger problems than Bigfeet on our hands). I'm with Andy on this and tend to lean toward a juvenile Bigfoot but am open to the possibility of a really good hoax.
Post a Comment