Hugh Gray: The Man and His Monster

Last year I published an article bolstering the case for the first ever photograph of the Loch Ness Monster. I attempted to show that the picture taken by Hugh Gray did not show the blurred image of a Labrador dog and indeed showed the perplexing image of a fish like head (look right and down on this webpage). That the head is there is undoubted in my opinion as it casts a shadow on the water below it. What it means to the mystery of the Loch Ness Monster is a continuing matter of conjecture. You can view all the relevant articles here. However, I wanted to address some loose ends and add some new information in this article. 

The first is the man himself, Hugh Gray. I managed to find a couple of photographs of him which help humanise the story a bit more and bring the history of the case up to date. The first was found on the South Loch Ness Heritage website where old photographs of the people and places of that part of Loch Ness are displayed. As I was browsing the content of this interesting website, I noticed a picture of a tug-of-war team taken in 1933. One of the team members was named "H. Gray" at which point the penny dropped!

The picture below was taken by Duncan MacDonald and is reproduced with the permission of the site's maintainer, Frank Ellam. Hugh Gray is sitting at the front in the tweed jacket, second from our right (Interestingly, the man sitting at Hugh Gray's left hand side is Jock Forbes who claimed to have seen the Loch Ness Monster cross the road in front of his father's horse and cart in 1919). The picture was probably taken a few months before his famous photograph. The picture can be seen with further information at this website link. Indeed, if you scroll further down at that website, you will see a 1912 photograph of another tug-of-war team featuring a younger Hugh Gray. 

As it happened, I later found another picture of Hugh Gray in the London Daily Sketch for the 8th December 1933 which I don't think flatters him much (below). As you can see, the main banner  headline conveys the sensation the Loch Ness Monster created at the time.

Now, the debunking of the photograph has proceeded with varying degrees of credibility but one attempt can definitely be put at the bottom of the credible list and that is a piece that appears in Ronald Binns' "The Loch Ness Mystery Solved". In it, Ronald Binns quotes the 30th May 1933 Inverness Courier which describes a failed attempt by an "A. Gray" to capture the Loch Ness Monster using wire, hooks, a barrel and bait. Portraying this episode as a leg-pulling event, Binns speculates openly whether this is the same Mr. Gray and therefore should this joker be trusted. However, apart from being a Mr. A. Gray instead of a Mr. H. Gray, the matter can be laid to rest. For some reason, Ronald Binns failed to mention a key fact from the article that Mr. A. Gray was a bus driver whereas our Mr. H. Gray was a fitter at the Foyers Aluminium Works.

A more intelligent critique comes from Dick Raynor, who is an expert in photographic analysis. He suggests that the shadow of the object is not consistent with the time the photograph was allegedly taken. The position of the shadow indicates the object is somewhere between the sun and the photographer and he further suggests such a configuration is not possible given the stated facts of the case (the implication being that there is deception involved). So, for example, if Hugh Gray had been looking at the object across to the other side of the loch, then he would be facing nearer west which would place the sun in a sunset position. It is this objection to the photograph's authenticity that I wish to address for the remainder of the article.

But first, why would I wish to address something as mundane as the position of a shadow? Because this is symptomatic of the way critics treat such evidence. I call it the "Poison Speck" technique and it comes straight out of the lawyers' handbook. For you see, such pictures are not normally exposed by a big one-off event such as a hoaxer's confession or a model nessie found at the scene of "the crime". Rather, the normal procedure is to plant a "reasonable doubt" in the mind of the reader via small arguments (our poison specks). In the same manner that a lawyer will chip away at the evidence of the prosecution/defence, so the sceptic chips away until he thinks the audience has reached the point of "reasonable doubt". It may only take one or two chips but in this generally sceptical age, this carries extra leverage. When you preach to the converted, proof is not so vehemently demanded. 

So, by way of analogy, if I present a tasty and appealing pizza to you but point out that a tiny speck of something vile has been added, would you eat it? It doesn't matter if the offending particle takes up less than one thousandth of the meal, most will politely decline. Such is the tale of the tactic used and there is nothing illegal or immoral about that (I use it myself but for the opposite reasons).

Going back to the picture, we need to know three things. The position of the sun, the object and the photographer. The position of Hugh Gray can be determined with reasonable accuracy as being on the point indicated on Google Maps below. Tim Dinsdale in his book "Loch Ness Monster" visited Hugh Gray in 1960 and was taken to the spot by him. Dinsdale describes a half mile walk "along the shore" which I take to be starting from the Foyers estuary and hence use to estimate the location more accurately.

