A Previously Unpublished Monster Sighting

Late last year I received an email from a reader telling me about her sighting of a strange object in Loch Ness over ten years ago. I get various emails at certain times from people who claim to have seen the monster and having checked she was not one of those Fake News sceptics who sometime pretend to be a witness, I am happy to recount her story to readers today. I reproduce her email to me below.

Hi, I have been reading your blog for a while now and have toyed with the idea of emailing you about a sighting myself and my husband had in 2000-2003 (not sure exactly what year it was). I have been interested in Nessie since I was young and my parents used to keep newspaper clippings for me and also make sure I could watch any news items on it.

Having grown up and married I travelled to Loch Ness once a year for a week with my husband and daughter. The last time it was just me and my husband. We were staying at Invermoriston Caravan and Camping Site in a caravan. The evening we had the sighting we had been to the Sports club at Lewiston at least I think its Lewiston as we stayed in a log cabin there the first time we came up.

It was about 8pm and I was driving back to Invermoriston and just before the bend near Urquhart Castle my husband said there is something in the water over there. I pulled in but couldn't see anything so he said to look across the bay and half an inch out I could just see something black. I turned the car around and sped back round through Drum and round the other side of the bay.

As we came round the bend I couldn't believe my eyes as there was a huge hump about 3 to 4 foot high. It reminded me of a huge chocolate brazil if you understand what I mean by the shape of it and a ridge running right the way down it. It looked mottled but I don't think it was rough just appeared so because of the mottling.

I am not sure I will be believed because it was so close inshore, feet rather than yards. I had only just come round the bend and was worried if I stopped that a car may come round and hit me but slowed down and we had a very good look at it. I drove until I came to a layby and waited for a long time but saw nothing more. I have no idea how deep the water is there but it was definitely not a bird, log or seal. It was enormous.

We have told people but as always we just get laughed at or asked how much had we drunk. I really don't care if anybody believes me but thought you might like to have the sighting for your records. I would of course rather stay anonymous as to most people its a laughable subject but I know what I saw that evening and whatever the animal is its huge.

I asked her to sketch what she saw and that drawing is shown above.  Enquiring more, she told me the length of the object at the water baseline was about seven feet, which tallies with the height of three to four feet mentioned in the original communication. The month of the sighting was also June.

As to where the creature was on the second, closer sighting, the witness cannot remember the exact location, but we can assume it was likely to be between the two lines shown on the map below.

By the time they parked at the lay by and went to the location of the object, it was no longer visible, despite waiting for a prolonged period of time. The presumption being that is had either submerged or moved off. I also asked whether the closer view on going round the bend was at Temple Pier, but she was sure it was further on.

Looking into the account more closely, the creature could have been at one of multiple points along the shoreline indicated in the picture below. Temple Pier is to the left and the curvature of the hill to the right sets a natural limit on where the creature could have been seen from Urquhart Castle.

As you can see from the buildings, this area would normally be a place of activity with people milling about and boats heading in and out of the pier. However, at 8pm onwards, most activity would have closed down for the day.

Looking further at the shoreline image for objects that could be mistaken for a seven by four foot dark shaped hump, the options are severely limited. We see buoys and some moored boats. In their attempts to discredit this report, sceptics may well resort to at least two items of fake news. They may say it was a boat, perhaps covered by tarpaulin. One would wonder why this imaginary boat then disappeared from view (covered in tarpaulin)? I note there is a covered object (probably a boat) in the photo, but it is on terra firma.

The sceptic may also try and cast doubt upon the location and claim nothing would be visible from the road due to the tree line. Having "driven" the route via Google StreetView, I am not buying that one. Or perhaps our witnesses saw the fibreglass hump that formed the basis of the 2012 George Edwards hoax which would have been used in that area? It did have a nice ridge to it, after all. Well, apart from being much smaller, this prop was used much later in 2011.

Or perhaps it was the oft invoked seal-on-demand which turns up just at the right time of witness reports before disappearing back to the sea. It could present a mottled appearance, but again, it would be too small, not have such a ridge and could not arch or suspend its back in the way described.

Either way, the witness was convinced that what they both saw was unusual and an animal.

THOSE RIDGED BACKS

The mention of the ridge running right down the back of the creature places this sighting in a unique niche of reports which mention this curious feature. Looking back at the database of sightings, I can count eight reports which mention a ridged back or something similar. That comprises less than one percent of all sightings, though I suspect there may be more; especially those describing the creature like an upturned boat, which suggests the underside ridge of its structure (see photo below).

So, the ridge may be more commonplace than realised. But going back to the sightings which are explicit on the matter, readers may be reminded of the Commander Meiklem report from August 5th 1933 in which he described a similar object in Inchnacardoch Bay. Curiously, this object was also seen in shallow waters and was also about four feet out of the water. The illustration is from Rupert T. Gould's book, "The Loch Ness Monster and Others".

We could also not pass by Tim Dinsdale's account of his filming of a strange hump in April 1960 from Foyers. In his first book, he included a sketch of the hump he saw through binoculars and one can clearly see the ridge line splitting the hump into two sections.

Another famous monster hunter saw a ridged back on June 15th 1965. That man was F.W. Holiday who describes his sighting of a humped object in his book, "The Great Orm of Loch Ness". He sketched what he saw (below) for the book. I would point out that Meiklem, Dinsdale and Holiday all observed their objects through binoculars for greater clarity.

What is of more interest was the sighting by Mrs M'Grath and her son in Loch Dochfour just north of Loch Ness on the 11th June 1935. As reported by the Scotsman newspaper, the long head and neck was accompanied by a back from which "protruded two distinct rows of fin-like excrescences, also several feet apart". The creature was seen at a range of about 100 yards. An excrescence refers to a growth, protuberance or swelling and so on. M'Grath's ridge sounds more haphazard in appearance than the smoother ridges of Dinsdale and Holiday. 

Another reason why ridges may not be so visible may be down to the large distances involved in many sightings. but perhaps also that many will be side views of the back seen at almost eye level. For example, the other witnesses to Holiday's encounter, who were on the other side of the loch, drew a side on hump with no ridge.

