you're reading...
Cryptid Research, Top News

Was Bigfoot Researcher Cliff Crook Accused of Hoaxing by the BFRO, Money Maker V.S. Crook

My name for the record is Evan jensen. I live in the Pacific Northwest, so when I see and article pertaining to the great outdoors,well I may just take notice to it.

If the paranormal or Crptid field ever changes, it may take  huge leaps toward achieving the same said goals.When people fake evidence and pictures, it can set the field back in progressive movement.We hope the allegations are not true and will be following any additional comments and or replies to this particular blog as well.

The feud continues Money Maker V.S. Crook?

IN this article, we will explore allegations made by the BFRO. They the BFRO have basically stated they had evidence and proof of alleged Bigfoot hoaxer(Cliff Crook) that he was making more stuffed toys and shooting them as the real deal?

The article was written by By Daniel Dover,in the Bigfoot Junction. the article goes on to say the following”Matt Moneymaker accused Cliff Crook of being a hoaxer soon after forming the BFRO (Bigfoot Field Research Organization) and a bitter feud has ensued between the two ever since. Pictured below are Crook, a photo of an alleged sasquatch published by Mr. Crook, and Matthew Moneymaker who claims the Sasquatch is a miniature sculpture created by Mr. Crook.

Cliff Crook had his first sighting as a child in 1956 in the state of Washington and he’s been a researcher since the 1970′s and has sold postcards, maps of Bigfoot sightings, and Bigfoot memorabilia including replicas of bigfoot tracks. During his decades of research people sent him photos, many of which he published. He was a consultant on the movie “Harry and the Hendersons.”

In a Jan. 30, 2010 BFRO article titled, Hoaxer Cliff Crook Promoting Phony Photo, Again,”Matthew Moneymaker makes this statement:

“Long-time hoaxer Cliff Crook of Bothell, Washington, has a unique niche in the bigfoot evidence fabrication business. He’s a sculptor. What does a Bigfoot-hoaxer-sculptor do? He mostly sculpts fake tracks, at his home. At one time he had a whole track duplication factory in his garage and backyard. Crook has sculpted more than just phony Bigfoot tracks though. He has sculpted entire Bigfoot statues of various shapes and sizes. He didn’t sell those statues, rather he took photos of them and tried to pass them off as authentic photos.”

Is Cliff a Crook guilty of these things? Sadly, even if he is right, Matthew Moneymaker states this as fact but doesn’t offer any evidence that Mr. Crook did this. Cliff Crook made duplicates of Bigfoot tracks at his home that he sold as replicas, yet Moneymaker claims he sculpted fake tracks, and then Moneymaker spring boards that accusation to conclude that Crook also sculpted fake statues of Bigfoot and photographed them as well.

A problem with the accusation is if someone has done research as long as Mr. Crook has then he has likely made sasquatch footprint casts and would not need to sculpt a fake print in order to make a mold for replicas. Besides there being no evidence that Mr. Crook sculpted fakes of any kind, if he publishes a photo from a third party that turns out to be fake it doesn’t make him a hoaxer, unless he promotes something as real that he realizes is likely fake, which might be where Mr. Crook is guilty of fraud.

Now, many believe the photo of the alleged Sasquatch above looks like a miniature action figure. Cliff Crook claims to have gotten that photo from a park ranger that didn’t want his name released. According to Crook the ranger said he was investigating a problem bear when he heard splashing in the water under a bridge he was standing on. He was able to take photos of the alleged sasquatch while looking down on it from above.

David Rodriguez wrote an excellent article explaining why that photo is not a miniature, providing evidence it is a full sized being. Residing in the same general region of the country he recognized the common water plant with white flowers seen in the photo with the alleged Sasquatch.