 

The position of the sun can be calculated from the date and time of the sighting. The date was November 12th 1933 but what was the time? My original article stated noon but there is some confusion here as other authors suggest the morning. Faced with this, I attempted to guesstimate the time. The account states he visited the local church first and then walked to the point on the shore afterwards. So he allegedly enters the church intent on keeping the fourth commandment, but leaves intent on breaking the ninth. How long was that interval? A church service would start at 1100 and took typically 1 hour 20 minutes (according to a current local minister).

He then would have conversed with fellow worshippers, walked from the church to the estuary of the Foyers river and then a further half a mile along the wooded shoreline to the sighting point. The overall distance can be seen from the postcard photograph again kindly provided by Frank Ellam's website (original link here). In the foreground is the church and he would have likely walked to the estuary along the riverside and then turned left along the shoreline trees (top left photo). Note that hypothetical Labrador dogs would not have been allowed in church - unless Mr. Gray was a registered blind person. :)

That would take us to about one o' clock which by a strange coincidence is the time he gave to the Daily Sketch reporter in our aforementioned newspaper article. Applying an azimuth calculator we get the sun's position as 194 degrees East of True North and at an altitude of about 14.2 degrees. Note that the stated time of 1300 is outside of BST (British Summer Time) which was introduced to Britain in 1912 and hence does not need compensating for.

On a Google Maps view of Foyers we can now begin to draw some lines between Hugh Gray, the sun and object (Google uses Grid North which is essentially the same as True North). But what about the position of the object? It is stated as being about 200 yards from the observer but what is not stated is the orientation between the two. Was the object due West of Mr. Gray, South West, North West or something else? No one knows and the various accounts given do not give a hint.

In that light, the remaining question is whether the object can be oriented to produce a suitable shadow given the known positions of sun and observer. The answer is that it can by placing it along a line of observation towards the sun to produce the desired shadow effect and see how that pans out with respect to the observer. The resulting map is shown below but how would we know how such an object in such an orientation could appear to Hugh Gray at his vantage point?

At this point, it's time to introduce you to "Shuggy" our stand-in Loch Ness Monster ("Shuggy" is the name for "Hugh" in the Glasgow vernacular). Since it will be a bit impractical to float a forty foot reproduction of the monster at 1pm on the 12th November 2012 about 200 yards from a ledge near Foyers, we went for the next best thing.

Since there is only a need to roughly reproduce a similar shadow, this plasticine model will suffice. It's not an exact representation of what is in the photograph, but it's good enough! I would also point out that this is not a complete representation either, since we do not know what was beneath the water's surface, so it's a part-Nessie.

So in my back garden, I placed the model roughly perpendicular to a south-north axis at 2pm (add one hour for BST). I then placed myself as the observer at a 35 degree angle from the sun line and photographed the model. The resulting photograph shows a similar shadow to the Gray photograph. The model is oriented to face side on to the viewer.

There are one or two issues such as the altitude of the sun would be slightly different compared to November and my own crouching down to simulate the height of the observer was an estimate as well. However, I hope I have proved that the shadow argument is no longer relevant as there is a sun-creature-witness orientation that is within the parameters of the case. 

One final objection may be that such an orientation would include some shoreline. The problem with this argument is two-fold. Firstly, we do not have the complete negative and what has passed down to us is an enlargement. So any talk of shoreline on the original is open to debate.  

Secondly, I visited the site of the Hugh Gray photograph in July last year and took some photos and video which I hope to put in a follow up post. Suffice to say, it was simple to photograph a spot 200 metres from me looking in that general direction which did not include any shoreline (though I appreciate my digital camera and Gray's box camera had different parameters).

As I said, a follow up post will be written in due course.


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com

Another Defunct Nessie Website

I will add this to the general link on the sidebar but I stumbled upon another as I was trawling around the Internet in my usual fashion.

It was Lieve Peten's Nessie web pages from the now defunct Yahoo! Geocities. Lieve was a Belgian lady who lived with Frank Searle during the 1970s as his assistant monster hunter. She admitted though in a 2005 documentary that the relationship went a bit further than just watching the loch. That Frank was quite the charmer it seems.

