Lake Monster Mysteries

by Benjamin Radford

  OGOPOGO: THE BIOLOGICAL BEAST

  N’ha-a-itk is clearly a supernatural entity (one writer calls it “part god, part demon”). Yet Ogopogo, the lake monster we and others searched for in Lake Okanagan, is presumably neither god nor demon; it is a zoological reality. This second incarnation of Ogopogo is crucial to investigators, as it moves the creatures from the mythological realm into the zoological one.

  Though the N’ha-a-itk of the Okanagan Valley Indians is long gone, it has been replaced by a decidedly less fearsome—and more biological—beast whose exact form is a matter of opinion and debate. Some writers (e.g., Jerome Clark) claim that the descriptions of Ogopogo are “strikingly similar”; Mackal (1980, 231), after reviewing hundreds of descriptive reports, was “struck by repetitive consistency of the descriptions, almost to the point of boredom.” He continues: “The skin is described as dark green to green-black or brown to black and dark brown.… [or] gray to blue-black or even a golden brown. Most often the skin is smooth with no scales, although the body must possess a few plates, scales, or similar structures observed by close-up viewers.… Most of the back is smooth, although a portion is saw-toothed, ragged-edged, or serrated. Sparse hair or hair-bristle structures are reported around the head, and in a few cases a mane or comblike structure has been observed at the back of the neck.” The head is said to look like that of a snake, sheep, horse, alligator, or bulldog. Sometimes it has ears or horns; sometimes it doesn’t. A surprisingly large number of sightings simply refer to a featureless “log” that came alive, such as in the following descriptions: “They saw what they thought was a log, six feet long, floating in the water,” or, “It was like a great moving log, but alive, moving up and down a little in the water.”

  This Ogopogo is supported not by Indian myths but by photographs, sonar readings, and eyewitness reports. The Folden film (discussed by Joe earlier in this chapter and analyzed in appendix 4) is considered among the best evidence. For such cryptozoologists as John Kirk of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, Ogopogo is the most likely and best documented of the lake monsters, far more so than Loch Ness’s denizen. Loch Ness is a high-profile money pit, swallowing hundreds of thousands of research dollars and countless hours of effort over the last three-quarters of a century, yet yielding precious little in return. According to Kirk (2005), “The Ogopogo phenomenon preceded that of the Loch Ness mystery. In the 1920s Ogopogo appearances were commonplace and the animal was regarded as just another member of the local fauna and not a mystery. Its reality was so strong to Okanagan Lake residents that when they built ferries to take people form Kelowna to Westbank there was concern that the ferry needed to be armed with ‘monster-repelling devices’ to ensure passenger and crew safety.” Furthermore, Kirk says, “The catalog of films and video of Ogopogo are more numerous and of better quality than anything I have personally seen at Loch Ness and I believe that several of them are very persuasive that there is a large living unknown creature inhabiting the lake.” Jerome Clark and Nancy Pear, in their book Strange and Unexplained Happenings (1995, 440), also suggest that “despite its silly name, Ogopogo is one of the most credible of the world’s lake monsters.”

  OGIE: THE LOVABLE MASCOT

  A third Ogopogo exists: the local mascot and hero, a cuddly bringer of cheer and love. Long gone are the echoes of live sacrifices, drowning deaths, and bone-strewn beaches. This is N’ha-a-itk and Ogopogo updated for modern Canada and presented by a savvy public-relations department. Nicknamed Ogie, this Ogopogo is sometimes dragonlike, complete with wings and scales and an elongated body formed into the distinctive series of humps. Countless tourist items feature Ogie, ineluding T-shirts, coffee mugs, key chains, and bumper stickers. Downtown Kelowna sports a life-size (?) Ogopogo statue near the waterfront (figure 7.9), and a half dozen books on the beast can be found in bookstores around town. The city of Kelowna’s coat of arms, adopted in 1955, even features a seahorse, which, according to a city brochure, “in heraldry is the closest approximation of our Ogopogo.”

  Figure 7.9 A statue of Ogopogo, the beloved local lake monster, sits in downtown Kelowna, British Columbia. (Photo by Benjamin Radford)

  The public-friendly Ogopogo can be found peering down from shelves in tourist hovels, next to snow globes and plush beavers in little red Mounties uniforms adorned with maple leaves. This Ogopogo is devoid of nasty scales or slimy skin, sheathed instead in a fuzzy body and lovable countenance (figure 7.10). Ogie is cute and green, often childish, and frequently sports eyelashes and a disarming smile.