Rodriguez writes, “so its time to blow the ‘small action figure’ allegation out of the water. You see those tiny white spots in the water? That appears to be one of a few well known aquatic plant species, such as White Water Crowfoot, Water Buttercup or Fanwort. They each grow in slow moving streams or in ponds throughout the US and Canada. I see it in the rivers and ponds where I live here in Oregon, which is how I first recognized it in the photos. I also have some background in waterway ecosystems having once pursued the construction of a fresh water interpretive center. Depending on species, the size of the flowers (1/2″ – 3/4″) then provides some scale to the photos.”

Open Letter to BLC from David Rodriguez

Now, this might not be a miniature, and if we stopped here we might consider this Bigfoot could be real, but I have to thank Matthew Knapp for finding another of these series of pictures that does indeed prove this Bigfoot is a hoax. As Matt K. commented, “. . . how do you explain this photo, same position, facing same direction, nothing has changed in its pose. Camera person standing right next to it?” Answer: you can’t explain it in a way that doesn’t make this a fake. The ranger could not have taken the photo up top and then gone down the hill to ground level with it and taken this other photo (below). So, perhaps Moneymaker is vindicated, having some legitimacy to his hoaxer claims, at the least this is problematic for Cliff Crook.

Now, Crook later admitted he was possibly duped with these series of pictures. But it’s hard to believe that if Crook saw this same ground level photo with the others he could not have known it must be a fake. And its a further mind bender why someone would release the ground level photo in the first place if they were committing a hoax. That’s as mysterious as Bigfoot itself; something doesn’t quite add up. If your intention is to hoax why release this damning photo?

looks like a damned tree to me people?

WTH is that?

WTH is that?

The following information came from this website and article.


Sure as hell does not look real to me, unless it is a midget ape, by the way, just made that up.

Sure as hell does not look real to me, unless it is a midget ape, by the way, just made that up.

Crook owns that image, but he *licenses* it to publishers for up to $9,000 a pop. He has promoted it consistently for years, and licensed it several times to publishers.

It can be found in newer children’s books about the subject, and more than one pictorial encyclopedia about famous legends and mysteries. It also appears in several foreign publications, which likely licensed it from Crook as well.

Crook got a lot of mileage out of the puffy black statue. In reality, it may have only been knee-high in size. Doug Hajicek thinks it was less than a foot tall.

Any publisher who licenses the Wild Creek photo will have a cause of action against Mr. Crook for fraud if he did the deal under the pretense that it’s an authentic photo … or the pretense that he doesn’t know either way. Both stories are bald-faced lies. He faked that photo himself in the 1990’s.

Disclaimer: The following information has been provided to us and the article is based on the said information, we obtained. All allegations made are alleged, and the Paranormal Herald can not be held accountable for other parties information.

Paranormal Herald : Evan jensen


MY NAME IS EVAN JENSEN A PARANORMAL EXPERT IF THERE IS SUCH A THING. I myself being involved at various aspects of the paranormal have come to realize it is a field riddled with conmen and frauds hoping to evade the public and con as many as possible. This paper I.E blog site has stopped many from doing such. It is a free site for those needing help and wishing to spread the news of there fellow con people.


14 thoughts on “Was Bigfoot Researcher Cliff Crook Accused of Hoaxing by the BFRO, Money Maker V.S. Crook

  1. I had to laugh at the first figure, if it’s a Bigfoot, it certainly looks like a male peeing in the woods. The second looks like a head was added to it. I don’t know these people, all I can say is if you are doing research, let’s keep it clean, be honest and present facts.

    I can see where someone would profit off selling Bigfoot tracks, if it’s done for fun then I have no problem with it, hopefully no one is claiming these tracks to be real.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by spiritualwalks | August 11, 2015, 9:33 am
  2. actually spiritwalks these people can make as much as 10,000 dollars for these faked tracks een it before i even wrote about it no wonder some folks want me off the internet their cons get exposed

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 11, 2015, 6:16 pm
  3. As far as it being a miniature, you should post a recently updated version of this article. It says an independent panel who investigated it went to the actual site of the photo, and doing ground measurements determined it was 7’10” tall. The article also has more written at the end than you have here that suggests Crook is not the source of the hoax.


