Bigfoot Pictures

This impressive picture was obtained by Ron Petersen, our newest Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies
team investigator, on March 13, 2009 in the front range of Colorado near Pikes Peak.

This shows what we believe is a Sasquatch hiding from Ron after he found its footprints in the snow. Ron also was able to smell the culprit as it hid from him, so he knew it was close by and snapped this photo before he felt the need to leave. He said the smell was very sulfur, like in nature and strong.

Bigfoot Picture With Pointers

This new evidence was recently discovered and is highlighted in this photo for your review. There appear to be multiple Sasquatches in this photo.

Clearly, a whole arm is present separate from the Sasquatch in the center. The arm is bent the wrong way to belong to the individual on the ground. You can see the hand and elbow as well.

The one on the ground is in what I would consider in a birthing type position with the feet forward. You can clearly see the foot at an angle and the black toe nail on one of the digits against the Aspen tree. The thing that is so compelling is how well they blend into their environment in the day time.

The foot design appears very similar to ours, except the black toe nails and fingernails are more similar to those found in the ape family. This evidence clearly shows we are dealing with something different and new. We are excited to bring you this evidence. We hope you enjoy it. Comments are appreciated.

This photo is compelling to me on many levels. This photo originates from an area I know very well. I have had my own
experiences in this area. I saw a Sasquatch myself just south of this well over 10 years ago.

The body shape and head remind me of what I saw long ago. The one I saw was black with black eyes. This one is black as well, but what I find intriguing is how well it blends in. It appears frosted, which is significant since most of our hair samples are gray. Black with frosted gray highlights would be great camouflage in this area in day light and night time conditions.

It is also hunkered down attempting to hide, which is classic Sasquatch behavior. They immolate stones and stumps when some one gets too close some times.

The above photo is grainy because it was pulled out of the image below. When you follow the footprints, they lead to the top left of the picture. So the above picture zooms in to the area where the bigfoot was headed (marked by the red box). Note how the tracks are next to large trees, which they use to hide.

Bigfoot Picture Of Footprint Trackline

Bigfoot Footprint Picture from Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies
Here’s a closeup of one of the footprints, which Ron reported were approximately 19″ long and 8″ wide. By comparison, you can see Ron’s footprint on the bottom of the photo, from a size 10 shoe.
.
I have found footprints of various sizes over the years in this area, including 19-20 inchers.
.
Last year, S.I.R. held a 3 day event less than a quarter mile from this sighting and some of the prints on our web site came out of that expedition, so that to me makes it even more interesting.

 

.Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies received the below photo from one of our Wisconsin friends. He checks websites for authenticity as a hobby.He lit up the background on our photo on purpose to highlight everything else in the photo. The faces are clearer and we thought you would like to see this as well. This type of work we appreciate as it further authenticates our work.

Sasquatch Picture Highlighted

Find out more about our Sasquatch Evidence

Share This Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies Page

    { 29 comments… read them below or add one }

    Vicki Bishop October 23, 2012 at 4:13 am

    I am thinking the feedback about the foot really being a hand with a side view of the thumb may be reasonable. A long hand that goes up the arm instead of a leg. It show a massive creature when you look at it that way. It is like doing an awful puzzle you have to check all of the colors against the other stuff…so hard to see. I think there might be a baby on the left. Can’t for some reason see the hand on the left will keep looking at it. When you figure it out can you outline the different ones for us? : )

    Reply

    Carl Castonguay October 27, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    If I may add; I will stay on the fence regarding this picture until we will be able confirm what’s about the two little black points which appear under the eyes of the massive face in the middle of the picture. According testimonies, bigfoot have a flat nose, looking a little as human beings. If these two black points are positively identified as nostrils, well, I don’t know but they look rather gorilla’s nostrils than bigfoot and this would be a great disappointment. The lack of knowledge about physical characteristics stay a big problem which request great caution. Living in the Quebec area, some observations have been made since longtime in the western part of the province, near Ontarian border, or in Saguenay area. I stay convinced about the fact that these beasts roll in my land but people seem unaware, not concerned with possible encounters. In any case, I keep confident… who knows.
    Regards,
    Carl from Quebec

    Reply

    Vicki Bishop October 29, 2012 at 12:28 am

    How far away would Ron say he was from the hiding spot was he when he took this photo?
    It is amazing what a good picture he got from what looks like a long distance.