One sighting on our list that bucks that trend is the August 16th 1933 account by Mrs E. Scott who saw a blackish ridge along the top of the hump. However, the object in question was about 800 yards away and was only seen for a few seconds and hence is not as strong as the other reports.

The final case I wish to mention brings things up to date and is William Jobes' report from May 2011. William has mentioned the possibility of a ridged back in his photos of the creature. The best picture is shown below which does give the suggestion of an unevenness along the back. 

However, something need to be compared and contrasted here. Namely, that a ridged back appears to conflict with the observation that the creature can control its humps in an almost fluid manner. Be it air sacs or fatty deposits, how does that fit in with a solid, ridged back?

Well, it is not clear that the ridge is as solid as it may appear. In fact, it is not clear what it is at all. Is it just darker markings along the presumed spine of the creature? Is it just skin deep serrations which would readily yield to expansion of the skin during sac inflation? I would go for the latter theory, thus accommodating both aspects of the creature's gross morphology.

What the ridge feature signifies as regards the creature's possible identity is ambiguous. Plesiosaurs are sometimes depicted with ridged backs, though it is not clear to me whether the fossil record bears out such an interpretation.

That other favourite of Nessie theories, the Atlantic Sturgeon, definitely sports a nice ridged pattern on its back, but could not possibly arch its back in the manner of the beast described by our various witnesses.

What I would say is that this ridge is inconsistent with a mammalian interpretation such as a long necked seal. However, some would interpret such a ridge as a mane, which would obviously take us to a fur lined Nessie, which is inconsistent with the vast majority of eyewitness accounts.

The idea of a mane tends to focus more on the neck of the creature rather than the entire length of the back. But the ridge as an extended mane is nicely pictured on Peter Costello's "In Search of Lake Monsters" where the extended mane idea is clearly seen.

So, it appears to be a case of "you pays your money and you takes your choice" with these ridge theories. We began with a good sighting of the monster just over ten years ago and expanded into the general realm of monster morphology. The witness was hesitant to write due to the predictable disdain and scorn of sceptics.

They will disdain and they will scorn, hence the anonymity. At this blog, we continue to accept genuine eyewitness accounts, just as the monster continues to appear at the loch.

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Hunting down the Taylor Film

The above article was recently published by the South African Daily Maverick newspaper and I will return to that later on in this piece. But looking back three and a half years ago, I published that still frame picture on my blog appealing for any information that would lead to the discovery of its film taken by a Mr. G. E. Taylor at Loch Ness in 1938. The first part of that strategy was fulfilled in that the article was highly visible on the Internet. In other words, a google search for "G E Taylor Loch Ness Monster" put the article as the number one hit.

The second part, in which someone would actually reply with some new information, never came to pass. While this was disappointing it was also somewhat worrying as one would assume that anyone who was a descendant or close associate of Mr. Taylor and knew about the film would be sufficiently Internet savvy to at some point search for this film and find the article.

This digital silence could mean one of several things. People may have relevant information but do not wish to divulge it. Or it could be that such people are unaware of such a film, either because they have not looked for it or because the film is now no more. I hope it is not the last of these possibilities, but it would always be a hard thing to confirm.

The other problem was that I did not know G. E. Taylor's full name. Descendants of Mr. Taylor may have searched for information on him by using his full name. Also, if they were not aware of his Loch Ness connection, then "loch ness" would not appear on their search input and so my article would be way down the list of hits (I have recently updated the article to "seed" it with common names that may match the "G" and "E". These are there only to lock into certain google search patterns).

That article remains, but it is not clear if it now still fulfils its original purpose. Expanding the search, enquiring of ancestry websites was the other obvious pursuit, though for me it resulted in tenuous matches. Scotland has a good genealogy site, as do others, and South Africa is also providing such online services. One problem is it costs money, the other problem is one of priority.

A search of the National Archives of South Africa indicates that the digitised archive does not go beyond 1950. Presumably, that is a fluid situation as more births, deaths and marriages are scanned and put online. But this is not a surprise as the service primarily caters to historians and genealogists and that means categorising the older data first and then working your way up to the present day.

The trick is again knowing what the "G. E." stands for. and I suspect this may involve going through the paywall of various genealogical websites to get some (if any) information. However, the main source of information would be the register of births, deaths and marriages in Pietermaritzburg. That may ultimately require the paid employment of a local researcher.

Other lines of enquiry were more proactive. I contacted the National Film Video and Sound Archive in South Africa regarding the old newsreels to see if anything regarding Loch Ness Monster films appeared on the "African Mirror" newsreels around 1938 or 1961. Again, nothing turned up.

I then paid for an advert to be placed in the Notices sections of the popular Sunday Times for three weeks running. Again, nothing, but it piqued the interest of a local journalist who contacted me and with my input ran an article concerning South Africa's claim to fame in producing the first colour film of the Loch Ness Monster and the subsequent disappearance of that film.

That also ended with an appeal for more information. Where that will lead remains an open matter. At the time of writing, there are only a couple of leads but nothing that is truly substantial. However, I have enough new material for an article on the G. E. Taylor film. That will go ahead, but ultimately there can be no really incisive analysis without the actual film.


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

That Man Gasparini

I was recently sent a newspaper clipping from the Adelaide Advertiser dated 23rd March 1959 which tells a story which has been covered here before but adds a twist (thanks for the information, Katie). It concerns the Italian journalist, Francesco Gasparini, who claimed he invented the Loch Ness Monster back in 1933. The clipping is shown below and you can click on the image to read it more clearly.

We have mentioned this man before in relation to another man who claimed ownership of the Nessie story. That other person was Digby Geharty, whom you can read about here and here. Neither man should be taken seriously as the parents of Nessie. Indeed, even the most seasoned sceptics cast doubt upon their claims.

However, what caught my attention was Gasparini's claim that he saw a two line headline from the Glasgow Herald from 1933 stating that a strange fish had been caught in Loch Ness. Now, I do not recall seeing such an article, but I would not claim to have covered all of 1933. Alternatively, Gasparini may have made this up or simply misremembered after 26 years.

