Steppin' Out (Of Frame): Was Bigfoot's Leg Captured on a Trailcam? Or..

Steppin’ Out (Of Frame): Was Bigfoot’s Leg Captured on a Trailcam? Or..


In the latest “almost got ‘im” Sasquatch news, this newly released trail cam image is the cause of some chattering in the Bigfoot hunting community, with many believers saying that the big hairy leg on the left hand side belongs to a North American Man-Ape… but I think it’s something else.

Despite the date stamped on the image, the trail cam photo was snapped in September of 2012, though was wasn’t made public until it was posted on The Weather Network this April. The details that surround the image are unfortunately scarce, as the man who posted the snapshop, Ken Cook, only stated that the photo was from Grand Rapids, Manitoba.

His original post:



The definition on the leg is pretty well defined, enough to guess that it’s some kind of leg without seeing the rest of the creature. Some Bigfoot hunters are saying that the image is just too good, and that something about it is off. Others are guessing the leg actually belongs to a hairy human, because Bigfoot has killer thighs and this just doesn’t cut it.

Guys, how come no one has suggested the obvious compromise yet? It’s totally a werewolf. Lest you think I’m kidding, note that they’ve been known to stalk the Canadian wilderness.

What do you think of the mysterious trailcam photo? Is it Bigfoot? Is it a werewolf? Or is it just some hairy naked dude out for a woodland stroll at night (totally a werewolf)? Share your thoughts with us on Facebook, on twitter @WhoForted, or in the comments below!


Join the Traveling Museum of the Paranormal and get awesome perks!


  1. Marc

    05/14/2013 at 11:50 AM


  2. Marc

    05/14/2013 at 11:51 AM

    I should add: How awesome would it have been to post a full-frontal Bigfoot picture?

    • Coppertop

      05/14/2013 at 1:11 PM

      Oh lord.

      “Ladies. Gentlemen. I offer you – you elite, chosen few – a rare glimpse of Bigfoot’s dick.”

  3. Henry

    05/14/2013 at 2:35 PM

    So Rick Dyer’s girlfriend doesn’t shave her legs.

    Seriously though, where is a photo the same scene taken without the leg for reference?
    And why does no one think that matters? Unless of course they are perpetrating a hoax.

    • Coppertop

      05/14/2013 at 5:21 PM

      The sad thing about hoaxers – and I’m not saying this /is/ a hoax, I’m merely talking from personal experience – is that they’re not too bright. They spend all their time, resources, energy and effort into creating a believable (or semi-believable) hoax in the first place, then leave out a critical step that somehow damns them. Usually it’s research – hair on Bigfoot’s face, stone type of the surrounding area, etc – but sometimes it’s just something simple that stands out jarringly.

  4. Cassandra

    05/15/2013 at 8:49 AM

    It’s just a tree…not a leg. Well edited shot, though. Should convince most “true believers.”

    • alanborky

      05/15/2013 at 2:20 PM

      I half agree with you Cassandra.

      The bottom half up to the ‘knee’ looks like a tree to me while the upper ‘animal’ half doesn’t correspond to the overall lighting of the rest of the image and appears photoshopped on.

      Taking it on face value though I agree with Greg if it’s anything real it’s almost certainly not a Sasquatch not even a juvenile but some sort of were critter quite possibly but not necessarily a werewolf.

      Just as my working position’s there’re tribes of Sasquatch out there another working position I have’s there’re also tribes of shapeshifters out there and for obvious reasons they usually find it far easier to come and go undetected than Sasquatch.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login