Lieve Petin website: link

There is also a Geocities specific archive site which looks better to me: link

Nessie Sonar Controversy Goes Commercial

The Nessie Sonar case gets more complicated each time something pops up on the media or someone else adds their opinion on the matter. However, I have been in email contact with the witness himself, Marcus Atkinson, to clarify and answer some points. I will come to those at the end of the post.

First off is a piece by Loren Coleman on the Cryptomundo website where he refers to Dick Raynor's website addressing some sonar questions. Dick Raynor skippers one of the boats run by another cruise company called Castle Cruises Loch Ness.

Straight after that, there is speculation about the man who got the sonar hit, Marcus Atkinson, who works for a competitor cruise company called Cruise Loch Ness. To quote Cryptomundo:

But perhaps truly damning, this year “Cruise Loch Ness” are running special monster hunting trips with underwater cameras on the boat skippered by…Marcus Atkinson – the man behind all the publicity of this new “discovery.” Therefore, some locals are questioning Atkinson’s big splash in the media this week. Is it a marketing move?

The cruiser website carries information on this monster hunting variant of their trips here. One wonders who the concerned "locals" are in this instance.

Now as regards so called marketing moves, what is this meant to tell us about anything? If I refer you again to Scepticism's Seven Deadly Sins, Mr. Atkinson had committed "sins" number two and six. That is, you are not a credible witness if you are involved in a commercial outlet near the loch or have gained financially from the sighting. The second point is answered as the William Hill £1000 prize that Mr. Atkinson won was not announced till months after his sonar story.

The first point is not relevant in my opinion as the original sonar hit story was on the 15th September 2011, way past the peak of the tourist season and only a few weeks before the whole industry slowed down significantly for the Autumn and Winter. Hardly a judicious time to stage such an event and rather more likely to add to the sincerity of the testimony. As for the current story, the newspapers I consulted (The Daily Mail and The Sun) don't even mention these new monster hunting trips.

However, the fact that Cruise Loch Ness sees an opportunity here needs to be looked at from both sides. The ramp up to the new season began only two weeks ago at Easter time (though things tend to dip again until the school holidays begin) and this rerun of the story is only a week old so any talk of "cashing in" would be premature. Moreover, if the company has upgraded their "monster hunting trip" variant with underwater cameras then that looks to me like a cash investment which means a degree of risk is being taken on. That's how capitalism and free enterprise works. If people (and competitors) don't like it, they could petition the Scottish Government to nationalise the entire fleet of all Loch Ness tour operators (okay, that's a bit tongue in cheek).

For completeness, it looks like there are five cruise companies operating in Loch Ness:

Castle Cruises Loch Ness (http://www.lochnesscruises.com/home.htm)

Cruise Loch Ness (http://www.cruiselochness.com)

Jacobite Cruises (http://www.jacobite.co.uk)
Loch Ness Cruises (http://www.lochness-cruises.com)
Deepscan Cruises (http://www.lochness.com/loch-ness-cruises.htm)

They operate at various points around Loch Ness near Inverness, Abriachan, Drumnadrochit and Fort Augustus. But essentially they are competing against each other since tourists tend to only pick one cruise when they visit the loch. In other words, one cruise company's gain is another's loss.

Such is the world of business at Loch Ness, but going back to the sonar trace itself, what it shows is still the subject of continued controversy. The Dick Raynor link above talks about sonar seeing debris and plankton along the thermocline though he does not explicitly state that this is what Marcus Atkinson saw that day. My own take on that interpretation is what does a sonar hit on the thermocline look like on these cruise boat sonars? Mr. Raynor has been using such devices for a long time and has been collecting various images for years of things that can fool witnesses. Since the thermocline plus debris/plankton/etc is not exactly a rare event, perhaps a picture of his own would help his theory?

It is one thing to theorise, it's another to prove it. I'll admit Nessie cryptozoologists such as myself will not be forthcoming with evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the phenomenon is a particular exotic species but this is also a problem with sceptical interpretations of Loch Ness Monster reports. A theory is proposed but too often no follow through to prove it is undertaken. It is just assumed people will accept it because it is plausible. This is clearly not scientific and leaves things in a suspended state. Understandably, some theories will not be testable due to their nature and people have other priorities and lives to lead. But at the same time the "trust me I am an expert" line is not the way forward.

Proposing makes it plausible, testing makes it probable (or improbable). In general, if it can't be tested, it's not fully scientific.

In contrast, Tony Harmsworth, another seasoned Loch Ness Researcher, is doubtful of the thermocline as a cause if the boat was moored somewhere in Urquhart Bay since the combination of shallow waters and the rush of water from the rivers would disrupt it too much. He goes for a different interpretation such as a layer of fish.

Again, a typical cruise boat image of a shoal of fish for comparison should not be beyond the wit of man. Also, I am not sure fish are known for shoaling in Loch Ness which makes me wonder how diffuse such an image would be in comparison to our strong sonar image here? My other observation is that you will see the presence of crescent-like images around the larger trace in the above sonar image. These shapes are normally indicative of fish, so what is the larger object if those are fish? Admittedly, a clearer image would have helped in this assessment.

However, what the experts are both agreed on are the vagaries of sonar interpretation in Loch Ness and this would seem to be exemplified by their differing views on this image. This has implications for both sides of the Nessie debate.

To wit, if people cannot agree on what they think are common objects, how are they going to fare with uncommon objects? Let me put this another way; if the monster exists, what would its sonar trace look like? I don't know and I bet none of the experts do either. We can guess, but we can never be sure. Though some don't think they need to be sure - they don't believe there can ever be a Loch Ness Monster!

Now getting back to Mr. Atkinson, it's good to get things from the source and so his input is helpful in clarifying matters.

Firstly, he (or his company) did not stir the thing up again. In fact, he says it's "a bit weird that the whole thing has blown up again". He points out that the original story in September 2011 was not given to the papers by him but by monster hunter Steve Feltham. But (in accord with my above bit on business), now that the publicity has come to them, they are not going to turn it away. I don't blame him for that, don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

As regards the sonar trace itself, Marcus says:

"I have always said I don't know what the picture is, and I would like to know."

Something mysterious? Yes. What exactly? That's what everyone has been discussing to no firm conclusion.

Marcus admits he is not an expert but he told me that he has had seven years experience of using the sonar hardware and that means he is no novice either. And with 17,500 miles on the loch clocked up after just three years, he says it is going to be people like him that are more likely to get the unusual sonar hits. In that light, he says he has never seen a trace like it in his time there.

One final point he makes is concerning the thermocline explanation. His colleague went back to the same spot an hour or so later but the contact had gone. I can see his point there. Even if the thermocline varied in intensity, one would still expect to see something there.

But we are not convinced it is the thermocline and so the debate continues.



PREVIOUS BLOGS
More on Nessie Sonar Contact
A Story About Ted Holiday

On This Day

Tim Dinsdale got his famous film of the Loch Ness Monster all those 52 years ago. A lot has happened at Loch Ness due to that one singular event and many lives today would have been completely different if Tim had never made that auspicious trip north. How many would be living near the loch today without that film or would we even have the various Nessie-oriented facilities that are used by so many today?


It also happens by some strange coincidence to be St. George's Day because the patron saint of England also famously pursued and killed his dragon. The story of this brave feat was brought back from the Crusades and some think the story took place in the town of Lydda near modern Tel Aviv. A dragon there had to be offered animal and human sacrifice to allow access to the local water supply. But when the lot fell on the king's daughter, George took up the challenge and after protecting himself with the Sign of the Cross, slew the beast.
Like Tim Dinsdale, this monster hunter's actions also had a significant effect on the local community as they converted to Christianity en masse.
[Image]

The area around Loch Ness was also reputed to be the haunt of the last dragon in Scotland, slain by a Fraser of Glenvackie. Apparently, this dragon was not the same beast as the Each Uisge which haunted the nearby loch, so scope for dragon hunting continues to this day!

More on the Recent Sonar Sighting

The Daily Mail reprises Marcus Atkinson's sonar hit from last year (see link). The interesting piece is a claim by a Simon Boxall of the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton that the trace shows a bloom of algae and zooplankton on the thermocline (the boundary between cold and warmer water layers).

However, I find that explanation a bit unconvincing due to the peaty nature of the loch. Algae need sunlight to photosynthesize and at a depth of 75 feet the loch has essentially become dark. Dick Raynor, who has dived at the loch says at his website that at about 70 feet all light would be lost from the surface when diving.

So, basically, no algae at 75 feet, certainly not enough "in bloom" to register on sonar. Mr. Boxall should think "Loch Ness" and not "English Channel"!

The Sun is also running the story here. Not sure why this is being rerun - it was all publicised back in  September.

A Story about Ted Holiday

Ted (F.W.) Holiday was one of the best known Nessie Hunters but his views on a paranormal Nessie may have earned him a few odd glances. However, he is to me a figure to be respected and I did hold similar views to him once upon a time.

