In the last few months I have tried to update report files.I have worked solidly to make sure that all the details are saved for posterity.
With British Ufology I have found that one "majhor case" after another simply crumbled away. One particular Ufologist was involved in three of these and NOW, after being asked for any extra information, his fellow investigator has cast major doubt on the authenticity of what was reported. Checking one case the location is dubious but the name of the percipient does not appear in any registery for that county...ever.
Another tells a good story but this is how it went down:
Me: "Is it possible to please get a copy of the investigation report?"
Inv:"The details are in my book"
Me: "Well, I cannot put a whole book into a folder and the report itself would stand as better evidence"
after a delay:
Inv: "I can send you a word doc but if used it will need to be credited to me"
Me: "No problem there. Thanks for your effort"
The email arrived. It was the chapter from his book. I contacted him again and explained that I would very much like to include an actual investigation report in the files:
Inv: "There was only a standard UFO report form on the UFO"
Me: "Okay, can I get a copy of that please?"
Inv: "I don't know where it is. I think I ghave it to a Ufologist."
This was a case that Ufologist has pushed as major and involving "UFO abduction" and much, much more. All he had was his notes from his book and not even the report form which he gave away (ever hear of a photo copier?). The evidence for the case is ZERO. It canbnot be used as anything other than a file filler.
So how about another one of his "Major UFO incident and abduction" cases that he has written and spoken of extensively? No report. A third case.... well, he is not getting back to me on that one (it has been a couple weeks).
This is not a fluke. Two other authors recently told me they havce no idea where their notes are on "significant" cases and I suspect that there are no reports and that means those cases have to be classed as LOW evidence (opne even admits to ignoring a letter from teenage witnesses BECAUSE they were "kids".
Out of ten 'Ufologists' who wrote books on abductionshow many do you think know how to get in touch with the percipients or have stayed in touch with them? Not a single one. They got what they wanted -info for a bvook or chapter in a book and that was it.
Mona Stafford is the last surviving member of the trio said to have been abducted in Liberty, Kentucky in 1975. That was a major case with all the extra anecdotal evidence and look what happened. The trio were milked dry for everything to go into magazines and books and then dumped. Even the 'stellar' MUFON had no idea about the case until I reminded them and they had no contact details. They did not know that two of the women had passed away. Mona Stafford appeared on a news (TV) item back in the mid 2000s and I have tried newspapers and even the reporter/TV station that interviewed her -no contact details. I try and try and try but a failure every time.
Here is another: Kelly Cahill involved in one of the most spectacular UFO abduction cases (1993 Australia). Multiple on board percipients and physiological evidence and independent corroboration and the Paranormal Research Australia report would have all the tech and scienbtific analyses to make it as close to absolute evidence as you can get. Kelly did the UFO conference circle pointing this out and it was bviously wearing her down based on the body language at times. Then....someone in PRA gave out the names of the witnesses who had come forward based on their anonimity being preserved. A court case against PRA and the report has never appeared (likely due to legal reasons).
Yes, Ufologists ****** up everything.
The PRA would not respond to me -and I have tried a few times. So I tried to contact Cahill: dead end. I contacted any Australian UFO group I could find. Two had never (?!) heard of the case and the others "no idea". Yes, a truly major UFO event screwed up by the investigators (and I have always been open to hearing their side of things) and the known main witness.... no one knows where she is. I suspect that after all the work Cahill put into making facts known the betrayal of witness confidentiality (as in the case of the three Liberty percipients) and what ensued she simply walked away and got on with her lifr.
We lost the Kathy Reeves family encounter from 1965 BECAUSE of a lazy Ufologist. We lost all the details from Eupora, 1973 BECAUSE of racist Ufologists and there is a catalogue of such histories.
We have lost cases that may have been historically significant and no one is interested in 2026 because there is no money ot great publicity for them.
There is far too much fakery in Ufology and in the UK it is rife. This article is from The Armchair Ufologist (95% of them are) and this is a summary by the AFU that can be found here:
The late Eric Morris was a long time UFO report hoaxer and fantasist who I had dealings with since the mid 1970s. He even attempted to bully and physically threaten older researchers. Joan Amos, whose name will be familiar to older Forteans, Ufologfists etc once sent me a letter (on file) warning me to watch out for Morris. He apparently was very loud and threatened her but a neighbour in his 70s heard the commotion and confronted Morris. Morris left quickly. Despite being outed as a faker many times he was still given a platform and applauded at northern UFO events -including by people who proved he was a faker.
