Friday, 18 December 2020

An Article on Sandy and Hugh Gray

 


Nessie enthusiasts will know about the first photograph of the Loch Ness Monster taken by Hugh Gray in November 1933. This blog has also covered the sightings claimed by his brother, Sandy Gray. But a fuller account of Sandy Gray and events mainly around the Foyers area of Loch Ness has been written by journalist and author, Paul Brown.

I helped Paul with a few questions regarding his article and I commend his article to readers interested in Sandy Gray and various events that surrounded Loch Ness in those late months of 1933. You can access his article here. There you can also find a "Listen" button if you prefer audio.


The author can be contacted at lochnesskelpie@gmail.com


41 comments:

  1. Fantastic article, Roland!...fills in a lot of holes in the narrative...thank you, and Merry Christmas to you and all your regulars.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great read! I think Sandy's idea to use bait is basically sound. I'm of course against any fishing or harming of the LNM, but maybe one could use fish chum to lure it up for a photo? :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's sound enough from someone who was an experienced angler. The arch-sceptic Ronald Binns libels Sandy Gray by claiming without the slightest shred of proof that this proved Sandy was a hoaxer.

      Delete
    2. I think bait has been tried before on various occasions to lure the monster. Even so far as some wizard trying to use his mojo to summon the beast from the depths. I believe some joker even tried some sex pheromones from some animal or another, maybe reptile or amphibian as an aphrodisiac to lure a lovelorn Nessie to the surface. LOL

      Delete
    3. That "joker" was Robert Rines..."Not the type to swat away the unconventional, Rines employed eclectic methods in his search. In the book Search at Loch Ness, which documents a highly-publicized 1976 hunt, Dennis L. Meredith writes that Rines had spent part of one summer trying to ply the animal with tempting smells and sounds:

      “There were sex glands of eels, sea cows, sea lions; there were substances known to attract fish; and there were tapes of various sea animal sounds to be fed into underwater speakers.”"

      Delete
    4. LOL Yeah, I couldn't remember who it was or where I read that. There were also plans for biopsying the creature by Roy Mackal. And, I think Tim Dinsdale was armed with a biopsy dart gun. The only problem with that scheme is getting close enough to do it and as we all know, that's pretty damned impossible!

      Delete
    5. And just to add to the unconventional thinking of Rines, I believe he had also planned on using Dolphins rigged with cameras and/or biopsy gear to home in on a Nessie. If I can remember correctly that plan was scrapped after one of the Dolphins became ill.

      Delete
  3. That photo of Hugh Grey still seems to be taken of a large eel to me!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, given the long sinewy shape it does seem to give that impression. Some interpretations also indicate some kind of appendages or flippers/fins. Eels don't have rear fins though. Either that, or a giant snake! Of all the old classic photos, I consider that one as the most likely genuine of showing some unusual creature. Too bad there was no wide shot showing foreground or background land features to give it context and scale.

      Delete
    2. Just curious if they caught a very large eel, say 20-30 feet long, would that be enough Nessie for all here, or just not exotic enough?

      Delete
    3. The head is eel like, but that's about it.

      Delete
    4. If a 30ft eel was caught in Loch Ness it would be hard to look beyond such a specimen. However, nothing more than four feet has been caught in terms of eels.

      Delete
    5. Nope, not for me it wouldn't. A giant 30 ft eel would be exotic enough, but wouldn't fit the typical Nessie mold. i.e. bulky body, long neck, small head. No cigar!

      Delete
    6. I don't know GB, if the reference is to the Gray photo, how anyone can discern a head within all that blur is just fanciful speculation. How does one reconcile seeing a big head when surely the prevailing eyewitness record is of the long neck, small head variety, the standard and typical model for the LNM. Unless, as some readers on here have suggested, a different creature other than the plesiosaur-like Nessie. No long neck, small head, no LNM in my humble opinion.

      Delete
    7. Maybe thats because there are thousands of 4ft eels in loch ness and maybe only one or two giant ones.

      Delete
    8. That is my thought, as there only has to be a few monster sized ones!

      Delete
    9. I'm recalling that the passengers in the story, on the bus "saw an unusual creature with a “big head” frolicking in the water." What the heck is going on here! Could they have just meant a long neck and head? Oh boy...

      Delete
    10. Thought they said a Bus sized eel? Could there be a few really big eels, and also some really big amphibians co existing in the Loch?

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. No, you must be thinking about the Bus sized something seen off of Dores a couple months ago, which the witness said looked like a giant eel.

      Delete
    13. You are correct! Thought was in Loch Ness? Still think that a giant Eel would solve many issues, and the Dna testing seems to support that for Nessie!

      Delete
    14. More than 1 species of large animal folks.
      Planbeck does the grey photo good.

      Delete
  4. I added a line to highlight you can listen to the story on audio too.

    ReplyDelete
  5. History Channel's MonsterQuest just had what I think is a new episode on lake monsters, with their major theory being these could be land locked normally saltwater Conger eels that grew to 30+ feet because they focus their energy on growth rather than mating. Usual bait and switch approach where divers are sent to investigate lakes where sensors indicated something, but ultimately nothing really found or proven. Still doesn't explain the long-necked creatures associated with Loch Ness, Lake Champlain and others. Merry Christmas!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL Olrik All these types of "In search of" never come to any definite conclusion.

      Delete
    2. That would fit for a majority of so called lake monsters sightings in colder climate lakes!

      Delete
  6. This was the MonsterQuest episode in question:
    https://foxsylvania.blog/2020/08/31/serpentine-creatures-on-monsterquest/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are they doing new shows, or are those repeats from Monster Quest done years ago?

      Delete
    2. New, other episodes so far on large unknown cats in the US and, of course, Bigfoot; nothing new found in any of them...

      Delete
    3. Hope that they get to my neck of the woods her ein Michigan, and relook for the Dogman! Just watched History channel do 6 hours on Rosewell, and nothing new to report there either!

      Delete
    4. Yes, I watched the Roswell mini series too and was disappointed...

      Delete
  7. Merry Christmas or Holiday Greetings. What ever is your preference.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Its cold here in LA. Hope Steve Feltham is OK in his Shack "Down by the river" Just kidding Steve.

    ReplyDelete
  9. A Merry Christmas to one and all!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Merry Christmas (Nessmas? ;)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Merry Christmas one and all! You to Nessie...an enduring legend as old as St. Nick.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Easy on the eggnog John,you might see "Bobby"!
      Cheers

      Delete
    2. LOL Merry Christmas to you john

      Delete
  12. Interesting article; nice find Roland. A question or two: I've probably read dozens of versions of the Saint Columba story, but I don't ever remember seeing the location described as "the Lake of the River Ness"; it is usually the River Ness.

    If this is accurate (and some of this article clearly is not) and this did happen in the Lake/Loch that changes things for all the people who debunk the Columba "sighting" because it happened in the River Ness.

    On the other side of the equation, there is this bit, which seems to explain away a lot of sightings if one were to be so inclined. I have never read about these currents before, but have read several sightings that describe something that could be riding these currents and not an animate object:

    "After several miles, the barrel changed direction and began to move back up toward Foyers. Sandy’s experience on the loch meant that he was familiar with its changing currents, which moved in opposite directions, often in defiance of the prevailing winds".

    Merry Christmas to all still reading...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You might mean still standing. I'm Drunk as hell. 3:37 PST Oy vey

      Delete
  13. Crap! Did I say something stupid...again Senior moment. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

    ReplyDelete