Loch Ness just a Catfish??

An expert who apparently gave up everything (dumb move, unless he's getting paid of course) to find Nessie is thinking that the Loch Ness monster may just a type of catfish... 24 years is an awfully long time to find something.

The Loch Ness monster is most likely a large catfish, according to an expert who has spent 24 years searching for Nessie.

Steve Feltham, 52, gave up his home, his job and his girlfriend to move nearer the Scottish loch in pursuit of the legend.

Speaking to Sky News, Mr Feltham did not claim he had solved the mystery of Nessie.

But he said: "Looking at all the evidence, speaking to eyewitnesses, the most likely solution is a Wels catfish."

Now while it can be true.. the pictures of Nessie that have surface over the years depict a more snake like creature with some humps.. I do think that while there may be huge catfish out there in the lake, Nessie is probably still hiding somewhere...

news.sky.com...

www.scotsman.com...

“It is known they were introduced into English lakes by the Victorians for sport. They are very long lived and it is entirely possible they were introduced by Victorians to the loch - which would explain why the main sightings of Nessie really started in the 1930s - just as the animals were reaching maturity,” said Mr Feltham, who gave up his girlfriend and home in Dorset to hunt for Nessie.

“There was a viable breeding population but I think the numbers have declined to the extent that there are now just one or two left. They also eat other catfish and may have eaten breeding females over time. Nessie is destined to be no more, I’m afraid.

Another link with more info... Apparently these things were introduced back in the day..

a reply to: blackmetalmist

I feel sorry for the guy , he spent 24 years looking for something then realises it isn't there after giving everything up for it , I guess he lived his dream but awoke to his worst nightmare.

The Monster isn't one thing it's many all given life by people belief , Monsters are best left un-hunted else they turn to mist.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

You're aware the famous Nessie photo above has been proven to be a hoax. It was admitted by the Creator just in the last several years as he wanted to admit it and clear the air.

Still, I agree there are too many varying descrptions that would make the catfish theory improbable...but, woah!

I love to eat catfish....and the thought of it being that huge...wow! How big a skillet or broiling tray would you have to have if "Nessie " turned out to be one for real!!!!!!!????

What a bummer!

SPOILER
Its like finding out Santa Claus doesn't exist.

I still want to believe!

a reply to: gortex

It's almost like coming to the conclusion that Bigfoot is nothing but a chimpanzee on the loose

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Yes, I just used that picture because that's what made it famous However, there have been other pictures and videos that have surfaced that portray the Loch Ness Monster as a snake like creature. I think Catfish get more rounder as oppposed to skinnier and large so I am still not convinced..

I love catfish too... I may have some for dinner in honor of this story

a reply to: blackmetalmist

Have you ever seen river monsters?

Catfish feature regularly on that show, and on many occasions the monsters of the deep are just giant catfish, and they are big, strong and fast. No one could blame the locals for believing that the giant catfish is a sea monster.

But the problem is that Nessie, Champ or Ogopogo have been reported to be as big as a bus and I doubt catfish get that big.

i have just looked up a bio-diversity survey of the loch - and catfish is not listed as a species present

so much for his expertise in such matters

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

I've seen the commercials but I've never watched the show. I'll have to check it out sometime.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

Yeah that is unfortunate. I can personally vouch for how big cats can get. I'm an avid fisherman And I've caught cats in the Mississippi and a little further down south. My best weighing in at 71lbs. That was a huge cat, but travel across the world to Europe and you can find cats in the 200+ pound range.

originally posted by: slapjacks
a reply to: blackmetalmist

Yeah that is unfortunate. I can personally vouch for how big cats can get. I'm an avid fisherman And I've caught cats in the Mississippi and a little further down south. My best weighing in at 71lbs. That was a huge cat, but travel across the world to Europe and you can find cats in the 200+ pound range.

Are they still edible when they get that large?

a reply to: highfromphoenix

It all depends on what type of catfish it is, and where it was. For example where I live we have an abundance of Channel cats, that are "edible" but I would not recommend eating them due to the nature of where they were caught, a god-awful dirty/polluted river.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

Hi mist,
I'm from Scotland, and have visited the Loch Ness area many times.