It goes on and on but Ufology sweeps it all under the carpet.
Overview
This issue of 'Tough on Ufology' critically examines the state of ufology, focusing on internal conflicts and the behavior of key figures. It details the case of 'Max Burns', accused of drug offenses and claiming to be targeted by 'The Establishment' for his ufological knowledge. The article also discusses Miles Johnstone's involvement with Max Burns and his critical stance on ufological research. The issue highlights the perceived paranoia and infighting within the UK UFO scene, with accusations of disinformation and debunking. It also touches upon the Rendlesham Forest incident and the role of researchers like James Easton and Jenny Randles. Furthermore, it criticizes BUFORA for its internal politics, perceived lack of progress, and handling of witness confidentiality. The article also reports on legal threats made by ufologist Harry Harris and the charges he faces, as well as a UFO sighting over the Pennines and the author's 'Federal Hypothesis' explanation.
Magazine Overview
This issue of "Tough on Ufology - Tough on the Causes of Ufology" is a critical examination of the state of ufology, particularly within the UK. It delves into internal conflicts, the behavior of prominent figures, and the perceived lack of genuine research and ethical practices within the field. The publication date is noted as February 1998.
Key Articles and Content
Countdown to Ecstasy?
The article introduces 'Max Burns', a self-proclaimed ET believer from Rotherham, who gained notoriety through 'Alien Encounters' magazine. Burns was reportedly arrested for possession with intent to supply ecstasy and claims he is being targeted by 'The Establishment' due to his ufological knowledge. The author expresses skepticism about Burns' claims, noting that other ufologists, like Miles Johnstone, seem to agree with him. The piece also mentions that Burns has been committed to Crown Court, with the charge potentially being reduced to amphetamine possession. The author personally dismisses ecstasy as a drug.
Max Burns
The Max Factor and Miles Johnstone
The author recounts a personal encounter with Max Burns, who allegedly made abusive phone calls after Dave Clarke's research into a UFO 'crash' case was perceived as a challenge. Miles Johnstone, a long-time BUFORA member, is presented as being aligned with Max Burns. Johnstone allegedly filmed something related to the 'crash' for BUFORA, which the author views critically. The author emailed Johnstone suggesting he contact Dave Clarke for a more balanced view, but Johnstone claimed Dave had not returned his call and expressed frustration with perceived rudeness.
Dr David Clarke
Rendlesham Forest and James Easton
The article touches upon the Rendlesham Forest incident, suggesting it might be a complex series of misidentifications and misperceptions, similar to the Sheffield crash case. Researcher James Easton is credited with in-depth research on Rendlesham, including original statements from witnesses. The author notes that Easton's research has been met with resistance, with some accusing him of being a debunker despite his previous support for the case. The internet is highlighted as a tool that has exacerbated ufological tendencies and the spread of rumors.
Harry Harris and Legal Threats
Ufologist Harry Harris is discussed, noting his tendency to use legal action against those who disagree with him. The article mentions a past case where Harris took legal action against Jenny Randles. More recently, the Manchester Evening News reported that Harry Harris was facing charges of making threats to kill and possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear, allegedly related to an incident involving his cat and a neighbor's dog. The article states that this case was pending court proceedings.
Jenny Randles and Peter Hough
Lights, Camera, Action: The Pennines Sighting
This section details a UFO sighting on February 2nd, 1998, where hundreds of people saw two bright lights flying over the Pennines. Airports had no record of the objects, and the press received numerous reports and videos. BUFORA's NIC's John Heptonstall studied the case and concluded the objects were likely helicopters or RPVs. The author questions why official sources deny knowledge, proposing a 'Federal Hypothesis' where governments use the UFO mythos for their own ends, suggesting the craft were intentionally flown with lights on to monitor public reaction.
The Law Of The Bungle: BUFORA's Issues
This section heavily criticizes BUFORA, describing its website being hijacked and subsequently terminated. The author details how BUFORA allegedly changed its Articles of Association to claim ownership of review books, rather than them going to the editor. The article also points to a breach of witness confidentiality within BUFORA, where details were allegedly passed to the press, causing distress. Despite these breaches, Philip Mantle, the Press Officer, was reportedly supported by the Council. The author argues that BUFORA has become a publicity vehicle, allowing tabloid ufology to penetrate its core and breaking its moratorium on hypnotic regression.