    Posted by DDover | August 11, 2015, 7:49 pm
  4. I like the play on words, Money Maker vs Crook.


    Posted by DDover | August 11, 2015, 7:54 pm
  5. can you present that linki and info and ill update the actual article and thanks so much


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 11, 2015, 8:14 pm
  6. thanks DDOver, i wonder if they someone there was the reason the herald received threat phone call.


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 11, 2015, 8:15 pm
  7. we are in this story and will find out what is going on there. i live in the areas as well and will live to investigate the said allegations and claims as well.


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 12, 2015, 12:00 am
  8. Here’s the link to the article. It’s the same link in you have in your article.


    The article was re-written in a number of places. Here is something added to the body after comments about David Rodriguez’ article.

    “The fine investigative work of Mr. Rodriguez might be academic though since an independent panel set up to investigate Mr. Crook’s claims visited the actual site the photo was taken in 1996 and found no discrepancies. It was not a miniature. They took ground measurements and determined the alleged bigfoot was 7’10″ tall. Experts on the panel also studied the photos including negatives and determined there was no photoshopping. See Panel: Bigfoot II

    And here are two paragraphs that were added to the end. You may need to read the previous paragraphs to understand it

    “Upon further investigation I found a possible answer. This main photo at the top of this article is one of 14 photos supposedly taken by a forest game officer in July 1995. Crook says he purchased 7 of the best photos. This is the only photo that he ever released to the public. Crook claims that you can see the other 6 photos in person by appointment only. Other photos that surfaced were not released by Mr. Crook. Bigfoot 101

    So, it’s possible he did purchase these photos from someone under false pretenses, and perhaps he never even saw the ground level photo that found it’s way into the public eye himself. That would seem likely since the ground level photo totally debunks this being a real bigfoot, making it inconceivable that Crook would ever release it or show it to anyone, meaning someone else released it. Since it’s likely someone else had photos that were released it lends credence to the idea that Mr. Crook did purchase the photos from someone, and if he purchased them, and if he never saw the ground level photo, he is not the hoaxer in this incident.”


    Posted by DDover | August 12, 2015, 12:47 am
  9. nice point he may not be the hoaxer and this dispute then would be for nothing really?
    if he did purchase the pics is their any true details as to how the photo was placed pout there is there any evidence that would show or enlighten how the said confusion came to be?


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 12, 2015, 2:00 am
  10. Its possible Crook did not hoax anything. I’d say its likely Moneymaker has stated a lot of assumptions as fact in regards to Crook sculpting items and photographing them as far as I know. We see a lot of unsupported claims of hoaxing in the bigfoot world. In this case Moneymaker is right that the bigfoot is a fake, and likely a fake sculpture at that. But Crook does have an out in that during his decades of research, and selling bigfoot related items, people did contact him with photos, etc.

    Now, if Crook knew these things were fake and promoted them anyway then that is fraud. Perhaps if you are in that area and do investigate it further you should contact Mr. Crook and ask him about the ground level photo, of when he first knew of it’s existence. Was it with the photos he declined to purchase. Since this is most assuredly a fake bigfoot he should out the person if he paid for these photos. You might want to acquaint him with my article.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by DDover | August 12, 2015, 7:13 am
  11. I will do so and thank you for this


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | August 12, 2015, 9:08 am
  12. This is David Rodriguez. First time I have seen this article. Am surprised that D Dover and I actually agree on something too. Too bad he never let me know.

    Anyway, that First photo from the side by Knapp, well I’ve NEVER seen that one before and do not believe it is associated with the other photos. If there is evidence to the contrary, of course I’d like to see it.


    Posted by David Rodriguez | March 5, 2016, 10:26 pm
  13. Oh and thanks for the compliments DDover! 🙂


    Posted by David Rodriguez | March 5, 2016, 10:29 pm
  14. thanks for commenting guys


    Posted by BEYOND THE EDGE OF REALITY | March 6, 2016, 2:22 am
%d bloggers like this: