Abowhunter hunting in the IslandPark region, Idaho, set up a game

camera in a tree and found this firstimage (Figure 1) along with those ofwildlife recorded. The same image isprovided in Figure 2 with labels thatidentify possible features, followed byan enhancement of the facial features(Figure 3). The tree that had the gamecamera is shown in Figure 4 with aninset of the game camera.

The first impression I had was thatthe entity’s shoulder is very high. Thisis typical of sasquatch; giving theappearance of not having a neck.Further examination revealed to mewhat might be the facial features aspreviously discussed.

The jaw struck me as being similarto the jaw in the sasquatch skeletoncreated by Dr. Jeff Meldrum. Figures5 and 6 show the comparison.

The “flowing hair” brought tomind artwork by Paul Smith of whicha detail is provided in Figure 7 withthe Island Park subject for comparisonin Figure 7A. If the head in this Smithimage were tilted down somewhat, itwould match the Island Park image.

Furthermore, the Island Parkimage reminded me of a similar gamecamera image captured in 2008 byPaul Graves in Washington State. Thedark figure seen on the right in Figure8 is believed to have been a sasquatch.

As stated, these are my personalobservations, which may or may nothave any credibility in the final

professional analysis. We haveprovided this material to keep you inthe know as to what is going on andencourage you to continue with yourresearch.

I will now provide what the IslandPark bowhunter said about theincident.

Startling Homin-like Image Caught on a Game Camera in the Island Park Region, Idaho

Christopher L. Murphy

IMPORTANTThe images and information in this paper will be provided for professional analysis. What I am providing here isstrictly my opinions and observations at this point in time. Please formulate your own opinion on what is seen. Ipresent the images first and then provide the account by the bowhunter who took the images with a remote gamecamera (camera trap). I will provide the official report as soon as it is available; again the choice will be yours as towhat you wish to believe.

FIGURE 1

FIGURE 2

1

Proceed to the nextpages for the

additionalFigures/Illustrations.

This is highlyspeculative. Youhave to look very

closely .

UPDATES ARE NOW SHOWN ON PAGE 4–6 PLEASE CHECK AS YOUR TIME PERMITS.

Email from the Bowhunter withAnnotation and Commentary

I would like someone to analyze apicture I got in late August over an elkwater hole. I feel the picture speaksfor itself and would like someone withmore knowledge than myself to lookat it. I have all the details of how highthe camera was and the location. Ilive in Rigby Idaho and the photo wastaken in Island Park, Idaho.

Upon response, the following wasprovided:

This is the picture that was taken bymy game camera in late August[Figure 1]. I'm an avid bowhunter andhad set this camera over a water holewhich you can see and the surr-ounding grass [Figure 4]. The camerawas approximately 15 feet up in a treepointing in a downward position. Thedate and time was never set as Iforgot. This is a heavily wooded areawith a grass canyon as you can see.Notice the balding on top of the head[possible] and the massive deltoidmuscle and tricep. It is walking to theright and must have a long stridebecause of only capturing half of thisthing. This is a real remote area withno roads close to it. I've showed manypeople and their first response is aBigfoot. We have looked at the treeand tried to make sense of this butcan't. Hope to have you analyze it andgive me a better understanding ofwhat this could be. I was going to putit out on Facebook but didn't want thenegative feedback. My daughtersdon't want me to hunt this areaanymore for the fear of disappearing,but I went back due to the amount ofgame in this area. Of course I didn'ttell them. No fear right!! I have moredetails and pictures of the tree if youneed them. Last year in the samearea my nephew and myself heard ascreaming roar sound about 5:00 AM;never heard anything like it in my life.Hopefully you can help.

And a subsequent email:

You will see the camera up the treenear the cut branch [Figure 4; theson-in-law placing camera is seenFigure 9]. This is when I went back inand you will notice I carried a shotgun for protection, but never seenanything that day. There is approx-

2

FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5

FIGURE 6

FIGURE 3

3

imately a two-foot bank along thewater hole this thing had to walkacross as well, so that will have totaken into consideration to determinethe height.

—00—I reasoned that if we could math-ematically determine the size of thehead in the image, then theapproximate full height of the homincould be calculated. I asked for andreceived scans of the game cameramanual providing camera specif-ications—I had contacted Bill Munnsfor assistance. He asked for a CD ofthe game camera image file, and thisis to be provided. If the walking heightcomes out at say over 6 feet, 6 inches,the image may be that of a sasquatchor some other very tall homin(almasty?). Figures 10 to 15 areimages of the scene in the same gamecamera sequence (cropped). Theywere photographed off the monitor solack full clarity.

