Unusual Footprint

[anthony62]

Good morning,
Hope these photos are viewable, they were taken last Wednesday in SE Qld,near Toowoomba. The print is obviously a left foot and was discovered when as is my habit, inspecting the area for fauna so as to set up my camera.
The area is isolated and is not frequented.
I have previously visited this area just for walks and have not experienced anything out of the ordinary.

Cheers

16864994_1311002538983567_2963621021353982156_n.jpg

[gregvalentine]

Good morning,
Hope these photos are viewable, they were taken last Wednesday in SE Qld,near Toowoomba. The print is obviously a left foot and was discovered when as is my habit, inspecting the area for fauna so as to set up my camera.
The area is isolated and is not frequented.
I have previously visited this area just for walks and have not experienced anything out of the ordinary.

Cheers

16864994_1311002538983567_2963621021353982156_n.jpg

I'm straining to observe anything identifiable. Perhaps the photos do not do it justice (after all, I wasn't there), or could it be simply something more mundane?

[adventurer]

I can see the outline there, and is is a long foot, looks good to me. It is so difficult isnt it. Ron and i came across 1 last week, but not sure if its a foot print or erosion??

[Simon M]

The outline is visible but indistinct in the photos - but you can see how massive the prints are. Just don't go back there on your own!

[Wolf]

Sorry, but both images do not have the characteristics of prints to my eye.
Adventurer's print is erosion from fast running water in the deepest part of the eroded trail (the feet are pointing downhill, correct?)
and Anthony's has no depth compared to surrounding substrate as would be indicative of an animal. Neither has it a remotely correct shape of a hominid foot.
Thanks for posting though, you could have found something.

[anthony62]

No, no run off whatsoever, photos were taken on top of a ridgeline,no slope and level ground. Ground is hard as due to lack of rain.

[ChrisV]

I can see the outline faintly in the dry ground.
Any others around? I imagine there has been no rain for a while and they were probably done sometime ago.

[DaveR]

I can see the outline faintly in the dry ground.
Any others around? I imagine there has been no rain for a while and they were probably done sometime ago.

Agree. I can see a faint outline too. I appreciate how dificult it is to photograph these things. Looks very weathered. Would have been very interesting fresh.

[TrevorPeters]

No, no run off whatsoever, photos were taken on top of a ridge-line,no slope and level ground. Ground is hard as due to lack of rain.

The ground may have been hard when the impression (of whatever it was) was made, but there has certainly been rain since.

This can be seen in the first photograph particularly well.

1. In the area above the suspected impression there is a splatter pattern typically left by a slight rain shower in dust.
2. In the area of the suspected impression you can see cracking as typically occurs when wet mud dries.

From the limited views it does not appear to have been more than a slight shower with no run-off, however, Wolf's comment was in regard to the other image of a deep foot-shaped hole posted by Adventurer.

[anthony62]

I can see the outline faintly in the dry ground.
Any others around? I imagine there has been no rain for a while and they were probably done sometime ago.

Yes I agree the print is reasonably weathered, unfortunately no others in the immediate area due to the the surrounds being predominately leaf debris. The terrain drops off sharply to boulder fields and a traversable dry creek bed which may warrant closer inspection.

[Dion]

Nature provides conditions for many alternate ways of looking at thing much like pareidolia you will see what you want to see.

[Simon M]

I can see the outline faintly in the dry ground.
Any others around? I imagine there has been no rain for a while and they were probably done sometime ago.

Agree. I can see a faint outline too. I appreciate how dificult it is to photograph these things. Looks very weathered. Would have been very interesting fresh.

Sometimes things don't photograph very well, so I accept the original posters' statement that these were a series of tracks. I'm not expert enough to judge what they are or aren't based on those pictures alone.

I've seen a heck of a lot of variety in plaster casts made from the (alleged) footprints of these things; if there are different types of them which vary in size then they may have differing foot shapes, etc.

Some interesting articles about Sasquatch feet -

http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigf ... uatch-foot

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... t-anatomy/

[Simon M]

Another interesting one!

http://www2.isu.edu/~meldd/fxnlmorph.html