My favoured theory is that he put a nearby strange fish story into Loch Ness. I think particularly of the fish caught near Findhorn in July 1934, which I reprinted here five years ago and from which I reproduce the picture below. 

But such a thing should not be put aside, so an archive search should be done. I have not done such a search yet, so I invite anyone else to see if there is any truth to this strange fish story.

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

The Ancient Serpent Stone of Loch Ness

There are some things which reside at the periphery of the Loch Ness Mystery and sometimes present themselves as a mystery within a mystery. I had been meaning to write on this object for some time, but was awaiting further information which has now arrived. One could best sum it up in the words of Nicholas Witchell's "The Loch Ness Story", back in 1974 (p.16 1st edition).

This carving, believed to be neolithic in origin, was found at Balmacaan House, which used to be near Loch Ness until it was knocked down in the 1930s. It has been speculated that the serpent-like form my be some reference to the animals in Loch Ness.

However, the story of this stone goes further back than this. Ted Holiday first mentioned it in his 1968 book, "The Great Orm of Loch Ness", where he recounts something akin to a jungle expedition in 1965.

On June 15th I had now been at Loch Ness for nine days. Heavy rain pounded down during breakfast, After going round to Strone for a last word with Clem and Brian, who were leaving for London, I finally spent the rest of the morning searching the grounds of derelict Balmacaan House for a view of the ancient carved stones on which an unidentified creature is depicted. After beating the rhododendron jungle for an hour, I gave the search up as hopeless.

Witchell's circumspection was overshadowed by Holiday's firm belief that this stone showed a Pictish representation of the "Great Orm". In other words, this carving depicted the first recorded "sketch" of the creatures. As he relates further on in the book:

In his dealings with the Orm the neolithic artist seems to have adopted one of two stylized approaches. Usually, the creature was represented in a sort of plan-view with its body coiled in two wide undulations. The head was ovoid with pear-shaped eyes and a bluntly conical nose. This particular treatment was often incorporated with a symbolic device or pattern known to Archaeologists as a 'Z rod' which may possibly have indicated the rank of the leader for whom the carving was executed. The alternative rendering was a depiction of the head and neck alone. Usually this showed a long neck topped by a small head embellished with a number of feelers or tentacles. 

To which Holiday adds a small note beneath a drawing of the stone:

A neolithic carving found at Balmacaan, near Loch Ness. The creature appears to be a stylized depiction of the Orm and incorporates numerous features reported by witnesses such as vertical undulations, wide head, oval eyes and conical nose. 

One could of course argue that the conical nose, oval eyes and sinusoidal curves were equally emblematic of a common snake. However, the discovery of the stone beside the shores of Loch Ness made this more than a matter of land based serpents. To delve further into this neolithic puzzle, we need to know more about the stone.

Though the stone was said to reside at Balmacaan house, the actual site of discovery was beside the river Enrick near Urquhart Bay. According to William Mackay in the 1886 Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, it was accidentally dug up on Drumbuie Farm about 1869  along with another symbol stone which were laying on top of a cairn. The site of that discovery gives the stone its proper title of the "Drumbuie Stone". However, it was removed to the Earl of Seafield's estate prior to 1886. The original location is shown below as the central green circle.

As it turns out, Ted Holiday was wasting his time looking for the stone amongst the rhododendrons in 1965 as it had been removed ten years earlier to the Royal Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh for safekeeping. The stone had left Loch Ness, but did the mystery of its serpent remain?

The stone is itself one of over 300 items known as Pictish symbol stones. The Picts were a mysterious race of people who populated the northern parts of Scotland, but little is known of their culture, even after converting to Christianity. The stones are rough hewn slabs of stone carved with known and unknown objects which are found either erect or laid flat on cairns and so on. They are to be found all over the north of Scotland with the preponderance being located in the north east and they date between the 6th and 9th centuries AD.

They have presented a bit of a challenge to archaeologists since the symbols carved on them have remained undeciphered and represent a kind of Highland Hieroglyphics lacking a Highland Rosetta Stone to unlock them. By that I mean, some carvings are clear enough in depicting boar, fish, eagles, deer and so on. Others appear to be more abstract, though some may represent man made objects such as mirrors and combs. But why they are there and how each carving on a given stone relates to those around it has no universally accepted solution.

The Drumbuie stone is no exception in that the serpent is depicted with a construct known as a "Z rod" interlacing it. What this and the double disc below it signifies is a matter of unresolved conjecture. Such abstract symbols are seen across Scotland adorning stones in various ways. 

When I considered these discs and the serpent, I thought of Holiday's subsequent book, "The Dragon and the Disc" which explores the links between alleged ancient dragon and disc worshipping cultures. Surely, the Drumbuie stone would be "Exhibit A" in such a theory with its combined discs and serpent? But, surprisingly, Holiday (as far as I can tell), makes no mention of the stone in his book. A curious omission, I thought.

Then again, maybe not. As I continued to research the matter, I found a very useful website mapping out the large number of symbol stones across Scotland. It is run by Strathclyde University and can be found here. Some observations can be made using their information. Firstly, there are 23 symbol stones containing a serpent and 13 of these are this serpent plus Z-rod combination. Moreover, these serpents are combined with so many different other symbols as to look almost random in occurence.

But the second point is that the other serpent stones are located largely in the east of Scotland where there is a dearth of loch monster traditions. Most of the folkloric tales of kelpies, water horses and water bulls reside in the west and centre of the Highlands. This is shown in a rough overlay I did of the distribution of loch monsters and symbol stones.

The folkloric lochs are shown as white circles and the symbol stones as red circles. One can almost argue for a negative correlation between the two classes. The conclusion is that the serpent carvings are not related to any ancient idea of loch monsters (though one cannot quite discount the river varieties). 

That may or may not be a surprise, as it depends on what the function of such a Pictish symbol stone was. Was the serpent a real snake or a symbol for something like a notable family or leader? That we'll leave to the experts, but perhaps Holiday himself came to realise the stone serpent was nothing to do with the Loch Ness Monster when he omitted it from his Dragon book.

