I figured it out; actually, I went, with the assistance of a friend, to
www.photobucket.com. Here are four pictures from several that I took while visiting with Bulletmaker and Fireman at B.M.'s place on Spencer Creek--which creek flows into Oolagah Lake in Eastern Oklahoma. I regret that we have lost the much debated picture that was posted above. (To enlarge these pictures, click on them and then hit the little doohicky up by the "x" in the corner--but you computer guys probably know that.)
\
These were taken at the spot where B.M.'s photo was taken. And I find them instructive and the locale of considerable interest. Spencer Creek crosses the black-topped road on which B.M.'s place fronts and circles north and west across his property to Corps land where it enters the lake. At the spot where the B.M. photo was snapped, the creek has a south to north orientation, but, shortly after passing the game camera's location, it bends to the west. This takes the creek around a cultivated field. (T's.g. refers to it as "the hidden bean field.")
We were on the east edge of this field--we had a barrel fire going--just a short distance from the creek when I smelled that "wet horse" for a few moments. (I've posted 'bout this before.) It was where the creek crosses the section road one mile west of the above mentioned black-topped road that we, T.'s.g., D.G., and I, heard the footsteps in the water. (I've posted 'bout this before.) Other "activity" has been reported round about the "hidden bean field." (I think they call it the "hidden bean field" because it generally isn't visible until you get to it. B.M. sometimes has a deer feeder located there.)
Photo One: This picture was taken from the field road which follows the timber around the field. It shows B.M. looking toward the place on the creek where the game camera was located. Note the large tree to his left. The camera was attached with a bungee cord to one of the smaller trees to his right.
Photo Two: This picture was taken from down under the bank--the reverse of Photo One. It shows B.M. looking down into the creek and Fireman pointing toward a tree which leans toward the creek. Note the two straight trees just past him. B.M. thought that the leaning tree was the one to which the camera was attached. (I say thought because he was not 100% certain. Remember, he did not realize that an image had been captured by the camera when he retrieved it. He did not take notes. It wasn't until the film was developed that the importance of details of the scene was recognized.) When I visited the scene with B.M., T's.g., and D.G.--Wasn't it a good time when we could all get together?--I remember that the tree pointed out to me at that time was a larger, straight-standing tree, perhaps the smaller of the two trees to F.M.'s left.
Photo Three: This picture shows the base of the large oak tree seen in the previous two photos. Note the texture of the bark. Especially note the directions of the striations in the bark at various places. Note that the striations on the large root on the opposite, north side of the tree angled downward from left to right.
Photo Four: This picture shows F.M. standing beside the leaning tree looking at a copy of the B.M. photo and facing east toward the creek. Note the low water level.
My working theory is that the camera, at the time that the photo was snapped, was pointed north down the creek. The dark area to the critter's left is the base of the large oak tree. With the camera pointed down the creek, the sky would have been visible over the critter's right shoulder. I do not believe that the camera was tilted; that is, the camera was more or less level on its transverse axis. It may have had the lens pointed upward or downward.
There is just one problem: the striations in the bark in the photo are not vertical as on the trunk of the tree but angled downward from left to right as they are on the large root pointed out above. If the critter was standing next to that root, it could not have been much more than 24 inches tall! A large Beaver??? But the critter may not have been standing next to that root: it may have been standing closer to the camera. If the critter was close to the camera, if the camera was angled just right, it could have caught the critter and the root in a perspective that makes the critter and the root appear to be the same size. (Remember that photo of the Texas Jack Rabbit wherein the hung-up Rabbit looks as big as the man with the skinning knife. That picture was taken with the Jack Rabbit much closer to the camera than the man but with the point of the man's knife lined up perfectly with the much closer Jack Rabbit.)
On the day that these pictures were taken, it was cold--note the clothing--and I did not think that my camera was functioning properly. We made attempts to duplicate the image using F.M. next to the tree, but we did not really get a good duplication. We curtailed the picture taking and looked for a warm place.
I made one intriguing observation: There is a natural "switchback" route up out of the creek to the field. Just to the right of F.M. in Photo Four, the creek bank is only a few feet above the creek bed. If the reports of how Big Feet can step over fences and leap up embankments are true, one would have no trouble coming up out of the creek at this point. Now look at Photo two. One of the big hairy guys could, after reaching F.M.'s level with ease, walk north toward the large oak tree, circle around the tree, and walk back south to B.M.'s level--which would put it at the edge of the field. With the amount of leaf cover on the ground as there was when I was there, it could do so without leaving much in the way of tracks.
If B.M. or someone else is interested in this site, I would suggest placing a game camera on the east side of the creek pointed at this natural "switchback" up out of the creek on its west side--and then stay away from the locale as much as possible. This during times that the creek is low. No tellin' what might show up on a roll of film!!!
I remain where I was with respect to B.M.'s photo: I can't say it is a Big Foot. I can't say that it isn't. It might be a Beaver. But it might be one of the big hairy guys.