Philip Mantle
North Of The Border News: Billy Buchanan
Scottish councillor Billy Buchanan has been banned from council committees until 1999 and restricted in his communication with staff due to his behavior, which included calling chief officers 'vagabonds' and accusing the chief executive of racism.
Aftermath and UFO Times
The author reflects on the article's potential publication in 'Fortean Times' being rejected, suggesting it was too truthful. The author resigned from 'UFO Times' after Dave 'Sensible' Newton took over, describing the resulting issue as a 'mess'. The article also mentions a 'cash retrieval team' from BUFOONA visiting Mike Wootten's residence to collect items.
General Criticisms of Ufology
The publication expresses a strong critical stance on ufology, labeling many involved as 'ufologists' who are more interested in stroking egos and generating publicity than in genuine research. The author suggests that without ufologists, the UFO subject would cease to exist, describing it as a self-perpetuating, hermetically sealed system. The article posits that professionals recoil from the subject due to a lack of evidence, proof, methodology, or integrity.
Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance
The recurring themes in this issue are the internal politics and perceived corruption within ufology, particularly concerning organizations like BUFORA. There is a strong emphasis on skepticism towards sensational claims, a focus on misidentification and misperception as explanations for sightings, and a critique of ufologists who prioritize publicity and personal agendas over rigorous investigation. The editorial stance is highly critical, bordering on cynical, of the ufological community, highlighting what the author views as a lack of substance, ethical breaches, and a tendency towards paranoia and infighting. The author champions genuine research and ethical treatment of witnesses, contrasting it with the prevailing trends in ufology.
This issue of "Tough on Ufology - Tough on the Causes of Ufology" is a critical examination of the state of ufology in the UK, focusing heavily on internal politics, organizational dysfunction, and the credibility of prominent figures and research methods. The publication adopts a highly critical and often sarcastic tone, aiming to expose what it perceives as flaws, hypocrisy, and deliberate obfuscation within the ufology community.
BUFORA Under Fire
The lead article, "You Can't Come In Here Thinking Like That," directly addresses the author's own membership status within BUFORA (British UFO Research Association). The author details a challenge to their membership renewal, stemming from their consistent criticism of how BUFORA is run. They accuse a small, controlling group within BUFORA of being unable to handle criticism and of resorting to personal attacks rather than addressing substantive issues. The author lists several past transgressions by BUFORA members, including using hypnosis against ethical codes, revealing witness names to the press, selling private photographs, and writing abusive notes, contrasting this with the severe reaction to their own criticisms.
A significant point of contention is the handling of BUFORA's financial and ethical state. The author criticizes the organization's logic of ignoring problems in the hope they will disappear, and then attempting to remove critics. The article "BUFORA Captain? Illogical - Does Not Compute" further elaborates on this, suggesting BUFORA is in a "mess financially and ethically" and that its leadership is attempting to hide this reality. The author quotes Steve Gamble, the chairman, as stating that if a force is trying to destroy UK ufology, BUFORA has "succeeded admirably by putting us all at odds with each other."
The issue also touches upon the resignation and subsequent 'unresignation' of chairman Steve Gamble, portraying it as a common tactic among BUFORA officers to maintain power. The article "Even Mushrooms Don't Get Treated This Way!" criticizes BUFORA's communication strategy, accusing them of using "spin doctors" to cover up financial problems and their inability to deliver promised services, such as the six magazines members paid for.
The Tim Matthews Controversy
A substantial portion of the magazine is dedicated to dissecting the activities and alleged background of ufologist Tim Matthews. The article "The saga of Tim Matthews" notes that Matthews is criticized by some for being "in your face" and for conducting research and publishing it. More serious allegations are explored, including his alleged past involvement with the British National Party (BNP) and other far-right groups. The piece references an "uncredited story" in the conspiracy journal "Lobster" that links Matthews to such activities. It also mentions his alleged work for the anti-fascist publication "Searchlight" and his involvement in Green politics before turning to ufology. Larry O'Hara is cited as alleging that Matthews, whose real name might be Tim Hepple, is working for the UK military as an agent provocateur to spread disinformation.