  A 1982 children’s book by Brock Tully is typical of the scrubbed-up, reformed beast. In the book With Hope We Can All Find Ogopogo, a “chubby, fuzzy, cuddly little ball of fluff with a big, warm and excited smile” named Hope becomes dismayed at the complex, alienating, and confusing world of adults. Seeking solace, he wanders to the shore of Lake Okanagan, where he suddenly “saw two of the biggest, warmest, lovingest eyes he had ever seen and he felt reassured. He was further soothed when the monster belonging to the eyes spoke so gently and softly and welcomed Hope to the cove.” Hope and Ogopogo develop a deep friendship: “Ogy was the most loving, forgiving, and patient living creature possible. Ogy was love!!” Hie story ends with Hope running back to his home yelling, “We are all Ogopogo!” It is this Ogopogo—not the murderous and fearsome N’ha-a-itk, not the dark and blobby images in home videos and photographs—that is love incarnate. In fact, there may be more children’s books about Ogopogo than about any other lake monster. Other titles include Ogopogo: The Misunderstood Lake Monster by Don Levers (in which the beast heroically saves several busloads of schoolchildren from drowning) and The Legend of Lil Ogie by Garfield Fromm.

  Figure 7.10 Cuddly and plush Ogopogo dolls are a far cry from the creature’s legendary and bloody past. (Photo by Benjamin Radford)

  RECONCILING THE OGOPOGOS

  Ogopogo means different things to different people. This does not automatically relegate the beast to myth, of course: Hindus imbue cows with a significance that eludes McDonald’s customers, and any cat fancier will affirm that felines are exalted among animals. But the differing versions do suggest that a real understanding of Ogopogo requires a broad view.

  “Ogopogo has mellowed with the passing of time,” writes Gaal in her book In Search of Ogopogo (2001, 120). “Of recent years, he frolics in the water with almost impish delight, flips a flirtatious tail, and, with a sly wink, disappears into the froth to return from whence he came.” This mellowing occurred rather suddenly in the 1920s. In 1924, songwriter Cumberland Clark wrote a popular music-hall song called “The Ogopogo: The Funny Fox-Trot” (Shuker 1995). As Joe mentioned earlier, the song (which whimsically claimed that Ogopogo was the result of an illicit union between an earwig and a whale) established the name of the creature. Shortly thereafter, Ogopogo sightings increased dramatically. Note that this increase in sightings was linked to publicity, not to other sightings. Unless the creature frequented music halls, it wouldn’t have known that its fame was being spread far and wide and thus be inclined to show itself more often. The most likely explanation for the increased sightings is that people were more aware of the creature, were expecting to see it, and were interpreting ambiguous lake phenomena as Ogopogo even in the monster’s absence. A similar spike occurred at Lake Champlain following the 1981 publication of Sandra Mansi’s 1977 photo of Champ (see chapter 2). But, notes Blackman (1998, 71), “reported Ogopogo attacks had ceased completely, and the peoples living on the lake were beginning to view the monster in a much kinder light. As fear gave way to curiosity and excitement, accounts of encounters with ‘the lake demon’ became much more lighthearted.”

  Unless lake pollution over the past centuries has had a sedative effect on the beast, this marked change in its behavior is very curious. Animals don’t exhibit such a temperamental about-face in the real world. It seems that the public’s perception of Ogopogo—independent of its actions—influenced reports of the monster’s behavior. Part of this
transformation is surely an effort to capitalize on tourism: who wants to travel to western Canada to vacation where a murderous leviathan may demand a blood tithe or the family puppy?

  As with N’ha-a-itk, the real question is not what Ogopogo means in some absolute or biological sense but what Ogopogo means to the culture and the age embracing it. The First Nations peoples have N’ha-a-itk, the cryptozoologists and eyewitnesses have Ogopogo, and the tourists and Okanagan Valley children have Ogie. N’ha-a-itk and Ogopogo are fundamentally amorphous, but with Ogie, we have finally have captured the beast—in its cultural, if not its actual, form. The creature’s fame began with stories and songs of its exploits; years later, those stories crystallized into (and influenced) modern reports of an actual beast; soon after that, stories and songs about the creature began to spread once again. Until and unless the beast is captured or identified, Ogopogo will surely live on: part god, part demon, and part chameleon.