I found this amusing anecdote about him as related by the late Ronnie Bremner, owner of the Loch Ness Monster Exhibition Centre. I would note I never employed the Nessie hunting technique described. How true is the story? Perhaps someone can enlighten us!

Original story is here.

Some years ago I spent an afternoon with the late Mr. Ronnie Bremner, founder and then curator of the Loch Ness Monster Exhibit and Museum in Drumnadrochit, Scotland. He'd overheard me mentioning to another tourist in the museum's gift shop that I had a copy of a book on Nessie written by the equally late Mr. F.W. Holiday. When I was a kid I had a fascination with the Loch Ness Monster and at one point I systematically had gone through the local bookstore's book catalog and had bought a copy of every book then in print on the subject as I could raise the cash.

That book never sold well and by the time I was old enough to finance my own trip to Scotland, it was out of print and considered quite rare. Mr. Bremner took from the fact that I should have a copy of what he called, "the Holiday book" that I must have had a serious interest in the mysteries of Loch Ness so he graced me with the nickel tour of his private collection.

One of the stories he told me was about this Mr. Holiday, who just recently had died. Mr. Bremner said Mr. Holiday was a touch eccentric and completely obsessed with finding Nessie. He apparently believed that the creature had a sort telepathy and could sense when anyone was watching for it. So when he went Nessie-watching, he'd set up his camera and tripod with the lens trained on the loch, then he'd sit down next to it with his back to the water. At irregular intervals, he would snap his head around, hoping to catch a glimpse of Nessie in a moment of inattention.

And if he took the notion to drive around the loch for a while, searching as he drove, he would stand and shout toward the loch, [Scottish Brogue] "Right, I'm giving up the searching now. I'm getting into my car and driving straight away from the loch, so if Nessie should come out now, I'd be far away and have no chance atall to see her." [/Scottish brogue] Then he'd get into his car and spend the rest of the afternoon driving the roads that circle the loch, with one eye on the road and the other trained on the water.

So maybe Mr. F.W. Holiday was just ahead of his time. Maybe he should have been a chupacabra hunter instead.

Loch Ness Trip Report April 2012

I loaded up the car and headed north to Loch Ness on the 6th April with my son in tow as well as various pieces of equipment (which were described in a previous post). The five day weather forecast was pretty variable and so the feeling was that each day had to be taken individually depending on conditions. Nevertheless, the drive up from Edinburgh was pleasant enough and took three and a half hours to Fort Augustus at the southern extremity of the loch.

We turned into the Cumberlands Camp Site and pitched the tent by late afternoon under thankfully a dry sky. We then tucked into a healthy portion of monster hunting food (mince and rice) before going into Fort Augustus to check out the town. It was a strange feeling passing by the old Fort Augustus Abbey which is now residential flats. I remember going into the Abbey in the 1980s when it was still a monastery and looking down the cold, dark corridors that spoke of frugal and devoted lives. The monks were long gone and I wondered if there were new witnesses to the Loch Ness Monster in those rooms or whether their fast, consumer lives precluded such activities?

The town was its usual tourist self as Easter visitors from Britain and the wider world arrived in their cars and coaches. That is one aspect of Loch Ness that won't be changing anytime soon. A visit to a local shop betrayed the new Nessie-speak as two sceptical books by Adrian Shine and Tony Harmsworth lay side by side on the shelf competing with one another for the tourist pound. One other book took a more mysterious approach to the loch and I wondered which of the three was more likely to be bought by tourists to aid their journey.

At this point, we then headed off to the loch via a quieter route past the camping site and on to the bridge overlooking the River Tarff. The word "Tarff" is Gaelic for "Bull" and I have mused in the past whether there is a reference there to the old water-bull legends that once held the locals in awe of the place. However, the modern soon overtook the ancient as a powerful odor assailed our nostrils as we walked along the river to Loch Ness. But it was not the sulfurous stench of aquatic demons, but the unappealing whiff of the local sewage works.

Holding our noses we pressed onto Borlum Bay and walked along its shingle beaches. The loch was now before us and opened up into a grand vista that stretched northwards to the distant horizon. The hunt was now on but what were the chances of anything presenting itself to view over the next few days? Statistically, some have suggested an average of 300+ hours of quality surveillance but in reality people have sighted the beast on their first visit while others continue to wait after decades of watching. By the very nature of the mystery I knew the odds were stacked against us, but if you don't go and look, the probability of seeing anything is exactly zero.