    Reply

    Ron October 29, 2012 at 10:08 pm

    50 yards…

    Reply

    Vicki Bishop October 30, 2012 at 3:06 pm

    Thank you, Ron.

    Reply

    Vicki Bishop November 8, 2012 at 9:53 pm

    Carl could the dark circles in question be from a face that is being “squenched up” sp? and the “pug” nose is pulled up in a different position from the squenching? Just trying to figure it out too…such an interesting picture…

    Reply

    Carl Castonguay November 11, 2012 at 3:28 am

    Hello Vicki,
    Thanks for observations. M. Johnson brought me some interesting points and I’m worried about the fact that my previous point was not clear. Please apologize my poor English (I don’t use Google translation which provide worst results and I’m taking my time to answer). In my last comment I indicate that the two little blacks spots under the eyes of the massive one in the middle recall me gorilla’s nostrils. This point annoyed me because when I saw the photo, this was the first impression received and each time I’m looking this impressive buddy, I see the same thing. This don’t mean I’m right. As you know, brain interpret and translate image through a bunch of criteria; knowledge, experience, chroma, colors, etc and results are not always accurate then I’m surely wrong. Remember when I mentioned that the white spot just above the big buddy recall me a skull, a massive one, looking like giganto or great ape skull, this was based upon feeling. I’m trying to make myself an idea about bigfoot and I’m still on the fence but in my mind they seems closer to human beings than monkey or great apes, with a basic social organization but maybe more structured than any others species. They are not just beast, they are a little more and they should be protected as “living fossils”. Over the misinterpretation, this picture is amazing and I stay restless about the next update.
    Regards

    Reply

    Carl Castonguay November 11, 2012 at 3:33 am

    Please read: “Over my misinterpretation” instead “over the misinterpretation”.
    Thanks

    Reply

    Keith Foster November 17, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    As a wildlife artist and also long time sasquatch researcher, I did a long term detailed study of the anatomy of the apparent skull structure of the female sasquatch filmed by Patterson in 1967. The subject in the photo taken there near Pikes Peak by Ron Peterson has exactly the same skull structure in comparison to the skull structure of the Patterson sasquatch. Facial structure also appears the same. The nasal openings appear in the correct location, though the nose appears less hooded in the Pikes Peak subject than in the Patterson subject.

    This does not concern me because individuals of apes and humans show quite a bit of variation in the structure of the soft tissues of the nose. The Peterson sasquatch may also have had her nose frozen off for the most part as a youngster or infant, which is not out of the question. Such things happen in nature. Apparent hair length and reflectivity on all parts of the subject are also impressive.

    I am greatly impressed with the photo, and am not usually impressed with blobsquatches. A little color adjustment and constrast adjustment of the photo also reveals that there is an apparent young sasquatch climbing the tree beside the larger sasquatch. Both arms are visible as one elbow is sticking out to the left of the tree and one elbow out to the right of the tree, with both hands on the photographer side of the tree. Both knees of the small individual are also sticking out on each side of the tree as it has its feet on the tree as if it is scaling the tree at the time the photo was snapped.

    I encourage Peterson to go back to the scene this coming spring and take the same photo again with a human in the location for scale and measurements of the exact location.

    The apparent foot of the larger sasquatch does appear too small to be her foot in measured comparison to cranium length, but does appear to be a foot. It could be a hand with the photo snapped before the hand completely grasped the branch it rests on, however I can not see the thumb and thenar region which would likely be more apparent. The apparent foot is puzzling, but does not dissuade me in any way of the authenticity of the subject itself.

    It is my opinion that Ron Peterson snapped a photo containing at least two sasquatch near Pikes Peak, an apparent female intently watching Mr. Peterson and an apparent youth in the act of climbing a tree beside her. There are at times sasquatch in the Pikes Peak area, so I guess it should not surprise us.

    Reply

    Keith Foster December 4, 2012 at 3:11 am

    On further review of the photo snapped by Peterson, I think I was wrong about the possibility of a youngster climbing a tree beside the sasquatch in the photo. I think what appears to be hands and arms around the tree are just limbs in a foreground portion of the photo and not actually on the trees beside the sasquatch in the photo. Wishful thinking on my part for a young one to be there with her. It does not however at all detract from the fully visible subject sasquatch in the photo. I think Petersons photo will be of historical significance.

    Reply

    Michael Johnson - Co-Founder SIR December 22, 2012 at 11:32 pm

    People are missing allot in this photo. These takes are from others based on what they tell me they see.

    The main point of interest is momma is looking down at ground in the “y” of the trees in the center. She is looking down. An Aspen cuts the center starting between “s” and “q” above. 1/2 way down the page to the left of Aspen is two round black eyes close together, Sasquatch snout on gray skin, and face of a juvenile looking straight ahead at you.

    This is only close up of their face I am aware of in the world. The arm and hand belong to an unseen individual obviously as it is bent wrong way for all the others seen in the photo. There is two more eyes directly down from the word hand at an angle at same height as the juveniles face, which are black. The foot and black toe nail belong to momma in what appears a birthing position.

    This was obtained in March and that would be the correct time of year for their birthing based my on experience in the field with them. Many also tell us they see a face in the back ground illuminated white with the same skull cap the same as the juvenile, but that is open to debate.

    And then again, may explain why our cameras are whited out some times. We have always contended they have special gifts. There eyes emanate light, they do not reflect it. The native Americans of Yosemite Valley called the Mewouks proclaimed, that where ever the Sasquatch went a lantern always followed him. There may be the proof. You decide.

    Reply

    gavin b January 22, 2013 at 6:45 pm

    i think there is a lot of wishfull thinking going on here. we all want there to be families of 10ft 800pd ape men walking about the woods. The facts simply dont back this up.
    youtube is full of film of leaves.tree showing apparant faces. Its an illusion. whe you look at a wooded area with branches and leaves you can make out a face quite easily,i would suggest, quite often.

    thats all we have here

    if there werre animals of this re[ported size,in their thisands according to researchers[ how they know this i dont know. guess its based on the length of sightings and how much it would take for a successful breeding population]

    like u all i want it to be true but there is no wau, no matter how clever, an animal this size could have stayed hidden for centuries. all we have is P/G film andf blobs/hoaxes.This is an illussion. surely common sense has to prevail and the chances that yo wouldnt get 1 trail cm face shot or film is impossible. we are all wlking about with cell phones/hand held cameras.

    No DNA,no bones, no biody, no films when heat seeking/goole earth/ trail cams etc… all exist and these animals all avois satelite photos, bumping into peole with a camera .hm,mmmm wakey wakey guys

    must be an American thing

    Reply

    Michael January 24, 2013 at 1:40 am

    If you pay attention closely to the website, our hits are worldwide. It’s a world wide phenomenon really is a more correct assessment of this situation based on the pulse map on the home page.

    In North America, 100% of Native American tribes have a name for them. Mass hallucinations are not a very scientific answer to that fact.

    In the Himalayas, its the Yeti, in Russia its the Almasty, in Australia its the Yowie and its goes on and on. The Europeans unfortunately appeared to have killed most of these people off over time along time ago. There are stories from medieval times of their presence. We are popular in the northern countries as well, such as Sweden, Norway and Finland, but I have never been there.

    As for proof, on our website, we have a photo of more than one, look to the left at the two round black eyes and gray snout looking right at you next to diagonal white tree just to the left. Its a juvenile that everyone else sees. Then listen to recording 7 with head phones and hear a mother and baby grunt at each other from NW Colorado. Then the dermal ridges on the hand print. The are allot like human except for the oval pad on upper left. The dermal ridges are 1/16 of an apart, which are way outside the human norm. Science has been unable to dispute or figure out any of these facts to date and they have been asked repeatedly.

    Our 3 hair samples and a stool sample are in, Wolfson College at Oxford has them and the same samples were sent to Australia.

    I have a feeling your view of the world is about to change dramatically just like when Copernicus told the rest of the world the Sun was the center of the solar system and not the Earth and they chastised him for that…We all must evolve…

    Your are only taking a cautious approach based on what you have been taught, which I understand…

    Thanks, Mike-SIR

    Reply

    Dawn Conti July 2, 2014 at 2:49 pm

    Gaven, I must agree with you about the various illunionary properties of being in a heavily wooded area.
    I too have seen things that intriqued me.
    Upon looking closer. It was not as it appeard to be.
    THIS is known in psychology as “”Top down processing””
    Our mind sees something and automaticly attaches something we already know about to it, so that it makes sense to us.
    BUT that does NOT mean it is real.
    EVEN camera angles and light reflection can appear to be a genuine article of some type.
    I want for bigfoot to exist.
    BUT we MUST stick to verifyable, hard, undeniable evidence.
    OR we will all just be labled as kooks,
    Lets be scientific in our data colleting.

    Reply

    Scott D. Smith March 6, 2013 at 5:45 am

    Look at the tree with the arrow pointing toe. Follow it up to mid frame. Appears to be a small creature looking directly at the photographer. Took me a long time to realize why I couldn’t pick up any other body parts. It’s not holding the tree,it’s hanging on to another creature. I looked and looked with a magnifying glass,and finally what it’s holding to jumped out. Tell me I’m not seeing things please. Thanks for your work.

    Reply

    jeni h April 1, 2013 at 9:00 am

    its amazing that we still have so much controversy on the fact that if bigfoots exist or not, i live in washington state andd come from a long line of hunters in my family, my good friend is one of the best hunters to come from our state and has hunted on every continent there is to hunt that said the time spent in the woods are enormous and as any hunter or hiker knows it is very hard to find bones or evidence of dead deer, elk and even harder to find evidence of dead cougars, bears ect. Kind of like baby crows and pigeons we all know they exist, but never see them. I have an uncle who was lucky enough to find aseries of footprints and tufts of hair while working in the woods near elma washington. My grama was chilled to the bone at seeing the pictures of the footprints and quickly refused to keep the plaster casts in our home. My aunt called the University of Washington and after tests run on the hair samples, seeing the pictures and casts claimed that they were not ablea to clim for the record what they were but off the record agreed they were sasquatch. We are not alone in the forests and Im sure they watch us just as close, the goosebumps you get are not from bear or deer.

    Reply

    Vicki Bishop April 5, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    If you draw a straight line up from the arrow before “Toe” until it intersects with the yellow line drawn in a circle in the picture you will see that you have bisected the face of a female standing behind the tree with a baby peeking out on the right side of the tree and her breast showing on the left side of the tree. Her arm is straight down beside her body on the right of the tree.
    The one with the white face holding onto the tree and leaning back from the tree is a female as well you can see her breast pointing upwards.
    I think there are at least 6 bigfoot in this picture 2 of them babies.
    This picture is absolutely amazing. Thank you, Mr. Peterson, for sharing it with everyone.

    Reply

    Alex May 23, 2013 at 9:57 pm

    Im interested in your comment Mike that ‘The Europeans unfortunately appeared to have killed most of these people off over time along time ago. There are stories from medieval times of their presence.’

    European folklore is full of such tales of ‘Trolls’ and ‘Ogres’ many of which were described as huge,hairy and often smelly creatures who lived in wild remote and mountainous places, often in caves and appeared to shun contact with man.
    Could it be these ‘Fairytales ‘ contain memories of a race of creatures now wiped out in so-called civilised parts of Europe by the ever-expanding human populations ?

    Reply

    littledancingfawn May 26, 2013 at 10:31 pm

    The “foot” is a foot. The guy is squatting like a football player hiking the ball. It looks like he is holding a baby. The female is behind him to the right with the yellow line threw her face. Her left breast can be seen clearly with nipple. Behind guy is is one too. I can see hands that wrap around far left and right tree. Each one is behind trees. I see a Childs hand lower on left tree as well. There are more too! I am on my iPhone and can see all this. Idk how others cannot see this!! They must not be searching for body parts. Rarely will we ever get a clear picture of one so you must look for body parts and put it all togeather. Look behind trees and leaves. Thanks for your time.

    Reply

    Andrew C Frost September 17, 2013 at 5:40 pm

    I am a subscriber to oregonbigfoot.com and I am glad you guys are local (Colorado) and from what I see here is commonly referred to as a ‘blobsquatch.’ It certainly looks like a BF squatting and looking down to hide from the camera. I like the tracks comparison. I am very much a believer and have read many reports of a squatch down in our area(Archuleta County) just up the river from where we live(Arboles) along the Piedra River valley about 15 miles north of here. I will check back often, now that I have your site in my bookmarks page.

    Reply

    Damon cloud October 30, 2013 at 4:38 pm

    I live in ignacio 4 miles off 151 I found tracks last year on my property out hunting a Mnt lion on the property

    Reply

    Valencia Jaramillo March 5, 2014 at 4:29 pm

    Get your facts straight. Bigfoot is real. The evidence is right there dumb people. Its not wishful thinking its the truth.

    Reply

    S.H. March 7, 2014 at 12:41 am

    What a wonderful capture! Thank you so very much for sharing your photo. It looks so gorilla like to me, I could never confuse it for a hairy human.

    Reply

    Patterѕоn-Gimlіn film March 15, 2014 at 3:15 pm

    Τhanks! This is designed for sharing, such nice thinking, post is fastiԀious, thats why
    I have read it completely.

    Reply

    jamie March 17, 2014 at 2:18 pm

    Photos like these are why non believers laugh at us that know the truth,come on think how this looks to others,I have no doubt bigfoot exists,I bet my life against 10 dollars they exsist,but even I laugh at this photo.

    Reply

    jamie March 17, 2014 at 2:26 pm

    If I was shown that photo with no writing or arrows and was told to pick b/f out I’d go to the little brown mark 1 third of a inch from the word foot at 8 o’clock. The photos need to be of a much better quality.

    Reply

    Brett March 21, 2014 at 3:14 pm

    I am an 18 year old guy and I’ve been very interested in Bigfoot for many years. I’m sorry but the first picture I seen shows nothing? I dont see how you guys think its a bigfoot. I see no good evidence. Please help me maybe im missing it.

    Reply

    Michael Johnson-Co founder-SIR March 27, 2014 at 12:11 am

    I have received allot of interesting comments as of late. 99% of you are missing the face looking right at you. To many have been programmed to expect to see a face that is very human and resembles our own. In this instance, that is not the case. Look for the two round black eyes close together to the left of the diagonal Aspen looking right at you in the middle of the page. Yes, they blend in that well. Please rest assured, Ron and I know the face of Sasquatch having seen them in the field and we are confident in our post. Also, understand their are many experts quite excited by what is in this photo and some have even commented on this photos importance above. All the Best, Michael Johnson-Co founder-SIR

    Reply

    Victor Oropeza- Arizona BigFoot Tracker May 28, 2014 at 4:32 am

    Very nice, Guys! Awesome website. I haven’t been to it in a while. Looks like I have some good reading after work!
    I hope that you don’t mind, I downloaded the oicture you have showing the foot and toe, that’s a real one!
    Tonight I’ll be analyzing it tonight as well.
    I see him in there!
    Maybe this will help you guys out. I have found that they use their hands to cover their faces.
    I have 2 pictures of them using hands and 2 using branches with leaves.
    When in a group hiding, they’ll gather together really close to break up their image.

    Keep rocking out there!
    Awesome website!

    Reply

    Leave a Comment

    { 1 trackback }