Matthews himself is reported to have vigorously denied some allegations but admitted to past affiliations. The article questions whether people are allowed to have a past and draws parallels with other figures in the ufology community, such as Patrick Harrington and George Sturgeon, who are accused of involvement in far-right politics or racist remarks.
"I Had Too Much To Dream Last Night" presents a fictionalized dialogue between Tim Matthews and Eric Morris, set in Southport, discussing plans for a conference and hinting at a conspiracy involving government manipulation of UFO sightings. This section appears to be a satirical take on the perceived paranoia and internal machinations within the ufology community.
Further scrutiny of Matthews comes in "Tough on Ufology - Tough on the Causes of Ufology" (pages 3-6), where his background is examined, including allegations of involvement with a white supremacist group called "The Church of The Creator." The author questions whether people are allowed to have a past and points to other figures with questionable associations. The article "We'll Fight Them On The Beaches" suggests that Matthews, as a young rebel, got involved with "big boys with bad ideas" and later became involved in ufology, realizing that much "research" was flawed. It posits that he is now active and outspoken, potentially annoying those in power, and has secured a book contract, but his "earlier 'enthusiasms'" are catching up with him.
Other Figures and Events
The issue also discusses other ufologists and events. "Beyond Our Ken (our kid)" focuses on Tony Dodd, formerly of YUFOS and UFO magazine, who is described as a "wild card" prone to discussing animal mutilations, MIBs, and death threats. Dodd has resigned from UFO magazine to pursue private investigations. A letter from Dodd to Omar Fowler, published in the OVNI newsletter, is presented. In this letter, Dodd suggests that some "flying triangles" are terrestrial and that there is liaison between humans and a "friendly" race of ETs who are providing advanced technology to defend against a "malevolent" ET race. The article "Dodd Watch" expresses skepticism about these claims.
Tony Dodd
"Sensible" is criticized for misrepresenting evidence and making vague claims, particularly in relation to the IUN (International UFO Network) collapse. The author recounts an incident where "Sensible" was allegedly misled by information and subsequently received a stiffly worded letter.
There is also a mention of a conference in Southport where conspiracy theories were prevalent, and an incident involving Larry O'Hara and Tim Matthews is described as a "near drubbing incident."
Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance
The overarching theme of this issue is a deep skepticism and criticism directed at the ufology community itself. The editorial stance is one of disillusionment with the internal politics, alleged lack of rigor in research, and the personal agendas of many involved. The author frequently employs sarcasm and direct accusation to highlight what they see as hypocrisy, paranoia, and a failure to address the core issues within the subject. There is a strong emphasis on the need for transparency, ethical conduct, and genuine research, contrasting these ideals with the perceived reality of infighting, personal vendettas, and questionable backgrounds of key figures.
The magazine appears to advocate for a more grounded and critical approach to ufology, questioning the validity of many claims and the motivations of those promoting them. The recurring criticism of organizations like BUFORA suggests a belief that their current structures and leadership are detrimental to the advancement of serious UFO research.
Addenda (TH)
I was with BUFORA from 1974-1980 and I can confirm that it was always incompetent. The NIC actually lost 150 UFO reports I had sent after confirming they had been received. There are others who found their reports went missing. Where? British Ufology is a bloody mess and it may have started out as seeking the truth but by the time the 1970s rolled in iot was a mess and so much more could be added to the above but I think trhe reader should get the point. The named persons in Ufology who were found out to have fgaked reports and spread them in UFO circles from the 1970s on have never identified WHICH reports or WHY they did this. Once they have passed on (no one is getting younger) then e3very report from the 1970s on will need to be looked at as a possible fake (this sort of thing happened in Spain and the USA mainly to discredit certain Ufologists but we knopw which cases there).
The whole British Bigfoot situation is a con as well as down to very susceptable minds.
I have a very big library -ghosts, crypto, Fortean, UFOs and so on. In absolutely none of those is there reference to a large hairy humanoid (often cited is a "ghost case" where "cavemen" were seen around a fire. Woodwose are interesting but if there was anything they became extinct pre-12th century.
For my other work I have a BIG wildlife library with books and references going back to Medieval times. Books on hunting. On quadrupeds and other species even "oddity" reports but not one single mention of anyone ever reporting a "Bigfoot".