  REFERENCES

  Blackman, W. Haden. 1998. The field guide to North American monsters. New York: Random House.

  Bondura, Darryl. 2005. Interview by Joe Nickell, February 5.

  Brimblecombe, W. H. 1930. Ogopogo. The Fourth Annual Report of the Okanagan Historical and Natural History Society, September 9. Reprinted May 1975, 28-29.

  Bull, John, and John Ferrand Jr. 1994. National Audubon Society guide to North American birds: Eastern region, rev. ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

  Clark, Jerome, and Nancy Pear. 1995. Strange and unexplained happenings: When nature breaks the rules of science. Detroit, Mich.: Gale Research.

  Collier s Encyclopedia. 1993. S.v. “Otter,” 18:248.

  Costello, Peter. 1974. In search of lake monsters. New York: Coward, McCann, and Geoghan.

  Daegling, David. 2004. Bigfoot exposed. New York: Altamira Press.

  DeMara, Paul. 2004. Personal correspondence, December 15.

  Ellis, Bill. 2001. Aliens, ghosts, and cults: Legends we live. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.

  Fredricks, Grant. 2005. Quoted in Lake Monsters. Is It Real? series. National Geographic Television, August 20.

  Fromm, G. S. 1991. The legend of Lil Ogie. Penticton, B.C.: Sea Plush Industries. Gaal, Arlene. 1986. Ogopogo: The true story of the Okanagan Lake million dollar monster. Surrey, B.C.: Hancock House.

  ________. 2001. In search of Ogopogo: Sacred creature of the Okanagan waters. Surrey, B.C. Hancock House.

  ________. 2005a. Interview by Joe Nickell, February 4.

  ________. 2005b. Personal correspondence with Benjamin Radford, January 24.

  Ganassin, Celeste. 2005. Interview by Benjamin Radford, February 4.

  Gould, Rupert T. 1976. The Loch Ness monster. Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press.

  Kirk, John. 1998. In the domain of the lake monsters. Toronto: Key Porter Books.

  ________. 2005. Interview by Benjamin Radford, February 4 and 5.

  Levers, Don. 1985. Ogopogo: The misunderstood lake monster. Kelowna, B.C.: Sandhill Publishing.

  Mackal, Roy P. 1980. Searching for hidden animals. London: Cadogan Books.

  Meurger, Michel, and Claude Gagnon. 1988. Lake monster traditions: A cross-cultural analysis. London: Fortean Tomes.

  Moon, Mary. 1977. Ogopogo. North Vancouver, B.C.: J. J. Douglas.

  Okanagan Lake. 2005a. www.sellingkelowna.com/kelowna_info/okanaganlake. htm (accessed January 21).

  ________. 2005b. www.bcadventure.com/adventure/explore/ok/mabel/okanagan.htm (accessed January 21).

  Roed, Murray A. 2005. Geologic history of Okanagan Valley and origin of Lake Okanagan, British Columbia, www.geoscapes.ca/pov/okhistory5.html (accessed February 21).

  Shuker, Karl. 1995. In search of prehistoric survivors. London: Blandford Books.

  Tully, Brock. 1982. With Hope we can all find Ogopogo. Vancouver, B.C.: Intermedia Press.

  Whitaker, John O. Jr. 1996. National Audubon Society field guide to North American mammals. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

  8

  OTHER NOTABLE

  LAKE MONSTERS

  So far in this book we’ve examined some of the world’s greatest and best-known lake monster mysteries. And although Nessie, Champ, Memphre, Cressie, Ogopogo, and the rest get much of the attention, their lesser-known cousins are said to populate countless lakes around the globe. What follows is a brief survey of the world’s other lake monster mysteries.

  NORTH AMERICA

  Canada’s Lake Utopia, in southern New Brunswick, is reportedly home to a fearsome monster, according to Micmac Indian legend, centuryold tales, and modern eyewitness reports. As with other lake creatures, it is variously described but only rarely glimpsed; its presence is more often demonstrated by a churning of the water and debris sent up from the depths. There are no known photographs of the alleged creature, but in the early settlement period, tracks—or rather a “slimy trail” with claw marks—leading into the water were reported (Martinez 1988; Colombo 1988). Today, it appears that most local people are skeptical of the monster’s existence, although a few have reported seeing an unexplained wake (Murray 1999) or what they believed was a large animal (Gaudet 1999); others know someone who has witnessed such a sighting (K. Wilson 1999; T. Wilson 1999).