It can be seen that the location wascertainly a popular animal wateringstation, Figure 14. We know thatsasquatch hunt deer as a food source.They have been seen carrying deerparts. That a sasquatch may havebeen photographed in this particularlocation is highly reasonable. I alsoneed to mention that other bow-hunters have reported sasquatchsightings. The fact that they hunt intotal silence is likely the reason.

All of this is just speculation at thispoint in time. I don’t know what wehave here. Please don’t kill themessengers.

FIGURE 7

FIGURE 8

This paper and all images are undercopyright. The game camera imageshave been provided with the good willof the bowhunter for the purpose ofsasquatch research. Any material maybe used for NONPROFIT purposes.Usage for commercial purposes (new-spapers, magazines, television doc-umentaries) needs to be negotiatedwith Sasquatch Canada.

FIGURE 7A

FIGURE 9

FIGURE 10 FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12

FIGURE 13 FIGURE 14 FIGURE 15

CAMERAThis mock-up using Paul Smith’sartwork illustrates what likely

occurred when the homin went bythe tree; however at this time we

don’t know how tall it was.Whatever that turns out to be, it is

seen that its head was within afew feet (even closer) to the

camera. This significantly reducesdigital “noise,” so what is seen in

the game camera framewas likely there.

There is a possibility that a squirrel or another smallfurry animal leaped from a branch above the camera toone below and passed in front of the camera lens. Thecamera immediately focused on that object resulting inthe image see in Figure 1. I am unable to rationalizewhat appears to be in the image.

In our original analysis, the idea that a small animalmight have been on a branch in the camera view wasdiscounted because there are no branches seen in anyof the camera images. Nevertheless, that the animalwas caught in the air is a possibility.

Another image taken 15 minutes after Figure 1 is seenhere. There is something in the lower right corner, butnote that the background (water hole and vegetation)is quite clear and was obviously the main focus of thecamera. If the object seen is a little animal, then itobviously again went in front of the camera lens—perhaps sat on the camera and a part of it (tail, leg)partially went in front of the lens. I suppose this couldalso be true for the Figure 1 image, but we would notlikely have the clarity seen in this image given thiswere the case. We are proceeding towards aprofessional analysis of the images.

—00—

UPDATE FOR DECEMBER 22, 2017

Shown on the right are the eight precise imagesfrom the game camera, downloaded onto CDs andthese sent to me (2 copies).

The water hole is obviously well-used by animals inthe region. It appears, however, that shortly before thesubject in image 6 appeared, all animals left. You cansee that the water hole is clear in both images 6 and 7.This might be just coincidental as image 2 does notshow any animals; just the shadow of the tree (nothingthere as far as I can see). Much later, after nightfall, ananimal appeared as seen in image 8.

The second copy of the CD has been sent forprofessional analysis, but this is going to take sometime, probably 6 weeks. An update/conclusion will beposted here. Please check back from time to time.

4

Island Park Incident Up dates

PRECISE IMAGES FROM THE GAME CAM

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

5

Update to April 20, 2018 – Analysis by C. L. Murphy5mm or 0.19685 inch

3.8m

m o

r 0.

1496

06 in

ch

46.3% of HeightEquals 0.06923 inch

Having concluded that the imageis probably not a small animal

(squirrel or chipmunk) that jumped infront of the lens, the image andcamera specifications were deter-mined to ascertain the actual (reallife) height of the image seen. Theimage specifications based on thecamera sensor are shown in Figure 1.

To ensure understanding, we wishto know the height of what appears tobe a head seen in the image. Giventhis number, we can then speculate onwhat is seen.

We have what appears to be adirect profile. This was mirror imagedto create a full face head andshoulders image as seen in Figure 2;the head has been circled. If the headcan be proven to be about adultsasquatch size, then we can determinethe approximate body height. Weknow the object was fairly close tothe camera, which was about 14 feet(not 15 feet) high in a tree, ascalculated in Figure 3. As a result,whatever it was had to be very tall(thus my reason for saying “adultsasquatch size”).

