Unidentified? Nah, we’ve seen this before.
It is unclear if this is an unverified picture of a “Bigfoot.” It was recently discovered on a “trail cam” placed in the nearby mountains.
It was surprising, to say the least, when I discovered the image on the camera’s disc. What in the world can this be?
Carefully scrutinizing the image, it appears that the right arm shows fingers as the animal grasps the base of the tree stump. It also has elongated feet similar to a man’s appendages. Its fur is matted on the back but thin on the arms and legs. Unfortunately, the head and face are not shown by the image taken.
There is no information about exactly where it was found or comparison with other pictures on the trail cam. The comments to his piece note as does the author that it is WELL ESTABLISHED that bears are here and that is a bait stump for bear. This bear looks young, thin, and may have mange which makes it look different from the big fuzzball bear we are used to. It’s somewhat like the why-won’t-this-silly-idea-die Jacobs photo (The case of the acrobatic bear (or juvenile Sasquatch) . Not a juvenile Bigfoot. This certainly looks like an animal that walks on four legs, not two. I don’t see the detail that the author sees. But, when I see brown hairy thing in forest on four legs, I think “Bear” not “Bigfoot”.
I really do think these photos with just the right parts obscured are deliberately touted as “bigfoot” pics when the people with the camera know damn well they are not.