CONCLUSION

I said the stone was sent to Edinburgh in 1955 and so we complete the story with its current status. I contacted one of the curators who confirmed it was still there and he kindly sent me the latest picture of it, which I reproduce with their permission. At last, we can see the actual stone and not sketches (probably derived from rubbings).

Copyright of the Trustees of National Museums Scotland

The stone is not on display at the museum due to its somewhat fragile condition and it awaits some restoration work. Therefore, it remains boxed up at the museum's warehouse facility and was not amenable to a visit by myself. At least we know this curious stone still exists and is in good hands.

The Loch Ness Monster may continue to be a mystery, but there is no mystery connecting it to this stone. The mystery of this stone firmly resides in the little known ways and customs of the Pictish people. There may be other symbols that equate to creatures the Picts regarded as aquatic and monstrous, such as those on the Aberlemno II stone and the well known Pictish Beast. To these we must look for clues as to the monster lore of these people.

HISTORICAL FOOTNOTE

Balmacaan House was the property of the Earl of Seaforth and was located on his estate to the south west of Drumnadrochit (see map from 1930s with house in bottom left). The house and its 40,000 acres would have served as hunting grounds and indeed were rented to rich clientele such as the American Bradley Martin. It was used as a home for war evacuees in the 1940s but was evidently abandoned as a sale of assets in 1942 suggested its days were over (perhaps due to the onerous death duties imposed by the British Labour Party on the aristocracy).

By the time Ted Holiday arrived with his machete in 1965, the house was in a severe state of disrepair and was soon demolished, perhaps in the 1970s. There were reports of ghosts appearing as the house was levelled!

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Monster Programs Alert

To all UK readers, Channel 5 has two hours of sea monster programs and Nessie may make an appearance. Programs start at 7pm.

Archive of Annual Nessie Reviews

This blog enters its twelfth year as of 2022 and has been publishing end of year reviews since 2012. So if you want a summary of what has been going on in and around the loch and its famous monster during those years, just click on the links below. I note I did not do reviews for 2011 and 2010. I will backfill these with articles when I have time.

Review of 2021 - link

Review of 2020 - link

Review of 2019 - link

Review of 2018 - link

Review of 2017 - link

Review of 2016 - link

Review of 2015 - link

Review of 2014 - link

Review of 2013 - link

Review of 2012 - link

Review of 2011 - to be done

Review of 2010 - to be done


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Vote for the Best Nessie Sighting of 2016

Source: link

The Inverness Courier are running their annual poll on the best Nessie sighting over this week. The poll closes at midnight on January 8th. The candidates can be viewed at this link, but to vote you need to go to this link and scroll down to the bottom right of the page until you see the voting buttons appear.

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Miscellaneous Loch Ness Articles

Here find an index of past articles on subjects not specifically on the Loch Ness Monster or its satellite subjects, but rather convey information on the history and geography of the loch and its environs. Of course, the monster may get a mention or two, but you can cut through that to the main stuff. This article will find its way to the webpage side links and be updated as and when.

Pictish Symbol Stones at Loch Ness - link

Metal Monsters in Loch Ness - link

Saint Cummin's Bell - link

Contour Map of Loch Ness - link

The Other Serpent Stone of Loch Ness - link

New Record Depth for Loch Ness? - link

 Boleskine House Ablaze - link

How Many People can Loch Ness hold? - link

A Piece of Loch Ness History - link

The Treasure of Castle Urquhart - link

Loch Ness Steamships - link and link

The Mysterious "Footprints" of Loch Ness - link

Wrecks of Loch Ness - link

Cool Picture from Loch Ness - link

Porpoises in Loch Ness? - link

Ice Age and Loch Ness - link

Another Car Accident at Loch Ness - link

60th Anniversary of John Cobb's Death - link

Another Monster on Loch Ness - link

Loch Ness in 1912 - link

An Interesting Catch near Loch Ness - link

The World's Biggest Spirit Level - link

 The Blighting of Loch Ness - link



The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Nessie Review of 2016

Looking back on 2016, Loch Ness and its Monster had a worthy list of events in and around the place to keep the subject and this blog busy from January to December. Let us now go over these in largely chronological order.

January began with a big claim for a new record depth for the biggest loch in Britain. Jacobite Cruises went to press with the story that their new 3D sonar imaging equipment had detected a depth of 889 feet, beating the current record by 135 feet. The claim immediately generated controversy as others said they could not reproduce the result.

I myself saw the sonar recording a depth of 884 feet back in September, when I attended a talk on the monster. So, there is no doubt the equipment was doing what was claimed and the talk was whether a minor quake had caused a collapse of the bottom silt near the Clansman Hotel. However, the lack of corroboration leaves this one a bit up in the air and so we move on.

The month of March showed that despite sceptical assaults on the centuries old story, you can't keep a good monster down as the tourist agency, VisitBritain, decided to recruit the Loch Ness Monster for their promotion of the Highlands to foreign visitors. 

Admittedly, it was all a bit tongue in cheek, but more tourists means more chance of good videos and photos. Well, that is the theory, but the shortcomings of reality often intrudes on opportunity, be it distance, human frailty or poor equipment.

A few weeks later in April came the sensational news that a monster had been found, albeit one that had sunk without trace over 45 years ago. I am, of course, referring to the model monster made for the 1970 film, "The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes". The prop did not actually appear in the film as it sunk before filming began. 

The relics of the prop had been found thanks to the latest in sonar technology in the form of a low flying sonar torpedo called the MUNIN Autonomous Underwater Vehicle. The missle's ability to draw near to target areas and produce higher resolution images was the advantage it had over previous searches.

Which clearly begs the question as to why previous sonar missions should be taken seriously when they claimed to have swept the whole loch and found nothing. They did not find this because they lacked the acuity of vision to see this monster sized object. Whether such new technology will be used again at the loch remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, pictures and videos purporting to be our favourite cryptid rolled in throughout the year. One of the first to "surface" was the webcam shot taken below by Diana in April of a strange looking neck like image. There were various such webcam shots that came to my attention over the year of varying quality, though the same conclusion applies to all. They may add to the story and the mystery, but they are too far away to provide conclusive evidence.

Other pictures came to the fore although most were no more than interesting and even explicable by natural phenomena. A video by Tony Bligh in June is most likely just a boat wake,. A picture also taken in June by a Texan tourist appears to show a dark shape under the water, but is too indistinct to tell. What was of more interest was a picture taken by Ian Campbell in August showing two strange objects swimming just under the surface opposite Inverfarigaig (below).

The picture suffers from being taken at a distance of about 400 metres, although Ian Campbell was convinced it was two creatures. Meantime, a strange carcass found on the shores of Dores was fooling no one. It was a publicity stunt for a forthcoming crime drama set by the shores of the loch.

Likewise, a picture taken in September claimed as one of the clearest yet, was clearly a line of seals playing and pursuing. The only argument was whether it was taken at Loch Ness or near the owner's residence in the Cromarty Firth. The argument leans to the latter, but it is certainly no Nessie.

Of more interest was the dorsal fin most certainly photographed at Loch Ness on the 22nd August by Kate Powell which had echoes of the Adams-Lee photograph of the 1930s. Further analysis showed it was no photoshop job and most were agreed on that. What was not accepted universally was that is showed a dorsal fin.

Indeed, the initial and well worn tactic of the sceptic was to first play the "Not taken at Loch Ness" card. This soon disintegrated when Steve Feltham produced the uncropped image. Panic soon set in as the prospect of a possible mystery stalked the sceptic and soon an alternative but pathetic excuse arrived in the form of an osprey taking a fish from the water. The answer is its own refutation, as they say.

But you know why it is a stupid explanation? Because if you had said it had been taken in the Moray Firth, the same Nessie deniers would have unhesitatingly screamed "Dorsal Fin". Please! Now what this photo actually shows is another matter. A local dolphin expert told me it was not one of the dolphins they track along the north east shores of Scotland. Bird? No. Dolphin? Maybe. Nessie? Not sure!

On a personal note, the hunt and research continued in 2016. Several trips were undertaken to the loch such as in September. The use of trap cameras and the like continues, but no conclusive evidence was acquired, but information about the loch useful in important conclusions were indeed acquired. Some strange things were investigated, though not necessarily of a monster nature!

Back at the desk and laptop, various advances were made in Loch Ness Monster research. After some pursuit, I was most pleased to make contact with H. L. Cockrell's son and obtaining a wealth of information on this famous photo of the monster - including the never before seen second photo. Sceptics don't give a rat's arse about pursuing such things, if you think it is all just boats and logs, where is the motivation? Leave that sort of stuff to those who believe there is something strange in Loch Ness. There is more to come on H. L. Cockrell in 2017.

Continuing in the vein of those who do proper research, a couple of mysteries were cleared up which had lain dormant for decades. The long standing conundrum of John Keel's 1896 Nessie was resolved when I dug deeper into the archives. Likewise, Peter Costello's brief mention of another 1896 reference to a monster in Loch Ness was also proven to be true, though not perhaps in the way predicted by either side of the Nessie debate.

Back in April, I also took part in a TV documentary on Nessie and delivered a lecture on the paranormal history of the Loch Ness Monster to the Scottish UFO and Paranormal Conference. Finally, I was pleased to renew my acquaintance with renowned Nessie researcher, Rip Hepple. I thank him again for his important contribution to the Nessie debate in the form of his 40 years of newsletters.

And so, the year draws to an end and even as I type these words, another late news item on a possible Nessie sculpture hits the media. You just can't keep a good monster down! It was a good year in terms of events and things to debate. However, evidence which will convince even the most die-hard sceptic continued to elude. Mind you, since that probably means a monster carcass, they could be waiting a long time.

I wish all readers a prosperous and healthy 2017.


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Ted Holiday and the LNIB Hunting Irish Monsters (video)

A reader called Liam emailed me with a link to an old October 1969 RTE TV report from Ireland which covered the visit of some members of the Loch Ness Investigation Bureau to the boggy land of Connemara in the west of the Republic of Ireland. The members interviewed were Ted Holiday, Holly Arnold, Lionel Leslie and Ivor Newby.

Seasoned monster readers will be well aware of this trip as it was covered in Holiday's book, "The Dragon and the Disc" published in 1973. I refer you to that book for further details of the search for the Irish "Pieste".

The picture of Ted Holiday above is taken from the video which you can view here.

/
The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Nessie at Christmas

Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the glen
Not a creature was stirring, not even a sceptic.
The cameras were placed by the lochside with care,
In hopes that Nessie soon would be there.

Okay, I couldn't get "sceptic" to rhyme, but I never claimed to be a poet. As we enter the Festive Season, I wondered if Nessie had ever added to the magic and mystery of Christmas by putting in a special appearance on Christmas Day? The answer appears to be "yes".

Now as far as appearances go, December does not fare very well. After all, the tourists have all but gone, the weather is cold and the locals are pre-occupied with turkey and presents. Indeed, you could argue that Christmas Day is the least likely day to hear about the Loch Ness Monster. But we have one account and only one account in the 83 long years of monster reports and it happened on the very first Christmas of the Nessie Era in 1933.

The story forms case no.33 in Rupert T. Gould's book, "The Loch Ness Monster and Others", published in 1934 which I reproduce below:

December 25, 1933. 

In Clayhole Bay. 

Time, about 8 a.m.

Weather clear.

Witnesses, Mr. John Cameron, Fort Augustus (second sighting). (L.) Mr. D. McIntosh. (L.)

[Clayhole Bay, which is not named on the 6-inch Ordnance sheet, is about 4 miles from Fort Augustus towards Invermoriston, and on the western side of Gobhar Sciathach - the promontory between Easter and Wester Port Clair.]

Mr. Cameron and Mr. McIntosh were driving in a motor-lorry along the Loch road (which runs close to Clayhole Bay) and caught sight of X lying about 30 yards from the shore, with its head (they considered) towards them. Mr. Cameron ran down to the shore to get a closer view; but as he did so X, apparently startled by the noise of the engine, swung very quickly round - making a great commotion in the water - and disappeared.

From the disturbance created, they deduced that X's bulk below water much exceeded that of the portion visible. This showed as a dark hump about 10 feet long, and rising some 3 feet above the surface. Mr. McIntosh also noticed, about 6 feet in front of the hump, "a clear and definite break in the water," which he considered might have been produced by the head.

I had never heard of Clayhole Bay before, though the location is familiar to me as denoted by the circle on the map below. Back then, the road afforded a better view as many trees had been cleared during the road widening. I suspect the foliage between road and loch is more substantial today.

Now one might hear the cry of "Bah! Humbug!" from the sceptical Scrooges out there. This was clearly a standing wave caught in an eddy in the bay from a ship whose crew forgot they should have been off for the day.

The fact that the creature was 30 yards from shore and unlikely to be mistaken is irrelevant say the Ebeneezers. Clearly, Mr Cameron and Mr McIntosh had indulged too much in the Christmas sherry and it was actually a duck at 1000 yards. Glad that was all cleared up, I was nearly getting too excited and gullible.

Getting back to reality, this sighting is typical and classical. The large, single hump is the most common type of sighting and the mention of the creature being sensitive to noise is a familiar description. Based on the overall description, this would appear to have been at least a 20 footer. Nice.


With that, I shall wish all readers a Merry Christmas!

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Metal Monsters in Loch Ness

Having spoken previously about the variety of objects that end up in Loch Ness, a reader enquired further about the steam tractors that found their grave in the loch. I found this when reading a lengthy comment posted on a forum in August 2012, now is as good a time as any to post that comment - especially since it now appears to have disappeared from the Web.

Local readers may be able to add further details and I note the author mentions our favourite cryptid at the end (this was during the hype around the now discredited George Edwards photograph).

Around 1981 I fancied getting a steam engine and phoned an owner near Kirriemuir for guidance. "Fit wiy div ye na tak the anes oot o Loch Ness?" was his question.

He went on to say that in the nineteen thirties when the A82 was being realigned some old steam rollers had broken down and were cannibalised to keep others going. At the end of the contract the robbed rollers were simply pushed into the loch to tidy up. Seems the contractor involved had steamed them up from Glasgow in the first place, taking over three weeks for the journey.

Just west of Clansman Hotel I found the remains of a steam engine but all that could be removed by boat had gone. A pair of front wheels rested against the gable end of a cottage in Dores. The governor weights adorned a garden in Milton but around 25 years ago a team came up from England and salvaged what was sitting half on the shore.

Last year someone commented on the line up of vintage tractors at Bogbain, asking why was I not trying to take the steam lorry out of Leanach quarry, up by the Keppoch. Seems that when divers had been searching for Renee MacRae in the quarry in 1976 a diver reported seeing a steam Foden in the depths of the flooded quarry. The English team made enquiries but were told to bugger off, this area was now in someone's back garden.

John MacKenzie of Achnagarron tells me that he used to see the steam lorry sitting beside a croft beside Culloden Station around 1960. I hunted down local divers with a trail leading me to Frank Allan and then on to the late Jimmy Kelman. No, Jimmy had not been involved but back a long time ago the great John Oak had bought a barge down in Corpach and been quoted mega bucks to bring it home to Inversneckie.

Jimmy went west with his welding gear and welded brackets on the barge to take two outboard motors. Coming through Loch Ness, Jimmy stopped to have his flask and sandwiches and as he rested on the land side of the barge, there in the water, below the surface, was a steam engine. So guess who got on a jet ski and headed for "the point in the loch below where the piper used to play for the tourists", according to Jimmy.

Seeing nothing from the jet ski I then got a loan of a cabin cruiser and using a friend's home made underwater camera, I trawled the area for days but could find nothing. Then news reached me from the Jacobite Cruise office that I was in the right place because one of their men reported seeing wheels above the water whenever the Loch was low.

I phoned Adrian Shine to find out where I'd get a good copy of a survey of the loch. "The library", says Adrian, and there is a grand survey which was done by Sir somebody or other in 1902. The library was no use but bumping into a friend and telling him my mission into the city centre on a good working day my friend says "Phone Mike the bike, he has a copy".

Mike arrived with his bike and unscrolled the most beautiful detailed survey that anyone could imagine. Seems Sir so so had done it all with piano wire and lead weight and according to sonar he was spot on with his findings. The survey showed that water on the north side of the loch was shallow, meaning that any engine dumped there would not have gone down 600 feet.

I gave the survey to George back around March asking him to have a go and now he seems to have found some part from the salvaged steam engine near the Clansman. The search continues.

But three trips to South Uist earlier this year proved fruitless while looking for a steam roller that ran off out of control while being unloaded from a Ministry of Transport lorry during the last war. Probing with metal rods, a metal detector, and even using a magnetometer from a local firm that guides oil drilling in Canada, I have detected nothing. 

It seems we were in the wrong bog around Bornish. Leaving South Uist the last time, I ran into my friend at HEBCO who has been very helpful and I  listened again as he repeated "the man that used to tell us all about the engine used to say. "I'm the only person who knows exactly where the engine is". This suggests it took off out of sight of the public road and over the years the location has got mixed up. I should be over there at this moment because the bogs are at their driest in years but can't get past Torvean.

I know of two ladies who have recently seen the same sort of thing as Mr Edwards in the Loch, quite near Dores Inn but no way would they ever go to the press with the news for fear of attracting the ridicule that we see on this page today.

The picture of the traction engine at the top of the page may not be the type used at Loch Ness, but it is probably similar. Having read the comments again, I did a web search to find out more about traction engines at Loch Ness and found an item which may relate to this comment:

"around 25 years ago a team came up from England and salvaged what was sitting half on the shore.". 

At the following website, I found this picture of a traction engine which had this comment: 

The traction engine came from the shores of Loch Ness, it fell in while a road was being made along the side of the loch. It was recovered over 20 years ago via a raft made of scaffold and drums with an outboard motor on the back. and 2 trips in a lorry back to Abingdon. Still have the video somewhere of the weeks adventure.