  On June 27, 1999, Joe visited nearby St. George and collected local accounts of the fabled monster. His guide, Tony Wilson of All Wet Aquatics, took him on a jet-ski trip (via the Magaguadavic River and a natural canal) into and around the 3,409-acre lake. Despite these efforts, the creature didn’t have the courtesy to show itself, let alone pose for a photograph.

  As with similar claims, a major argument against the possibility of such a monster is the improbability of the lake providing sufficient food not merely for one leviathan but for the breeding herd that would be necessary for the continuation of the species. Also, many mundane phenomena can simulate a monster. Local candidates include floating logs; wind slicks; salmon, sturgeon (Gaudet 1999), and schools of smaller fish; and silver eels, which were once so plentiful that they clogged the pulp mill’s waterwheels (Brief history n.d., 13). Other potential culprits include swimming deer, muskrats, beavers, and otters (St. George 1999)—especially otters, which could have produced many of the effects reported (Nickell 1995, 1999).

  Another reputed New Brunswick lake monster is the giant amphibian now displayed at the York Sunbury Historical Society Museum in Fredericton (figure 8.1). Dating to the 1880s, the huge bullfrog reportedly lived in Killarney Lake, some eight miles from Fredericton, where Fred B. Coleman operated a lodge. Coleman claimed that he had made a pet of the great croaker and that his guests fed it June bugs, whiskey, and buttermilk. It thus grew to a whopping forty-two pounds and was used to tow canoes and race against tomcats. It was killed, Coleman said, when poachers dynamited the lake to harvest fish, whereupon the distraught raconteur had it stuffed and placed on display in the lobby of his hotel. His son’s widow donated it to the museum in 1959 (Coleman n.d.).

  Some local doubters insist that Coleman simply bought a display item that had been used to advertise a cough medicine guaranteed to relieve “the frog in your throat” (Phillips 1982). A former historical society president called it a “patent fake” and said that it should have been thrown out years ago; other officials coyly declined suggestions that it be examined scientifically (Colombo 1988, 50–51; Coleman n.d.). Macleans magazine concluded: “The argument about whether it is a stuffed frog or an imitation may never be settled, but as a topic of conversation and a tourist curiosity it has had as long a career as any frog, dead or alive” (McKinney n.d.).

  Figure 8.1 The Coleman frog. Since the 1880s, folks have debated which is the bigger whopper: this giant amphibian or the claim that it’s authentic. (Photo by Joe Nickell)

  Following Joe’s expedition to the museum’s third floor, he determined that the exhibit was probably not a real bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana). Did he penetrate the sealed display case to obtain a DNA sample? No, he simply sweet-talked his way into the museum’s files, which were revealing. A 1988 con
dition report by the Canadian Conservation Institute referred to the sixty-eight-centimeter (almost twenty-seven-inch) artifact as a “large, possibly stuffed frog” but went on to observe that—in addition to many wrinkles having formed in the “skin”—there was actually a “fabric impression underneath” and, indeed, “a yellowed canvas” visible through some cracks. There was an overall layer of dark green paint, to which had been added other colors, the report noted. Wax appeared to be “present below the paint layer,” and the feet were described as being “a translucent colour, possibly consisting in part of wax.” Although a taxidermist of the 1880s might have used some of these materials (Encyclopaedia Britannica 1960), the overall effect is of a fabricated item, especially considering the canvas. Its impression showing through the paint suggests the lack of an intervening layer of true skin, for which the fabric was probably used as a substitute.

  It should be noted that the largest frog actually known, according to The Guinness Book of Records (1999), is the African goliath frog (Conraua goliath), a record specimen of which measured a comparatively small fourteen inches (sitting) and weighed just eight pounds, one ounce. At almost twice the length and five times the weight, Coleman’s pet froggie is no more credible than his outrageous yarns about the creature.

  The museum file also contained a letter stating the policy of the historical society regarding the Coleman frog. To a man who had objected to the exhibition of the artifact, President E. W. Sansom (1961) wrote: “It was agreed .… that the stuffed frog was of historical interest only as an artificial duplication used for publicity purposes by F. B. Coleman years ago in Fredericton. As such, the majority of those present felt the frog should be retained but only as an amusing example of a colossal fake and deception.” And so it remains on display, according to one journalist (Brewer 1973), “as big as life—yea, bigger.”