I spoke to many dubious people for my EAR work as well as l;and owners/estate managers, game keepers and they would tell me about ghosts as well as big cats and some of these people were born and raised in "active British Bigfoot areas" and guess what? Never a single word about a giant hairy man.
I think many sightings are due to altered states, misidentifications -some "hairy menm" turn out to be people in gillie suits. Others are fantasists.
I once offered to look at evidence gathered since I am what people keep calling a "noted naturalist" and these people were stating experts would not study the evidence. My offer had me slandered on one of the groups and members were told NOT to share anything with me. The group owner later apologised but would not tell her members she was wrong and it was okay to share so....
Then there was a fella told me to check out his "unchallengable"evidence on You Tube. A "tree knocking stick". It turns out that it was a stick found in the middle of a forest. "How did it get there?" I was challenged. Just search this blog for British Bigfoot.
It was a stick in the middle of woodland. It broke off a tree but "why was there no other sticks that size in the spot?" I was asked. Someone could have just picked it up for a dog or any reason.
It was a stick in the middle of the forest.
The response came back (in his mind I imagined the 1812 overture playing at full volume and a massive fireworks display going on) "You lose the argument. You cannot explain it!!!" and he then went into cheering himself for beating the debunker (but not with a stick found in the middle of a forest).
US TV shows and You Tube suddenly created the abductyion craze in the UK and everyone who watch "UFO Hunters" got their black urban combat gear and were Ufologists.
Then the US paranormal shows flooded You Tube and demonic possession, haunted houses, hell holes/gateways to Hell were in every British property. Everyone bought their urban combat (black of course) combat gear and became ghost hunters or paranormal experts.
In both of those genres made up, fabricated, lies were intreoduced as facts and "always having been recorded". None of it was. You Tube is not a training service.
Then, of course, US TV shows got into monsters and Bigfoot and then, suddenly, the UK was having Bigfoot sighted everywhere and "there have always been reports" -NO there have not. My late friends and I looked into every single thing that was odd or weird to look into it and get evidence or disprove it.
NEVER EVER a single British Bigfoot which, like the Owlman and other "cryptids" you can trace the origins back to and friends of a certain disreputable Fortean group. Lies are publicity and cash.
I can at least claim to have observed a mysterious primate in forestry with four other people present....but that was in Germany.
Big cats: The hunt for the puma caught roaming the Highlands in 1980
She was the ‘wild’ puma who became a celebrity after being captured in the Highlands 40 years ago.
She was the ‘wild’ puma who became a celebrity after being captured in the Highlands 40 years ago.
Felicity, as she came to be named, had been roaming the countryside in Cannich before being caught two years after farmers in the area started reporting a spate of attacks on their sheep.
There had been mystery animal sightings in the Highlands going back to 1927 when a lynx nicknamed the ‘Tiger of the North’ was caught in a trap set by a farmer after sheep and goats were attacked in the wild mountain districts of Inverness-shire.
Ted Noble
It was reported in 1977 that a man and his nephew at Farr, 10 miles from Inverness, “saw a lioness and two cubs” in a field and the next day a similar sighting was recorded at Culduthel.
However, matters came to a head in October 1980 after farmer Ted Noble took matters into his own hands following a continued unexplained loss of livestock for over a year.
Felicity the puma.
Ted saw what he described as a “lioness or similar member of the big cat family” stalking ponies at his farm near Cannich.
Police searched in vain for the ‘lioness’ with the help of big-game expert Eric Stephens who said a lion could easily be living in the area where there were sheep, horses and deer because there was plenty of food and plenty of cover.
Ted continued to find the carcasses of farm animals, mainly sheep, mutilated and with their bones crushed.
The mystery beast had been sighted a number of times by other local people and eventually he decided to set a trap after becoming frustrated by police reluctance to make a further search.
Last laugh
The animal was enticed to a cage by a sheep’s head dangling from a rope at the entrance to the trap.
The captured puma made national news with one headline proclaiming: ‘Grrr-eat Scot! Farmer Ted Catches the Loch Ness Lion!’
“People were beginning to think I was nuts the way I was so obsessed with capturing this animal,” said Ted.
“But I have had the last laugh.
“I am pleased to have caught it but I am sad to have deprived it of a grand life.
“However, it was a destructive animal having killed sheep and ponies in the area and I had to end its freedom.”
