Geographical Index > United States > Alabama > Tuscaloosa County > Report # 6938
Submitted by witness on Sunday, September 21, 2003.
Tracks and feces found in freshly turned field
(Show Printer-friendly Version)
COUNTY: Tuscaloosa County
LOCATION DETAILS: Withheld at witness request
NEAREST TOWN: Brookwood
NEAREST ROAD: Withheld at witness request
OBSERVED: My husband and some others were preparing a field for planting when he noticed a pile of pooh in the field. He walked over to it and stated that he wondered what might have made such a large pile. As he looked around for horse or cow tracks, another person walked over to look at it and said "Look at the size of these foot prints". They all began looking around and found tracks coming out of a grassy area onto a dirt road. The tracks went about 20 feet then turned left into the freshly plowed field (plowed the day before). They proceded about 30 feet into the field. There you could tell where it paused to squat repositioning it's feet to do so and did it's business. While in this position it dug up some turtle eggs in front of it and ate them leaving broken shell behind. The feces were the consistancy of horse droppings in that they were of high fiber content and contained undigested muscadines(a kind of wild grape). But the droppings weren't in the shape of horse manure,(round ballshaped piles) but were long and cylindrical like that of a dog or human. The feces(2) were about 18-24 inches long and about 2 1/2-3 inches across. Rather large I must say. The tracks then turned left again into an area of tall grass, small pines and other small trees that lined a field at the edge of the woods. I wasn't able to follow them very far due to dead branchs, briars and undergrowth that blocked my progress. Plus I was wearing only sandals, shorts, and a tank top. Not prepared to trek through the woods. I took pictures of the tracks and the feces with a yardstick for size comparison. I also took a specimen of the feces and turtle egg shells which are still in my freezer. I have a cast of a left and right foot. The right one broke trying to pick it up but is still n pretty good shape. The left one is completely intact. They measure approx 18 inches long, 8 inches wide at the toes and 4 1/2 inches at the heels. The stride measured 3 feet from the toe of one foot to the heel of the next step. Each foot has 5 toes. A humanlike large toe on the inside of the step and each toe following being smaller than the last. There is an arch to both, showing it is not flatfooted. I took these samples to the Univesity of Alabama and showed them to a professor who is an anthropology professor in forensics. I walked away disappointed to hear him insist that what I had were Bear tracks. But he had been on a bear trip since I had spoken to him a few days prior about my find. When I arrived at his office, before he even looked at the cast he was talking bears and showing me books and pictures of bears and bear tracks. I tried to say Bears don't have a Big toe, but he tried to make up reasons that these tracks of a "bear" had a big toe. I realized this person was not going to believe what he was looking at was not a bear. It either frightened him to think it was a possible Bigfoot out there or he was embarassed to say he didn't know what it was. Just a "Bear". Well there is our encounter of a Track sighting. When I was looking through the internet for sighting reports in the Alabama area I was excitedly surprised to find the one on your sight (report#245 Class A) which is in the same general area as ours.
ALSO NOTICED: Nothing that I am aware of
OTHER WITNESSES: There were about 8 persons who first found this then family members of some of these men came to see the phenomenon so I would have to say more than 10 witnesses. The field was freshly plowed the day before so the tracks were made between 4pm on the 29th and 7am on the 30th
OTHER STORIES: My daughter used to drive thru the area as a shortcut but after seeing a very large figure on the side of the road at 3 am, she now goes the long way around after dark. She described it as being a hairy creature on two legs in an upright stance approx 9-10 feet tall. She did not reveal this info until after the tracks were found for fear that people would think she was crazy. Then I read the sighting report #245 on your websight that occurred in 1999 and I'm still bummed out that it was in the same general area. Freaky! Then since the sighting a man who lives in the area claimed that something big picked up his chicken pen and carried it 30-40 yards into the woods and all his chickens are gone. A man who grew up in this area stated he saw it as a child. But no one would believe him back then.
TIME AND CONDITIONS: It was early morning around 7am. Skys were partly cloudy. Temperature in the 80's. Dry with a little breeze.
ENVIRONMENT: This is a heavily wooded area. There are pines and hardwoods as well as clearcut areas. There is a swampy area plus a small lake. It is hilly in spots. Plus there is a large creek that winds through the property.
Follow-up investigation report:
I met the witnesses and followed them to the place of the sighting. They showed me the place where the tracks were found, but it had since rained and the tracks were no longer present. They also showed me a shooting house (for deer hunting) which had been broken and overturned. They then showed me the photos and casts of the tracks, which were just as described in this report. I examined the casts carefully, looking for any sign that they could have been faked. I found no such indication. The size and shape of the tracks plus the step interval definitely DO NOT indicate bear.
The witnesses first thought was that someone must be playing a practical joke on them, but the fecal evidence and the tracks just seemed too definitive to dismiss or explain away as a joke, especially considering the fifty-four inch step interval they measured. Photographs of the tracks and casts were also sent to experts within the BFRO for analysis. The witnesses did not insist that there was a real Sasquatch present at the property; they simply wanted help in determining whether the evidence was hoaxed or is genuine. I saw no indications that point in the direction of hoaxed evidence.
Evidence collected by the witness was sent by the BFRO for scientific analysis, but the analysis proved inconclusive and does not contribute to our understanding of this event at this time.