Presently, we came upon a fire fuelled by various pieces of driftwood and engaged some anglers in conversation. They were there to hopefully catch some trout but also get ahead of the various fishing clubs that would soon descend upon the loch. Apparently, the catch is not so good once these clubs have had their way with the loch. I asked one man whether he had seen anything bigger in the loch (i.e. the Monster), but he said he didn't believe there was anything in the loch. At this point he told me that he had watched a documentary on TV which stated that only 24 tonnes of fish were in it - not enough for Loch Ness Monsters. I was tempted to correct him on a few matters related to fish stocks and predators but decided to just leave on amicable terms. As we walked along the beach and past some very Nessie-like pieces of driftwood the sky began to darken and the only long necked creatures on display were the slow moving white swans standing out against the dark waters.

We soon arrived at the spot on the beach where in 1934 Margaret Munro claimed to have seen the Loch Ness Monster lying on the beach from her employers' house. I took some footage and pictures and will use those for a future posting but again there was that sense of standing on Loch Ness History. Had a long necked creature of thirty feet or more really lounged 78 years before on the very spot I now stood on? If it had happened yesterday, I would be looking for anything that looked like a DNA sample. Back then, her employers could only visit the beach and note the unusually large depression in the shingle.

Trudging back to camp, I settled down to read a book perfectly suited to the Monster Hunt, "The Great Orm of Loch Ness" by Ted Holiday. In my opinion, no book better captures the romanticism and mystique of the Loch and its legendary inhabitant. As I considered my own current trip in a cold tent on a dark evening, I empathised with Holiday as he took us through his own expeditions of the early 1960s with their cold nights on the beach and the lonely vigils during the long Scottish Summer evenings. His first visit in 1962 ended with a hump sighting at Foyers, I wondered if I would have such a stroke of luck or be forced again to admit the loch does not give up its secrets so easily.

With day dawning on Saturday, the first task was to install the trap camera at a suitably quiet spot. This time I was more minded to place it near river mouths where the creature is reputed to chase its food but nothing suitable was forthcoming in the short time available, so I left it strapped to a tree at a previous spot to be picked up again in two days. Having armed the camera to snap anything that moved within 50 feet of it, I stopped off at the shop run by the Hargreaves who had a sighting of the creature last Summer. One of the witnesses gave some details and she also drew what she saw (which I shall post in due time). Apparently, since the sighting got such large publicity, they regularly get lots of enquires about it, more than they can handle!

In the afternoon, we headed to the village of Bunloit near Drumnadrochit to ascend Meall Fuar-mhonaidh, the highest point around Loch Ness at about 2100 feet. It was a battle between us and snow, bog and rocks but we got to the summit two hours later and were rewarded with a superb view of Loch Ness from Fort Augustus in the south up to the north end and beyond to the Moray Firth. Legend has it that a small loch near the summit is unfathomable (perhaps Loch Nam Breac Dearga) and that once a stick thrown into it appeared some days later in the River Ness. Such were the local tales of underground caverns and channels, but this was not some ultimate water funnel ride we were about to test so we pressed on back downhill while the weather was still dry and on our side. Modern technology intruded again as I managed to make a mobile phone call back home from this most barren of landscapes!

When we got back nearer to sea level, food was more on our minds than monsters and after such ardour I was not particularly minded to cook and so we drifted over to the restaurant run by the Drumnadrochit Hotel. This is just beside the Loch Ness Centre which runs an exhibition designed by Adrian Shine and emphasises the complete story of the loch rather than just its famous resident. I often wonder what tourists expect to see when they go in - a 100% Nessie presentation or something more balanced? I found out just before this that almost 300,000 visitors went through its doors in one recent year. I reckoned that was a turnover of nearly £1.5 million, who said cryptozoology didn't make money? But then again, how much has that exhibition got to do with cryptozoology? But thanks to the vagaries of free enterprise and competition, there is the Nessieland Castle Monster Centre just down the road which proclaims that "We believe in the Monster!". So you can check up on food chains and plankton at one exhibition and then check out the plesiosaurs in the other. Personally, I think I prefer something in between - but they were both closed anyway.