Kincraig Highlind Wildlife Park director Mr Eddie Orbell and retired Detective Sergeant John Cathcart of Inverness.
Ted was aided in his successful trapping operation by Ian Graham, a senior inspector for the Scottish Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals, and by Janet Chisolm, a neighbouring farmer of nearby Tomich.
He also had advice on the correct methods to use from a retired Colonel who, in his younger days, had been a big game hunter in Africa.
The director of the Highland Wildlife Park at Kincraig, Eddie Orbell, confirmed the animal was a puma but his conclusion was that the big cat seemed too tame and too well fed to have been living wild.
He believed Felicity had been hand-reared as a cub and had been kept as a pet.
The origin of the puma was unclear but she even allowed experts who examined her to pet her behind her ears.
Overweight
Grantown vet George Rafferty undertook a close examination of Felicity after she was given treatment for a paw complaint.
“I was very surprised to find that the animal weighed 36 kilos – approximately 80lbs,” he said.
“This is definitely overweight for a female puma.
“I examined its teeth and found it has some incisors missing at the front, which is not unusual for an animal of its age.
“Its teeth are in remarkably good condition, although yellow with age. There is no tarter on them which suggests it has been living on a natural diet, as opposed to processed food.
“It has certainly spent most of its life in captivity.
“If it has been living rough I do not think it has been doing so for very long because of its bodily condition.
“There is also no doubt it has been used to contact with humans and is very well behaved.
“It loves to have its ears tickled and comes straight over to the bars of its cage when you approach.
“In fact we had great difficulty persuading it to go far enough away from us to fire a tranquiliser dart into it without doing any damage.”
Hoax
People soon began talking about a hoax and it was reported soon after Felicity’s capture that some eyewitnesses had seen a puma in a cage being driven around the area in a pick-up truck, although this could have been prior to the animal’s release.
Ted denied there had been a hoax and he was supported by Bob High from the Farmers’ Union who said that many farmers in the eastern Highlands had seen the animal, or lost livestock to it, but were afraid to speak out in case they were ridiculed.
Additional support came from Dr Hans Kruuk from the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology at Banchory, who analysed her faeces in the first hours of captivity which showed that Felicity had recently fed on deer, rabbit and sheep, suggesting that despite her advanced age and tameness she had indeed been hunting and surviving independently in the wild for some time.
The big cat sightings and livestock losses continued following Felicity’s capture and later a man wrote to Ted from a prison cell in England, confessing that he had liberated several big cats in the Glen Affric area after driving them up from south of the Border.
During the 1960s and 1970s it was perfectly legal in the UK to keep exotic animals as household pets, which ranged from leopards, pumas and panthers, to crocodiles and poisonous snakes.
Angela McWilliams, a 23 year old part-time secretary of Kensington, was often seen taking Michael, her pet leopard, for a walk in Kensington Gardens in 1967.
In 1976 the UK Government introduced tougher new licensing rules over the keeping of wild animals without a licence.
Given the choice of acquiring a costly licence or relinquishing their pets to animal sanctuaries, rumours started that some owners chose a third option, which was sending cats out into the wild.
Further twist
The great Highland puma puzzle took a further twist three weeks after the capture as scientists in Banchory revealed strong evidence of another mountain lion on the loose.
Special tests carried out on two sheep mauled on Garve farms in Ross-shire found they were killed either by a puma or some other big cat.
Felicity was a top tourist draw for the next four years at the Highland Wildlife Park, Kincraig, near Aviemore, until she died in February 1985.
After Felicity’s death, the puma was preserved by a taxidermist, and since then has been a prime exhibit at Inverness Museum.
‘Mystery predator’ at large prompted police investigation
Felicity the puma is often cited as evidence that there are non-native cats at large in the UK.
Sightings of big cats or photographs taken at a distance have fuelled theories about their presence for decades.
A black panther.
Police and government scientists worked together to try to identify a “mystery predator” that appeared to be at large in the far north.
Correspondence from the past two years between Police Scotland, Science and Advice for Scottish Agriculture (SASA) and other government-funded agencies was released after a freedom of information request.
Injured sheep
A police officer, whose name and title have been redacted, wrote to SASA in November 2018 asking for help in identifying a large paw print.
They wrote: “I’ve had lots of reports over the past three years of big cat sightings and activity on the north coast, mainly in the Bettyhill area of Sutherland.