I have to say that I have never heard of any mention of Catfish there before.

I believe that the guy (in the OP) claims that Catfish were introduced into ENGLISH LAKES by the Victorians (and that is probably true) but he only asserts that it is "entirely possible" that they were also introduced to Loch Ness.
(Not that they definitely were.)

I'm not aware of any such programme of introduction, and I suspect that if it had happened, then the people responsible for cataloging the range of species in the Loch would almost certainly know about it.

It may also have to be taken into account that the stories of monsters in the Loch go WAY WAY back, many centuries before the Victorians were around, and that the vast majority of "sightings" don't seem to match the descriptions of any catfish.

Obviously, a "one-off" monster doesn't make any sense biologically speaking (there would have to be a breeding population of whatever it is) but the Loch is linked to the Sea... and we've all heard the ancient stories of Sea-Monsters, so who knows!

kindest regards,
G

I don't buy the catfish theory. People are seeing *something* on the water surface and catfish are bottom feeders and dwell in small caves, crevices and under things. You rarely, if ever see a catfish go to the surface of any given body of water that they frequent. Catfish most certainly do not poke heads, fins and appendages out of the water. I'm from the South and I go noodling and catfishing all the time in Lakes and Rivers. I've seen huge yellowcats that look like they could swallow a man whole from your regular mudcats to channelcats.

This theory is almost absurd. It seems like a last ditch theory made out of desperation due to 20 some odd years of failure. So he felt the need to come up with a forced theory due to it.

I don´t think there's catfishes on loch ness.

At best, the monster could be a giant eel.

Coming from a race of brilliant idiots, I will remind those that will point to the Surgeon photo that despite it allegedly being an admitted hoax, it does little to close the book on the countless sightings through the centuries. It is odd that people seem to want to wipe their hands on the matter, given that picture. There are many historical accounts of land sightings, the St. Augusta tale, etc

I recall the attempt to create a sonar wall in 1987. Forgive me....but did anybody really believe that such a brazen, noisy attempt to attract such a water demon would work?

Nessie sightings seem to have dropped off over the last 15 or so years. Did new roadways, circa 1933, reveal a hidden inhabitant....one that has now passed on, relocated or vanished into the ether?

I cannot get away from the few reports that Nessie seemed to shape shift...or that it was conjured up at that famous dark house down the loch. The paranormal spin to Nessie...and even other cryptids is not lost upon me....as though we are being subjected to a long tease.

I'm onboard with the eel theory too.

a reply to: Gordi The Drummer

Hi ! It must be nice to live in such a beautiful place like Scotland Thank you for your input and yes, it's highly unlikely that this animal is just a catfish. Especially since they are not native to that area. I think that he is just pressured into saying something after spending all those years searching for Nessie.

Hopefully the quest to find Nessie continues. I'd personally like to take a trip to Scotland one day and go out there to the lake myself

a reply to: Frocharocha

tim dinsdale also opines :

" a monster eel "

i cannot find his book right now - despite the fact i consulted it for my last thread post

but IIRC - his argument is :

an eel in the loch with aboundant food [ trout // salmon ] would have little handicap to growth - and low predation risk - allowing a theoretical growth only constrained by age and health

^ paraphrased

"Loch Ness Monster" is ambiguous. It's just the catch-all term used for something large that is seen in the loch. It's almost like how people always forget the literal meaning of UFO. There are many Loch Ness Monsters, this is a fact. The question is, what the hell is it. More specifically, is it a plesiosaur?

There are catfish and eels in loch. A large amount of sighting reports are catfish and eels that either look larger to people than they actually are, or are actually bigger than usual. What this dude should have done is created a hypothesis, a very basic one. Either prove or debunk that there are plesiosaurs/basilosaurus/whatever else in the loch. Just coming out and saying that a lot of the reports are just catfish adds nothing to the search or conversation. It's just something we already know.