The formula for determining thesize of an object in a photo/image is:

(D*IH)/FLD is the Distance to the objectIH is the Image Height in image.FL is the Focal Length of the lens

We have the Image Height in theimage (.06927 inches and the FocalLength (.11811 to .196856 inches).The largest will be used and explainedlater. The Distance is not known andhas to be assumed at several pointsand then analyzed to see what makessense. The different head sizes arethen multiplied by 5, which is the 5:1ratio of head to body size forsasquatch. This was determined fromthe P/G film. The resulting figure isthe walking height of the subject. Thedistances considered are shown inFigure 4. Here are the figures:

Figure 1

Figure 2

CAMERA 5 Feet to8 Feet

Figure 4Figure 3

6

too close and the image would be atotal blur. If it was caught in the airleaping then the image would be veryfuzzy—what is called a motion blur.We are quite certain that what is seenas hair is not squirrel hair, nor does itappear to be raccoon hair in theunlikely event a raccoon leaped bythe camera lens.

For certain, the game camerasetup was perfect. Given we see asasquatch, had it been interested ingetting water in the water hole, thenwe would have astounding images.Obviously it had its mind onsomething else; probably game thatby this time had moved away andlikely seen in the distance.

We really don’t have much luckwith game cameras, sasquatch seemto know they are present and avoidthem. It is possible that in this casethe sasquatch was preoccupied andsimply walked by the camera withoutnoticing it.

We have a similar situation withthe P/G film. Why did the sasquatchnot hear the horses coming? Theanswer appears to be that it waspreoccupied; perhaps looking forsomething in the creek. The noise ofthe water running would also haveplayed a part.

Now, having made a possible casefor a sasquatch and presented all theimages and calculations, if you don’tthink the material has merit, then youmust challenge it using what has beenpresented. You can’t just say as manyskeptics say, “I don’t think so.” Youmust say something like, your math isincorrect or the image is of a(whatever) and here’s proof. Even ifyou are a scientist, you can’t simplysay that the sasquatch does not existso the image is of something else. Youneed to state what that “somethingelse” is and provide proof.

The facts are that something withhair that appears to have a head and ashoulder was photographed close to acamera that was about 14 feet high ina tree above a water hole. Other large

animals are seen using the water holein previous images of the samecamera sequence. They are at least 14feet away (camera height); I wouldsay up to 30 to 50 feet away.

AS TO THE FOCAL LENGTH

The camera manufacturer statedthat the focal length for the cameraused was between 3mm and 5mm.This has to be converted to inches touse in the formula. Here are theequivalents:

3mm is .11811 inch4mm is .15748 inch5mm is .19685 inch

Using 5 feet as the distance we getthe following:

FOCAL HEAD WALKING HTE.11811” 35.19” 14.66 feet.15748” 26.39” 11.00 feet

As can be seen the object heightgreatly increases as the focal lengthdecreases.

If we use a focal length of .11811 at12 inches distance we get an objectsize of 7.04 inches

If we use a focal length of .15758 at12 inches we get an object size of 5.28inches.

Now if the object is a small animalthat somehow got in front of thecamera lens, then I would say whatwe see is no less than about one-thirdof the animal’s body (whatever thatmight be). We are likely well beyondthe size of a squirrel, chipmunk, oreven a bat. If it was a raccoon, then itleaped past the camera from at least14 feet to the ground, but the cameraimage does not support this.

Further analysis will depend uponadditional findings.

—00—

DISTANCE HEAD WALKING HT4 feet 16.89” 7.04 feet5 feet 21.11” 8.80 feet6 feet 25.34” 10.56 feet8 feet 33.78” 14.08 feet

The average height reported for asasquatch is 8 feet, so there arereports of much taller sasquatch. Ifwe say the distance was 5 feet fromthe camera, then mathematicallythatsasquatch was 8.80 feet tall (8 feet 9.6inches) at the moment it was photo-graphed. If we say the sasquatch wasin the same plane as the tree (it wascertainly close) then its height plus itsdistance should equal the cameraheight; this comes to 13.8 feet whichis very close, thus a distance of 5 feetappears reasonable. Nevertheless,there has to be some tolerance here.For every 1 inch the object is closer tothe camera, its walking height de-creases by 1.76 inches. So if we saythe distance was 54 inches (4 feet, 6inches) then the height was 7.92 feet(7 feet, 11.04 inches) and so on down.

I think we can say with someconfidence that a sasquatch orsimilar homin was photographedand its walking height was not lessthan 8 feet.

At the outset I stated that theobject was probably not a smallanimal of some sort. If one believesthis is still the case and that the detailsobserved are simply pareidolia(seeing things), I took the formuladown to a distance of 12 inches, withthe following results:

DISTANCE OBJECT HEIGHT12 inches 4.22 inches18 inches 6.33 inches24 inches 8.45 inches36 inches 12.67 inches

The main problem with thisconjecture is there was no place(branch) for the subject to stand or sit.If it stood on the camera and part of itcrossed the lens, such would be far