The phrases "over 20 years ago" and "around 25 years ago" suggests these may be referring to the same tractor? I leave it to our intrepid local tractor hunter to put a bid in (as I recall he posted under the pseudonym "Bogbain" on the Inverness Courier)!

Nessie fans will recall how the extension of the Glasgow-Inverness road lead to hundreds, if not thousands of tons of blasted rock and other debris being regularly tipped into Loch Ness. The thought being that the Loch Ness Monster was disturbed from her "sleep" and embarked on a rash of surface adventures.

Now I am quite happy to accept that the continuous rumble of rubble did disturb the cryptid as I am of the opinion that the creature is not an open water creature, but one that largely spends its time amongst the submerged sides of the loch. These areas would have been particularly exposed to these torrents of rock.

Having said that, it is more likely that the opening of the road and the cutting back of the lochside vegetation that made it more likely for people to see the monster rather than the underwater disturbances.

I see I have now posted successively on three subjects which are not cryptid related. Back to Nessie now, but a knowledge of the local history around the loch adds to the interest in the area as well as potentially proving useful in Nessie forensics. I think I will add a "Local History" side bar to the webpage.

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Keep Nessie out of this!

I note a tweet from a senator elect in California called Kamala Harris. I don't anything about her, never heard of her and may never hear from her again. She says, "We must take on science-deniers who insist the earth is flat, the Loch Ness Monster is real & climate change doesn't exist." You can find her curious tweet here.

One thing I will deduce from her rant is that she probably knows next to nothing about the Loch Ness Monster. Doubtless spoon fed what to believe by "Nessie-deniers" to borrow her phrase, the creature is a convenient symbol of ridicule to hang her tweet on. What I am not clear on is why she didn't use the Bigfoot? After all, that cryptid is reputed to haunt her home state. Maybe she believes in Bigfeet? 

Anyway, the term "science-denier" implies her view of science has built an impregnable case against any such creature existing in Loch Ness. If one asked Ms Harris specifically what type of creature science had disproven, she would probably look at you stony faced with her mouth open. Science has not disproven the Loch Ness Monster, but neither has it proven it. In fact, science has nothing to say on the existence or non-existence of the monster.

Sure, we have seen various attempts to use "science" against the creature. These have been more than challenged on this blog over the years (and without reply in a lot of cases). Unfortunately, in this sceptical age, such "science" is generally accepted in an uncritical and prejudiced manner.

So, feel free to protest about resistance to climate change, but don't bring my nation's favourite monster into it!

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

 

Oor Wullie meets Nessie

Two of Scotland's favourite icons meet (from 1990):

Saint Cummin's Bell

In a loch the size of Loch Ness, you will expect a wide of variety of objects to be lying at the bottom of its dark, murky depths. We have mentioned a panoply of such things over the lifetime of this blog and they include John Cobb's speedboat, various ships, a Viking longship, a Wellington Bomber, a monster prop, the body of Winifred Hambro, fridges, cars, myriad pieces of Nessie hunting equipment, steam tractors from the time of the 1930s road expansion and, of course, a number of Nessie carcasses. Perhaps you can add your own object to this Loch Ness junkyard.

Now I find another object named in the Aberdeen Press and Journal, dated 13th December 1950. This goes back to July 1544 and I reproduce the article below.

In hindsight, the story was already in my copy of George Campbell's "The First and Lost Iona". The bell was taken from the ruined priory at Cille-Chumein (the town's name before it was renamed Fort Augustus after the Battle of Culloden). The intention was to rehouse it in the Lovat's church in Glen Covinth near Beauly. Campbell's books relates how the bell was "sacrificed" as an offering to the spirit of the lake, which I would take to be the Loch Ness Each Uisge.

Now, the location of the holy bell is unknown and yet we are told the loch waters above it have healing powers. You just need to know where! The reference to Aneurin Bevan brings us down to earth as he was the then architect of the National Health Service (another religion of the British people).

However, Campbell speculates from the Wardlaw Manuscript in suggesting the bell may have been deposited at or near Ellanwirrich or Cherry Island as it is now called. But, using my previously calculated silt deposition rate of 4mm per annum suggests the bell is now under a metre of silt. One would presume that, if it exists at all, it is not going to be found anytime soon.

The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Is the Loch Ness Monster a Sturgeon?

The theory that the Loch Ness Monster is an Atlantic Sturgeon is not something new and has been doing the rounds since the early days of the modern Nessie phenomenon. The earliest reference I can find to this theory is from The Scotsman of the 4th November 1933 where a correspondent states the following:

That was about six months since the Aldie Mackay report in the Inverness Courier. The leading expert at the time, Rupert T. Gould, in his 1934 book, "The Loch Ness Monster and Others", examined the various theories to explain the reports that had been coming from the loch since the year before and addressed the sturgeon idea which he said was "in some ways ... rather attractive". His drawing below drew out some ideas.

The first being that the sturgeon's snout could, in theory, be mistaken for a long neck. Likewise, the bony plates along its back may be misinterpreted as a line of humps. In that light he considered it a theory worthy of examination. However, serious objections were finally raised by Gould. Firstly, that the claimed size of the Loch Ness Monster was up to three times longer than the biggest sturgeon known.

Secondly, the bony plates may be construed as humps, but their rather fixed configuration does not allow for the rather more pronounced double humps and so on, let alone the classic upturned boat scenario. However, Gould eventually went with his itinerant sea serpent idea and any thought of a sturgeon finding its way into Loch Ness largely fell by the wayside as more exotic theories won the day.

It was only when we entered the sceptical 80s and 90s that the theory began to gain traction as leading Loch Ness researcher, Adrian Shine, revived the idea with the suggestion that some sightings could be accounted for by errant sturgeon making their way along the River Ness from the North Sea into the loch. In an article for the BBC in 2012, he sums up this line of thought:


"I think it could be the occasional navigationally challenged Atlantic Sturgeon," he says, with a mischievous smile.

Known to grow to over 4m long, the fish, which has reptilian scaled plates along its back and a long pointed face with tusk-like barbells hanging from its jaws, is not indigenous to Scotland. It could conceivably make its way up River Ness and into the loch in the search for new breeding grounds.

