It was assumed for a long time that seals never visited Loch Ness. However, it is now established that they do follow the salmon into the loch on rare occasions.
But what about the dolphins and porpoises that are a tourist attraction along the Moray Firth? Is it possible that they could get into Loch Ness? Until now, it was assumed this was a task too great and there was no record of such an event. Indeed, the only possibility was the famous attempt by the Robert Rines team to deploy a couple of equipped dolphins into the loch. This project never saw the light of day when one of the dolphins died.
However, some months back, Fortean Investigator, Paul Cropper sent me a clipping which suggested otherwise (Paul is a fan of the Australian Bigfoot called the Yowie). This small paragraph is from the London Daily Mail of the 16th September 1914 (click on all subsequent clippings for sharper images).
So we have the incredible sight of not one porpoise but a whole school of them swimming in Loch Ness! I forwarded Paul's find to Adrian Shine at the Loch Ness Centre in Drumnadrochit and he managed to find further details from the local archives. The first clipping from the Highland News of the 5th September tells us more about what was witnessed.
So we have eight or nine porpoises in Loch Ness. Now when I pondered on all this and the improbability of it, I wondered if the correspondent had actually seen the Loch Ness Monster in its multi-hump aspect? I mused that if there was a large beast in Loch Ness, it was more probable to see that than a school of porpoises! However, a second clipping from the 19th found by Adrian puts us back in the porpoise camp. This appears to be the original correspondent replying to someone who was incredulous of the whole event. Here we read how the familiar "blowing" activity of porpoises was observed (a habit never reported in monster reports).
The article continues to quote an as yet untraced article which speaks of a journalist going out to investigate the matter. Indeed, it seems our witness was as much believed as a modern day Nessie witness as the journalist concluded it was merely a shoal of fish skimming along the surface of the water.
So what do we make of this possibly unique event? The first is that so far we only seem to have one person claiming to have seen these animals. Considering the active surface life of porpoises, one would presume others must have seen them. This muddies the waters somewhat and (according to Adrian Shine) the Inverness Courier does not seem to have run the story.
Secondly, could it have been dolphins rather than porpoises? Now, how you can tell the difference between the two from distance is not clear to me but the porpoise has in its favour that they can be half the size of a Bottlenose dolphin and hence could negotiate a river spate into Loch Ness more easily. But whatever the species, it no lessens this remarkable event.
Thirdly, it may be asked whether there were any claimed stories about the Loch Ness Monster at that time (as told retrospectively by people after 1933)? There were actually two stories of something seen in 1914, but there were in July and I suspect may have been the same sighting.
All in all, it is a strange tale in its own right. Almost 100 years on, the implication is that there is a mass of porpoise skeletons lying at the bottom of Loch Ness somewhere, doubtless covered in silt by now.
How did they meet their end? Did they encounter the loch's most famous denizen and will such an event ever be witnessed again? It all adds to the lore and fascination of Scotland's most mysterious loch.
POSTSCRIPT
Adrian Shine sent me another clipping from the Northern Chronicle for the 16th September 1914 which adds one or two more details to this uniquely recorded event.
If a number of porpoises had got into Loch Ness than it might be reasonable to suppose that, at one time or another, they had also got into other lochs, Scandinavian lakes or Irish loughs which are only a few miles from the sea. Any reports?
ReplyDelete*AnonStg*
I guess so, it depends on the conditions. Dolphins and porpoises need a reason to divert from their natural environment - such as food.
DeleteFinding such stories is another matter. This one appears to be a once in a century or more event and would have been forgotten if a chance clipping had not been stumbled upon.
Have there ever been reports of Nessie with a dorsal fin (or fins)?
ReplyDeleteActually, some do report some kind of fin structure, but I do not recall one that would be interpreted as a mid body fin like a dorsal fin - but I could be wrong.
DeleteYes,there have been grey seals in the Loch.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lochnessinvestigation.com/Seals.html
Indeed - I covered that subject in a previous post on the Mackay sighting.
DeleteDorsal fins could be confused with 'head & neck' sightings and photos. This blog has previously included a photo of a suspected Orca dorsal fin in Loch Duich that, if presented as Loch Ness instead, would have caused a furore. Furthermore, a dorsal fin could be a good interpretation of the Adams picture. As to 'head' and the exact identification of species to which the dorsal fin might belong, you have to remember that dorsal fins don't always point straight up or are rigid (often due to damage) - therefore the tip might be drooping or bent to give the impression of a neck and head at 90degrees. I seem to recall that Popular Science magazine as early as late 1934 ran an article where a marine zooligist identified the Surgeon's Photo as being a dorsal fin of an Orca or similar (would also partially explain the change in shape/structure seen in the 2nd photo as well perhaps?). None of this actually addresses how an air breathing aquatic mammal could remain submerged for so long between being spotted. There are large fish with similarly proportions of dorsal fin though (including the often suggested the Atlantic Sturgeon).
ReplyDeleteI'll address your issues on the Adams picture in a future article. But I would note that the interpretation of the Surgeon's Photo as a dorsal fin was clearly wrong and exemplifies how any old explanation can be thrown at a sighting/photo without any further analysis.
DeleteThe main problem with Dolphins, Porpoises, Orcas etc. being an explanation for unusual sightings in Loch Ness is that they are not usually mistaken for anything other than what they are when observed in the sea. I agree that on the extremely rare occasions that Dolphins or Porpoises have entered the Loch that perhaps one or two people may have been seduced into believing that they are seeing something more exotic, but I am sure that the majority of witnesses would have seen them for exactly what they were. The problem with Orcas would be the size of the animals. Travelling up the relatively shallow River Ness for several miles would be virtually impossible, unless we are talking about juveniles. There is also the problem of getting past the weir. Perhaps Jeremy Wade has a suggestion or two in his upcoming episode of River Monsters.
ReplyDelete