“There have been sightings of a large feline and a lot of dead or injured sheep.
“On one occasion I was present when a ewe was brought in off the hill with two puncture marks on the front of her right shoulder and two at the back of it.
“The wounds were over three inches apart, while some of the recent carcasses have very large puncture marks.”
The officer conceded that it was a “very controversial topic” but added: “Some crofters say there have always been very big feral cats in this area. I’m told there is a photograph of one shot, years ago, which was over four feet long.
“We definitely have a wild cat population as well; I’ve seen one myself. We don’t have many domestic cats in the area; there is a very sparse human population and miles of unoccupied land.”
The officer sent images of a paw print and one of a “recent kill”, writing: “The carcass was stripped clean, down to the spine/skull.”
The response from the SASA was inconclusive. They replied: “I’m not sure about the footprint. It does look a bit like a feline print but is also reminiscent of a fox or a dog.”
One name is missing from this piece: Arthur Cadman. A veteran naturalist who I was corresponding with in the 1970s/1980s prior to his death. He had been studying a "family" of pumas and had even predicted that due to her age "Felicity" was likely to get trapped as she went for easier game.
This is WHY animals were still being killed after her capture and that capture was, obviously, not a set up/hoax.
When I contacted Ted Noble he was polite but I think the claims of a hoax made him less forthcoming. Ted suggested contacting Janet Chisolm who I corresponded with and was handling all the enquiries. Noble was afarmer and had no time for all the messing around.
I even spoke Ms Chisholm and she confirmed that she had also observed the pumas (plural) and had also made paintings of them and had a 10(?) page account she had written. I was told that I could get a copy of her account -for £10...later £15 and back then that was a lot of money compared to today and as she would not tell me anything about "the story" she had written I had no intention of paying out that much money especially when a journalist from The Scotsman told me "It reads like a childrens story."
There is a lot of evidence for puma still being in the Highlands but further away from farms and where there is plenty of wild game.
We have seen Arthur Cadman pass away and I was never able to find out what happened to all of his notes -and photographs. There were others such as the rev Gwilliam Williams in Wales and all of these people were not high profile newspaper publicity seekers but naturalists.
All of the old contempories of mine have gone. So to have people such as Nigel Brierley, Trevor Beer and Danny Kingdom who I was discussing a cat project with before his tragic death.
Thereare the senationalists and fantasy prone people out there but from all of the naturalists who began studying large cats in the 1970s I appear to be the last survivor. And my Red Paper: Felids will NEVER be published while the official stance of bodies such as DEFRA is to kill all 'non native species' as 'invasives'.
I was reminded today of a time that I was being interviewed by the BBC (before I blacklisted them in 1997) for a Radio 4 programme. We had briefly covered my work with exotics in the UK and there was an element of frustration from the BBC reporter that I would not discuss the work I did with UK police forces. I had explained that I was on the Partners Against Wildlife Crime list of experts and that I was also covered by the then Public Records Act (is that still a thing?). I advised forces and forces had observers contact me and so there was back and forth and like the police I treated people I spoke to in the greatest confidentiality -in fact in some cases it was the only way to get them to tell me what they saw and not fear ridicule or their name all over newspapers. I would not betray that confidence or today.
The BBC reporter was looking through notes and then seemed to have an idea: "How about telling us what animals have influenced you and your work?" There was a smile as the poor reporter expected something good.
I spoke for 30 minutes on jackals and hyenas. All the time the reporter was making notes and seemed as though on the verge of a breakthrough. "We have those in the UK -you've had reports come in?" Although I had explained everything the reporter's ears were selective in what they heard.
I had once had to travel across Bristol, after a snow storm disrupted roads, to get to BBC Whiteladies Road studio to be interviewed by a radio 5 reporter. A two hour journey there and another two hours home after an hour long interview. Altogether 55 minutes had been recorded. I waited for the segment on the radio days later. One minute. Five hours of my life wasted and never compensated as promised for a just about 1 minute sound bite. That could have been done over the phone.
