THE BEAST OF BOGGY CREEK: The True Story of the Fouke Monster (23 page)

Skeleton in the Closet

A month or so after I first saw the skeleton, I purchased Smokey’s second book,
Too Close to the Mirror
, which features a clear photo of the skeleton’s feet on the back cover. The photo is in full color, depicting the lower portion of the skeleton’s legs from about the shins down. The bones are laying on a bed of grass and dirt, so it was evident that the photo must have been taken at the time the carcass was discovered.

After viewing the actual remains, one of our group commented that they thought the bones might belong to some kind of cat. With the photo to compare, I did a quick internet search for any images of mountain lion (i.e., cougar) skeletons, as these kind of large cats would be the type found in Texas. The results were thin, but there was at least one fairly good image of a mountain lion skeleton that I could compare to the feet on the back of Smokey’s book. I saved the image to my computer and rotated it a bit to match the orientation of the feet from Smokey’s photo. My heart sank a little as I stared at the two images. There were indeed many similarities that could not be ignored, although this was by no means a solid scientific conclusion.

After finally reading Smokey’s book, I came to realize that it was no secret that the remains were thought to be those of a large cat, specifically a Siberian tiger. Smokey mentions the particular rumor, pointing out the paradox of its growing value. In his own words: “… I had never been thoroughly convinced as to what I had in my possession. Experts were wanting to tell me it was the skeleton of a Siberian tiger, others wanted to buy the skeleton, offering as much as sixty five hundred dollars. If the skeleton was that of a Siberian tiger why were they willing to offer such an amount for the bones?”

Perhaps the skeleton’s perceived worth had gone beyond the question of whether it was actually a cat or not. Within a short time the specimen had already woven itself into Fouke Monster legend, becoming valued more for its part in history than for its biology. In other words, it became a part of Fouke Monster history in spite of itself. But like Smokey, I maintained hope… that is until I managed to track down two items that shed a bright light on the whole mystery. One of these was a nearly three minute long exposé, which had aired in 1991 on Shreveport’s KTBS television station. The other was an article that ran in the
Texarkana Gazette
around the time of the skeleton’s discovery. These reports provided the missing pieces needed to recreate the historical chronology of the skeleton saga, and also indicated, much to my disappointment, that it was most likely
not
the remains of an undocumented bipedal primate, which may or may not be indigenous to the swamps of the southern United States. In short, I was happy to have the whole intriguing story but disappointed by its less-than-exciting conclusion.

The newspaper article ran on December 11, 1991, with the headline: “Boggy Creek remains apparently Siberian tiger.” The report cites the original story published by the
Marshall News Messenger
and goes on to add new details regarding the skeleton’s appearance at the Monster City Jamboree. The article lays out the twisted tale:

… Capt. Frank Garrett, Criminal Investigations Division supervisor for the Harrison County Sheriff’s Office, said the remains are those of a Siberian tiger.

Garrett confirmed information in a story published by the
Marshall News Messenger
in Marshall, Texas, that the remains originated in Jefferson, Texas, and eventually made their way to Fouke.

The tiger, which was reported to have died of pneumonia, belonged to a Jefferson resident who raises exotic animals. The exotic animal owner was reported to have sold the dead animal to another resident who, in turn, sold it to a local taxidermist.

The taxidermist beheaded, declawed and skinned the tiger. Tiger bones and other remains were discarded by the taxidermist on nearby private property belonging to James Mackey of Shreveport, La., Garrett said.

Mackey said he and a friend discovered the bones on his property near Karnack, Texas, Nov. 27. Mackey said he notified the sheriff’s office, which arranged to examine the bones on Nov. 29.

But Mackey said his 17-year-old nephew had, in the meantime, transported the bones to Vivian, La., near the Arkansas border—apparently aware the Boggy Creek Monster legend originated Fouke.

The nephew eventually met Smokie Crabtree [
sic
]. From there, the remains apparently made their way to Fouke.

The trail of ownership sounds like something out of a gruesome sit-com, but judging from the report, it seems that the Fouke Monster may have a boney imposter. To verify the story, I contacted Captain Frank Garrett, now retired from the Harrison County Sheriff’s Office. He recalled the incident immediately, remarking that: “it’s one of those stories that sticks with you.”

Garrett was well aware of the controversy surrounding the skeleton but assured me that the details offered in the news accounts were accurate, and that the bones had a traceable history to their origins as a living Siberian tiger. According to Garrett, the cat had been living at one of the local exotic animal reserves in Jefferson, Texas, until it died from complications brought on by pneumonia. The remains were sold to an individual in Marshall, Texas, by the name of Wayne Scoggins, [14]  who took them to a taxidermist for mounting. The taxidermist removed the head, skin, tail, and claws and dumped the rest of the remains on the property of James Mackey where they were discovered by two hunters. Garrett and a local veterinarian examined the bones, and satisfied that they were not human, arranged for them to be picked up the following morning. However, before they could be removed by officials, the bones were taken by Mackey’s nephew and transported to Vivian.

“It looked like an upright creature because it had no paws on it,” Garrett remarked, understanding how it could be mistaken for something other than what it was. “What [t he taxidermist] had done was take the claws and everything off of it. You had part of a foot, but you didn’t have all of it. And that was the same thing with the front and the rear [legs].”

Granted, no DNA test has offered conclusive proof of the skeleton’s true biological identity, even to this day, so the possibility for error is still there, but the logical conclusion points to something more mundane. The remains are indeed exotic and would qualify as a cryptid if the animal had been roaming the Texas woods alive, but unfortunately they are most likely not something so exotic as to be those of an undocumented ape-like creature.

Regardless, the skeleton seems to possess an undying appeal to those who have an affinity for the Fouke Monster. And soon enough, its creepy charisma would call again from that cold, musty coffin.

The Hunt For Bigfoot

Ever since its debut at the Monster City Jamboree, word about Fouke’s mystery skeleton had been buzzing around the cryptozoology wires. Among the listeners were Jim McCullough Senior and Junior, better known as the creators of
Creature From Black Lake
some 20 years earlier. Not wanting to miss a good opportunity to capitalize on Fouke Monster fame, the McCulloughs hatched a plan to exploit the skeleton. The idea was to film a low-budget documentary about Bigfoot and feature the mystery skeleton as its centerpiece.

To accomplish this would of course require the cooperation of Smokey, so the McCulloughs promptly called him up with a proposition. According to Smokey’s second memoir,
Too Close to the Mirror
, he agreed to a tidy sum of $5,000 to let the skeleton be photographed and tested. In addition to the filming rights, the contract gave the McCulloughs one-forth interest in the skeleton. Smokey was also told that the movie would be titled “The Hunt For Bigfoot with Smokey Crabtree,” in order to further tie the skeleton’s owner to the production. Up until that point, no one had been given permission to take so much as single photo of the rotting remains, so naturally the specimen had built a buzz in the Bigfoot community. The McCulloughs hoped this would translate into sales of the final product.

After working out the details, the shooting commenced. Both McCullough Senior and Junior worked on the project, filming much of it in and around Smokey’s home near Days Creek. The final product, released in 1995 with the shortened title
The Hunt For Bigfoot
, is ultimately a haphazard pseudo-documentary/movie that fails to provide much gratification, regarding either the general subject matter or the skeleton itself. Presumably because of its low budget production, the documentary never received wide market circulation, making it a rare commodity even for cryptozoology enthusiasts.

The documentary is narrated by host, Clu Gulager, best known as a prolific television actor who appeared on hundreds of shows including
Kung Fu
,
Ironside
,
Hawaii Five-O
, and
Knight Rider
, along with a few notable horror movies such as the classic
Return of The Living Dead
. He’s a personable actor with a distinctive voice, but unfortunately, in this case, the badly lit set and African safari get-up only downplay his talent.

The documentary comments on the Bigfoot phenomenon in general but concentrates on sightings and stories from the Arkansas/Texas area. These accounts are intercut with statements and opinions from various people, including an alleged psychic and a doctor. The psychic, Valorie Taylor, ventures to guess that Bigfoot creatures live in caves in sort of a “Cro-Magnon man kind of situation.” Dr. David Otto also provides commentary, but it centers mostly on man-ape legends rather than anything hard science.

VHS packaging for “The Hunt For Bigfoot” Documentary.

Several residents of Fouke are interviewed throughout, one of them a woman who works at an unnamed convenience store. On screen, she recalls a time several years back when two men came into the store saying they had seen “the creature” (i.e., the Fouke Monster) at about 3:00 a.m. As she put it, they were “shaking, white as a ghost.” The store is obviously the Monster Mart and the men were Roosevelt Shine and his friend, whose account I have already covered. Unfortunately, the details of their account are not discussed in the documentary, which is a shame since it would have made for compelling content.

The documentary goes on to highlight
Creature From Black Lake,
using footage from the movie to round out the production. However, since that movie is fictional, it adds nothing to the “scientific hunt for Bigfoot” and merely comes off as cheap filler material. To make it even more cheesy, a “Fouke Monster hunt” is staged by filming an actual family being guided into the Mercer Bayou by Smokey himself. The family was visiting from Michigan and had no scientific background or prior experience hunting for Fouke’s undocumented animal. They mostly walk around looking confused, as Smokey scouts ahead on the river in his pirogue. The whole thing is rather silly and a discredit to Smokey’s serious, life-long pursuit of the creature.

Throughout
The Hunt For Bigfoot
the narrator drops hints about the mysterious skeleton, implying that something big might be revealed when scientists examine it for the first time. It is only towards the end of the documentary that the narrator finally focuses on this piece of alleged evidence. A short back-history is provided, telling the viewer about how it was found in Texas and ended up in the hands of Smokey Crabtree. The skeleton is first examined by Dr. Beth Leuke and Dr. Vaughn Langman, both professors of biology. They take various measurements and make conjectures based on its current condition and the state in which it was reportedly found. Leuke makes a good case against scavengers having taken only the head, which, ironically, backs up the official police report that it was dumped by a taxidermist.