"It could very easily have swum into the loch, been spotted and left again leaving nothing behind save an enigma," he says. 

Adrian's thinking on this certainly goes as far back as Operation Deepscan in 1987 where he mentioned the possibility. However, it was the publication of a paper in 1993 for The Scottish Naturalist that caught the attention of the press and went worldwide. This clipping from the Times Daily of the 30th December 1993 sums it up.

Now, it is not to be denied that sturgeon have been caught in the general area of the Highlands for centuries. Some old clippings will suffice here and also show the typical size of such creatures. The first is from the Inverness Journal of the 31st July 1846 and then from the same journal of the 14th August 1812:

Note that even in the less consumer strained times of the 19th century, this creature was regarded as a rare visitor to the more accessible waterways. The near 11 foot specimen mentioned above weighed in at over two hundredweight which equates to over 16 stones or 100 kilos. Quite a beast in its own right, though a bit worrying for this theory that I could not find more modern stories.

ASSESSMENT

Having said all that, I have yet to find a newspaper article from any year talking about a sturgeon being caught in Loch Ness. That does not mean that such an event has never happened, but the clippings above suggest that such an event would undoubtedly receive local newspaper coverage (angling was a big sport in the Highlands with newspaper carrying frequent reports on angling news).

The thing about this theory is that it is a bit player. It is not a theory crafted to explain many sightings, for in the world of scepticism, the monster is a motley mosaic of so called ordinary objects seen in so called extraordinary circumstances. My opinion is that such extraordinary circumstances are rare to the vanishing point. The sturgeon is offered as an almost monstrous monster to explain accounts which go beyond the simplistic boat wake or floating log.

But the problems with this idea of an itinerant sturgeon are greater than that for an exotic monster. I heard of an old Chinese proverb asking what is the most cunning animal. The answer is the one that is yet to be found. Whilst the disputed behavioural characteristics of the Loch Ness Monster allows it fulfil that age old puzzle, the same cannot be said of a sturgeon.

The point being that no sturgeon has been caught, let alone a verifiable photograph or video clip of one. You can take that thought two ways. It can either mean that this proves no sturgeon has ever entered Loch Ness or it means that large water breathing creatures can enter the loch and remain largely undetected.

The counter argument on that point is that the sturgeon is an in-out creature. Adrian's comment above that the said sturgeon would ultimately leave the loch seems an unlikely proposition for this type of creature. However, if a sturgeon did enter the loch and inevitably become loch bound, it again says rather a lot for the general monster hunt paradigm that even this type of well known creature cannot be detected in Loch Ness.

SIGHTINGS

But the problem for this theory is its application. Given that scepticism so easily forces the round peg of monster sightings into the square holes of waves, logs and birds with the hammer of confirmation bias, it is perhaps no surprise how Adrian handles certain monster sightings. I quote from his aforementioned 1993 paper: 

In November 1933 Lt.-Commander R.T. Gould (1934: 30) listened to the account of Mr. John McLeod, who, some 20-30 years previously had seen, at the mouth of the River Moriston beneath the lowest fall, a creature with a "head like an eel and a long tapering tail". This is how a Sturgeon might appear from above. Another witness, Miss K. MacDonald, spoke of a "crocodile"-like creature, 6-8 feet long, ascending the River Ness and heading for the Holm Mills weir, in February 1932 (Gould, 1943: 38).

Rather more recently, in 1993, Mrs Marion MacDonald described to the author an experience at the Fort Augustus Abbey harbour. She saw what she first thought was a log, because of a distinctive 'scaly' bark pattern, but which then developed a wake and moved off to submerge, while she called her family. After she had sketched her impression (Figure 2, 8K) she was shown an illustration of a Sturgeon's bony plates, and considered the pattern to be reminiscent of what she had seen.

Three eyewitness reports are brought forward in support of the sturgeon theory. What struck me was how these sightings were not consigned to the usual sceptic dustbin of more mundane explanations. After all, we are repeatedly told that eyewitnesses practically forget all the important details by the next day, the newspapers exaggerate stories or it is just the locals having a laugh.

Yet, here, suddenly, the clouds of poor memory depart. The perception of the eyewitnesses becomes lucid and their descriptions are as sharp as a tack. The 1993 report would have normally been written of as a log. John MacLeod's sighting would have been told he saw a seal and Miss MacDonald's encounter was not even in Loch Ness!

Here we have an example of sceptics having their cake and eating it. Sightings are anecdotal garbage ... unless they are useful in promoting your cause. Try and tell me this is consistent and unbiased critical thinking!

MEANWHILE ... IN A POND NEAR LOCH NESS

It would be remiss of me not to mention the saga of Adrian Shine's pet sturgeon at this juncture.  It transpired back in 2000 that Adrian was rearing his own sturgeon in a pond at the Loch Ness Centre in Drumnadrochit. It seems it had grown to six feet long and Adrian was a bit peeved it's existence had been revealed as he was conducting experiments as to how visitors described it when it surfaced.

Other Loch Ness researchers were a little less sympathetic when they wondered what would have happened to the fish when it got too big. Would it be secretly dumped in the loch, caught and then declared to be Nessie? Conspiracy theories aside, what exactly was Adrian trying to achieve as viewing a sturgeon at a few feet away hardly constitutes a sighting reproduction. One also wonders what the endgame for the sturgeon really was? Fish and chips or fish and ships?

CONCLUSION

That a sturgeon may or may not have entered Loch Ness is not the point of the debate. They may have, but given the recent sceptical disdain for dolphins getting into Loch Ness, I doubt they could be of the opposite mind with sturgeons. Rather, such a creature is not a good fit for what is described and is actually just a debating tool to lift the sceptical debate above the banality of waves and birds. Indeed, sceptics admit such a creature would only explain a small percentage of sightings.

The situation is best summed up in the cartoon I saw recently which shows a dinosaur like Nessie snacking on a tiny sturgeon, to which eyewitnesses holler "WOW! There really IS a sturgeon in Loch Ness!". In other words, there are bigger fish to fry in Loch Ness.




The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com