- Bigfoot backers treated much like flying
saucer believers at Hillsboro
Published: June 1, 2002
By STEVE FOX
Of the News-Register
HILLSBORO - Ray Crowe is still
waiting for his big moment.
The Hillsboro resident, director
of the International Bigfoot Society, attracted
few hundred fellow bigfoot
believers to the Washington County
The 10th annual conference,
including speakers, films, artifacts and
memorabilia, was tucked away in a
small, dark building in the middle of the
grounds. A dog show drew bigger
crowds and the gem sale had top billing on the
But that didn't deter bigfoot
enthusiasts - witnesses and wannabe witnesses
Crowe is leader of the pack and an
He was a self-described naturalist
when he was invited on a bigfoot seeking
adventure in 1991. He saw tracks
and collected 8 1/2-inch red hairs - a major
coup for his first time out.
But he wasn't sold on bigfoot from
the start. He said it often takes people a
while to overcome the grocery
store tabloids that make bigfoot out to a be a
"It gives the ordinary person the
impression we're all nuts," Crowe said. "There's
nothing we can do. The only thing
we could do is come up with a body."
That isn't so easy.
Finding a body or capturing a
bigfoot has proved difficult. Some at the
conference were even so bold to
say the government doesn't want to see it
Why would the government care? "It
would put the spotted owl issue to shame,"
Displays during the two-day
conference described bigfoot as a creature up to 8
feet in height and 400 pounds in
Yet, he's elusive. That's why the
International Bigfoot Society has field
Roland A. Wolfe of Idaho, who
wears an official field researcher badge from the
Bigfoot Research Organization,
said he concentrates his searches in Idaho,
Eastern Washington and Eastern
Oregon. He said the Blue Mountains are a hot
Looking at stacks of books lined
up on a table during the conference, he
recommended one: "North America's
Great Ape: The Sasquatch," by John A.
Bindernagel. Wolfe called it the
bible of bigfoot books.
As North Bend's Gordon
Strasenburgh drew the attention of about 150 to the
famed Patterson/Gmilin film from
1967, a few stragglers examined castings and
other displays. The most
definitive film known shows a hair-covered beast
ambling across a dry, rocky river
bed near Bluff Creek, Calif.
While it hasn't been officially
disproved, most are still skeptical.
It's similar to the 1950 flying
saucer photos in Yamhill County. They draw some
serious backers, but most brush it
Several conference attendees used
the opportunity to share stories of sightings.
Others sought those lucky enough
to have had sightings.
Crowe has not had a sighting. He's
investigated several, however.
He remembered one in the early
1990s, soon after starting the International
Bigfoot Society, from south of
"Almost anywhere you go you'll
find reports," Crowe said. "Anywhere you don't
find reports, it's because there's
no one there to report them."
The bonus, according to Crowe, is
that bigfoot research is done outdoors. And,
not just outdoors, but mostly in
remote Northwest woodlands.
Even if he doesn't spot bigfoot,
find tracks or discover long red hair samples, he
can live by the common theme of
all who seek the mysterious beast: Any day
searching for bigfoot is better
than a day at work.
The News-Register of Jan. 18,
1978, included a brief story on a reported bigfoot
sighting near Newberg. Crowe said
he doesn't know of any official bigfoot field
researcher in Yamhill County,
The Molalla River area has been a
recent hotbed for sightings in Oregon, along
with sections of the Columbia
River Gorge in Multnomah County and
less-populated parts of Clackamas
Middle school science teacher Thom
Powell of Portland took his turn at the
podium during the international
conference. He lightened the mood, but got his
point across: He's a believer.
He also wants some changes to the
bigfoot culture, including no longer
capitalizing the word. He said
that's like capitalizing the word deer.
Even better, according to Powell,
would be using the terms sasquatch or wildmen.
While the conference attracted its
share of oddballs, there was a serious tone to
many, even if Harry and the
Hendersons posters were included in the displays.
- Okay, I asked this same question in Oregon Hauntings, but I will post it here
as well. These guys with the BFRO for the most part believe in the Patterson/
Gimlim film being actual footage of a bigfoot. Yet these same guys go
hunting for him and collect long reddish hairs along side the places they get
footprint casts. Now when I watched the Patterson film, it looked to me that
the animal/creature/man in a suit was black or very dark brown in coat...not
reddish. Do you feel this is further evidence of the film being a hoax? Or is it
just a different color bigfoot? I lean more on the hoax side of it and wonder
why the BFRO guys all stand by it when they collect evidence to the contrary.
- -I still don't know what to think of the Gimlin footage. Very well could be a hoax, it all seems so convenient, on
the other hand, it was a hell of a lot of work to lug all that equipment around back then. We're not talking about
a relatively lightweight video camera, but heavy awkard film equipment. And the suit as well. Plus the risk of
being shot at by someone. Add to that all the personal intrigue of who said what, their relationship, etc. Who
But I think it's just a variation. You bring up a good point. The white bigfoots intrigue me; and there's a lot of
paranormal stuff going on with white or light colored BFs, or out of place bipeds. So is it a mundane physical
difference, or something more? If it's something more, then why are these BF researchers, like the BFRO, so
against hearing anything about the high strangeness cases of BF, like UFOs, etc?
Come on over to "out of place bipeds" and ask your question! :)
-- In debunkingdebunkers@y..., zen_witch <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> Okay, I asked this same question in Oregon Hauntings, but I will post it here
> as well. These guys with the BFRO for the most part believe in the Patterson/
> Gimlim film being actual footage of a bigfoot. Yet these same guys go
> hunting for him and collect long reddish hairs along side the places they get
> footprint casts. Now when I watched the Patterson film, it looked to me that
> the animal/creature/man in a suit was black or very dark brown in coat...not
> reddish. Do you feel this is further evidence of the film being a hoax? Or is it
> just a different color bigfoot? I lean more on the hoax side of it and wonder
> why the BFRO guys all stand by it when they collect evidence to the contrary.