Loch Ness Photographs	Loch Ness Background	Aircraft	UFO Links Space Links	Main Page
UFOs over Belgium	UFOs over Belgium (page 2)	UFOs and Aliens Throughout History	UFO Articles	Alien Catalogue

For hundreds of years there have been reports of strange animals living in Loch Ness, creatures much larger than one would expect to find in a British fresh-water lake. Many people have seen the so-called Loch Ness 'Monsters' but few photographs have been taken. This is because most of the sightings are of very short duration, usually 8 to 10 seconds.

In Loch Ness the visibility is almost nil below 30 feet and infra-red penetrates only about 15 feet. This is due to millions of tiny peat particles washed down by the rivers and streams. Thus, underwater photography is out of the question. This also applies to observations by skin divers or submarines. Sonar and Echo Sounders have been used with some success, but these instruments only indicate the presence of some large, solid, animate object(s).

To obtain close-up photographs which might identify the creatures is extremely difficult. Apart from the brevity of the sightings, one has to contend with bad light, the vast area of water and the fact that only a part of the animal is seen. Unfortunately there has never been a large scale scientific investigation of Loch Ness. There have only been more than a few publicity stunts and gimmicks under the guise of investigation.

So what do the Loch Ness 'Monsters' look like ? Adding what my friends in Scotland have seen to hundreds of reliable eye witness accounts, these creatures certainly resemble the Plesiosaur closely. Those aquatic beasts were known to have lived in the Northern Hemisphere, and several skeletons have been found in the British Isles.
A creature with a small head, long tapering neck, large body and long tail. There is some evidence to suggest that the creatures have four large flippers or paddles. The largest ones are estimated to be about twelve meters in length. Although scientists believe the Plesiosaur to have been extinct for something like 70 million years, we cannot rule out the possibility that the present inhabitants of Loch Ness are descended from or closely related to these creatures from the Dinosaur Age.
After all, until 1938, the Coelacanth was believed to have been extinct for millions of years. Since then, many have been caught or found in the South Atlantic.

Written records about the Loch Ness Creatures go back to somewhere around the beginning of the 7th century when Adamman, 9th Bishop of Iona, makes reference to the water beasts in Loch Ness in his writing of the biography of St. Columba.

As recently as 7000 years ago Loch Ness was open to the North Sea, and it must be accepted that the creatures were coming to and from the sea, using the Loch as a feeding and breeding ground, in the same way large sea creatures use the Scandinavian fjords. Then the Loch was cut off from the sea by a local land upheaval where Inverness is now, and some were trapped. There have been similar sightings in the North Sea and the North Atlantic.
Some marine biologists have given fourteen as the minimum number that would be required to maintain a species. If we accept this figure, and we must accept somebody's estimate, it might be reasonable to suggest between 20 and 30 of the beasts. Some so-called experts have talked of a 'breeding herd', but I prefer to think of several small families each in their own part of the Loch. There has been a number of sightings of two together, but no reports of a huge disturbance that might indicate a herd or school.

The physical aspects of Loch Ness make it an ideal place for the survival of any species. The Loch is 21.78 square miles in area, has a mean depth of 433 feet and a maximum of 980 feet. It is free from pollution and has a constant water temperature of about 7° Centigrade (43 F°). Although science is reluctant to accept the evidence coming from Loch Ness, it must be pointed out that the 'monsters' have been protected by a local bylaw since 1934.

Like the Plesiosaur which they so closely resemble, the Loch Ness animals must be fish eaters. There is not enough vegetation in the Loch to support large life forms for a long period of time, and the plankton content is low. Possibly the main source of their food could be eels. There are millions of them in the Loch and they do go down into the depths. There are also large amounts of salmon, sea trout and brown trout. These fish are mainly only a few feet below the surface and it may be because of this that we see the creatures - they have to come so close to the surface to catch those fish that they break the surface by accident.

There is absolutely no pattern to the sightings. There is no evidence to suggest that one part of Loch Ness is best for sightings, nor are there any special times of the day or months of the year that are better than others. There is no evidence to suggest that night watching would bring better results - and of course, night work would present many difficulties and would need much more sophisticated equipment. Besides, to be of any value, a picture must have background and foreground to prove where it was taken and to make a comparison as to size.

Many people ask why remains are never washed up. Tests have indicated that the mineral content, the density and constant temperature of the water combine to delay the usual action that brings bodies to the surface. And the under-water ledges and rock overheads would probably trap any large body. It is said that Loch Ness never gives up its dead. It is certainly true that quite a few people have drowned in the murky waters and their bodies have never been recovered. Even dead fish never come to the surface.

It is essential that a Nessie watcher has his or her camera at the ready at all times. A camera done up in its case or lying on the back seat of the car is useless. A telephoto lens is a must and the most important factor is the ability to use the equipment very quickly.

Frank Searle, for whom I worked at the time I lived at Loch Ness, has taken a number of pictures, but none that he ever claimed to have any real scientific value. Some of these pictures can be found on the 'photograph' page.