After battling Meall Fuar-mhonaidh, I woke up on Sunday feeling the worse for wear but we got moving eventually and headed for a gentler walk by Alltsigh Burn (just north of Invermoriston). This river has some odd stories attached to it (as I outline in my book) and so I was keen to take a closer look as its torrents plunged down in spate towards the loch. There have been some good sightings of the monster at this river mouth and perhaps it is worthy of closer attention in the future. The Youth Hostel beside it also brought back memories as the place I stayed at during my cycling visits of the 1980s.

Moving south, it was famous Nessie places again as I stopped first opposite the Horseshoe Scree where Torquil MacLeod had his well known sighting of the monster in 1960. As I trained my binoculars on that feature one mile away (pictured below), I tried to put myself in the place of Torquil and what he described that day. As I sized up the scale of the trees and the various boats that passed near its shore, I realised how inadequate the various goats and boats explanations were that attempted to discredit this event, but that is for another day and another posting.

After some more watching of the loch and its whipped surface, we headed back for pasta carbonara via the small burn where Jean MacDonald and Patricia Harvey claimed to have seen a large creature hastening past them on a brilliant moonlit night in 1934. With the food finished, we headed out on the evening road back to Drumnadrochit to attend the evening worship at the local presbyterian church. Afterwards, the minister confessed he had not seen any monster in sixteen years to which I half-seriously suggested that sixteen years was not long enough. We then discussed other incredible subjects such as the Edinburgh Trams project finishing on time and under budget, but even I have my limits of credulity and suggested that to err was human, but to forgive was divine.

It was again darkening nicely over Loch Ness, so it was time to deploy the night vision equipment. We pulled in at the same layby that was opposite the Horseshoe Scree and brought out the tripod, IR binoculars, cables and recording devices. The rain was gently falling so I used the opened tailgate of my car as a shelter for the equipment and trained it on the loch. I connected the laptop to the video out port of the binoculars and used the video capture software to set the correct focus. I could have done this looking through the eyepiece but there is a greater latitude for error here as the brightness of the eyepiece can dazzle the eyes which are now accustomed to the night light levels. By using the laptop, one is assured that the device is recording the correct scene.

As I surveyed the darkening loch, I recalled Ted Holiday's words about how the loch was a place best left alone at night and wondered what use he and other famous monster hunters would have made of the technology that is now available to modern Nessie hunters. In olden times, this was the hour of the Water Kelpie, but I pressed on regardless of any supposed demons out there. The loch was dark and it was now difficult to make out features on its surface with the naked eye but the night scope was relaying a good picture to the laptop and anything which broke surface would have registered nicely. I put the IR illuminating laser on but I did not notice a discernable difference on the display which I put down to the large distances involved.

At the start of the watch, I tried out the mini-DVR with its motion detection capability and left it to run for a bit. A walk in front of the binoculars and the record LED lit up on the DVR and I knew it was active. A clip is shown below which I felt was a better quality to the experiment I tried at Dores last October, but the light levels may have been different. I also think the recorded feed to the laptop was of a better yet quality.



However, I had a slight problem. If a black hump or head and neck broke the surface, would the mini-DVR go into record mode? It was correctly remaining inactive in response to the numerous waves rippling across the loch but there was a bit of a chicken and egg issue here since I required Nessie to surface in order to calibrate the device in order to record her in the first place! I could not even rely on a similar sized boat passing by since there is no boat traffic at night time on Loch Ness. I was beginning to think the mini-DVR was more a device to be combined with a daytime camcorder or settle for continuous record at night time. With some more recording on the devices done, we headed back to camp along the now lonely stretches of dark roads.

Monday came and it was time to pack up the tent. I don't know how fitfully the intrepid monster hunters of old slept in the wild, but I don't think I will ever get used to this less than superior form of sleeping. We then headed up along the south side of the loch to retrieve the trap camera and take it home. It was still there after two days but I had the feeling that a more secure way of setting up these cameras was necessary as, given enough time, it would surely be spotted and stolen. On the way back, I stopped off at the spot where Lachlan Stuart took his famous photograph of three triangular humps in 1951. This is another Nessie picture that has been dissed by the critics from day one but I shall put something out on the blog in due course.

By now rare sunshine had given way to rain as we approached Fort Augustus for one final time. The car tank was topped up and we headed back south to the big city. Unlike Ted Holiday and 1962, we did not spot the "Orm" as he called it. The images from the trap camera and night vision may yet show something but the assumption is they will not and the hunt will resume again for myself and others as a hopefully hot summer unfolds before us in the months ahead.