Franklyn A Davin-Wilson c 1977 (c)2025 T. Hooper
When it comes to the question of "Why jackals?" the answer is simple.Around 1977 I was at a meeting of the British Flying Saucer Bureau in Bristol. I was invited by an astronomer who only informed me just before that he would not attend "You do your stuff" he told me...I still have no idea what my "stuff" was. Anyway, I was approached by a short man with rather odd clothing and a flattened "Russian Diplomat" style hat: Franklyn Angus Davin-Wilson He smiled at me and said "Your new here, aren't you?" As he held out his hand his smiled showed two long vampire fangs. He was rather disappointed at my reaction -people were usually either taken aback jumped back. I learnt that the teeth were actually from a dead fox and a dentist friend had made a false set of teeth for him to wear. He smiled again and told me that he liked the lack of panic "I think we are going to be friends" he told me.
During our following conversation he learnt of my interest in wildlife. As it happened he was also a very keen naturalist and I later inherited his collection of 19th century books on lepidoptera, arachnids and beetles. He asked what I thought about the "Vampire sheep slayer of Badminton" to which my response was that I had never heard of vampire sheep before; "Yes, they never thought that title through" was his response. The killing of sheep and draining of blood from their bodies had been reported on by Charles Hoy Fort (after who the "Forteans" name themselves). Fort had an habit of misreporting or even giving sources that contained none of what he included in his books. I have dealt with these incidents in both the 2010 and updated 2022 Red Paper Canids.
It took a few years of trawling through old newspapers at the Bristol Central Library before I had amassed a good amount of information on the case. It could be said that this was my first Jackal in the UK case.
Golden Jackal (c)2025 respective copyright owner
The Sevenoaks jackal was another (sadly, all of the cryptozoologists and Forteans who use my material never credit me). I had no idea at the time that for almost 50 years I would be studying jackals or that it would lead me to discovering why jackals were in the UK and the standard explanation was always that they had escaped travel;ling menageries (I leave out the brainless theory that they were somehow supernaturally transported here and then vanished).
Oddly, this led into my research on coyotes in the UK and wolves -again fully explained in my books even though at first I doubted what I had found as it was all in plain sight and easily findable but people had forgotten or preferred fantasy or dogma over fact. Incidentally, a lot of these 'mystery canid' reports come from the same areas where we get (historically to today) puma, lynx and panther reports: big hunting estates.
What about the hyena then? Again, late 1970s I was told about this mystery creature known as "The Beast of Gevaudan" that slaughtered live stock and people between 1764-1767 in France. Forteans and cryptozoologist had it marked down as a paranormal creature, a werewolf (I'm not joking), a Dire wolf -an extinct species of canine which was native to the Americas during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene epochs (125,000–10,000 years ago). Other Forteans seem to almost relish the theory that the 'beast' was a child sex killer (again, I am not joking) despite not all the victims being young or human.
There were certain t6hings in the accounts that as I read them struck a memory and the animal I had in mind was neither a "freak gigantic wolf" nor an extinct species. I was thinking of hyena. Today "copy and paste" is almost -it is- standard for people writing on these topics since they have no idea everything they need is in what someone wrote before them...and that writer probably also copied from someone else. No one seems to have looked at how the animal attacked and killed or the geography of the area.
Back in those days before the internet you wrote letters and it might take a week or two but you got responses. It takes a minute for an email to out out and no one responds now. But, as outlined in Mysterious and Strange Beasts, I received a reply and a paper published by a museum and it clearly identified the beast as a hyena. The fur was in storage up until (possibly) 1950s when it went "missing". The British press of the day even mocked the French over being messed about by a hyena.
A one off hyena killer. Well, uh, not really because there were other "beasts" in France at the time and some of those appear to have been hyena. Remnant population spreading out across a part of France or escapees breeding and living wild -that we cannot answer, However, after many decades I am still trying to find one last piece of evidence that may indicate that there was a population that eventually died off through inbreeding (I am currently trying to find a copy of that source).
hyena (c)2025 respective copyright owner
People think I am odd because I like hyena (or "hyenas" if you prefer). But I am still studying and researching hyena as I am jackals I have hefty files and one day I hope these may help promote further historical research as everything is referenced -sometimes with more than four reference sources.
That hyena and jackals crop up in my work on Old British foxes and even wild dogs should not be surprising. For many involved in Fortean or cryptozoology "it was a clearly identified dog" is not sensationalist or sexy enough to sell magazines or books. It always has to be "A previously unknown big cat"/ "Hyena"/ "Dire wolf"/ or "paraform (paranormal) creature".
