Go Back Report # 874


NOTE: The following are two separate events. The first occurred at a farm with physical effects on the snow which occurred at 10:20 p.m. on the 12th. The one following this was a very close encounter by car at approximately 1:00 a.m. The date of the last case is also the 12th BUT more likely the early morning of the 13th. If both DID occur on the 12th, there is a gap of 21 hours and 20 minutes. It seems to me that there are too many coincidences here to explain the gap.-CF-

       According to Spaceview, published at Vidor, Texas, a strange, circular craft was seen to land on a snow-covered field near Custer, Wash., in the winter of 1965. Next day a circular pattern was found in the snow at the landing site.    

       "Leading away from the imprint were tracks---oval-shaped about eight inches long and the same distance apart in single file," Spaceview reported. "These tracks led from the imprint in the snow toward a road about 75 feet away, stopped at the barbed-wire fence, made a straight line across an open field for several hundred feet, made an acute right angle turn, and disappeared into a clump of evergreens. The tracks were unique; they were not an impression in the snow but appeared, instead, humped up as though the snow had been sucked up into a vacuum tube oval in shape. The next morning a Geiger count of the incident was made, and the tracks and circular imprint were far above the normal background count of the area. It was also noted then that the tracks had approached the fence uninterrupted, in a straight line, and equidistant in spacing. They had lifted up to clear the fence and returned to the snow on the field across the road."

       Note the distance between prints-eight inches. This was precisely the distance between the mysterious prints made more than a century earlier in the snow of Devon. Considering also the convex oval pattern in both cases (though the English prints were about half as long), the exact single-file sequence and the weird ability to surmount obstacles, it is possible that some sort of mechanical contraption strikingly unchanged over the years, rather than a living creature, was responsible for both sets of prints. Although the spacing was greater at Drumheller, other details were basically similar, so this might have been a third incident of the same variety.  

       In trying to solve the riddle of the tracks, we might compare our position to that of an alien space traveller on the moon who comes across tracks left by American and Russian surface vehicles. If he follows them to their source, he will see landings were made in devices from which the vehicles emerged.  

Since those vehicles are still on the moon, the alien would have no trouble recreating the scene. But even without them, he would almost certainly guess that the twin parallel lines of evenly spaced imprints were made by mechanical objects with propulsion on each side. After a little more study, he would probably have a good idea of what the vehicles looked like and realize they were a means of extending man's lunar exploration.     

       The tracks at Drumheller and Custer suggested so strongly our visitors followed a procedure similar to man's on the moon, particularly as a landing device was seen in each case. Let’s try to picture what type of vehicle they used. (Although no landing site was reported for the Devonshire Beast, we can assume from the path it left it was the same sort of vehicle.) Because of the single-file tracing, we can imagine the vehicle as a solitary wheel with traction-giving pads projecting from its rim and its balance maintained, possibly, by gyroscopic effect. In motion it might resemble a flying saucer rolling along on its edge.                                                                                        
This reference: Our UFO Visitors by John Magor, pp. 211-213 

ALSO, for additional information      

       This was just a few hours before AF silencing of a Federal law-enforcement officer, briefly discussed in the "intimidation" story. This officer had service in the Air National Guard and is a graduate of his present agency's training academy. Here are the full details from his signed report:

       About 1:00 a.m., on January 12, the officer was on duty, driving near Lynden, Washington, when a bright light from the sky illuminated the ground. Suddenly a large, round, glowing object, about 30 feet in diameter, swooped down toward the car.

       "It was only 50 feet away," the officer reports, "I thought I was going to collide with it. Then it arced up over the top of the car. I got out and saw it hovering two hundred feet above me. It appeared to be disc shaped. It was emitting a bright white light except for a round black spot in the center that was possibly 10 feet in diameter.

       "I could hear nothing while it hovered, but when it started to move, I heard a sound like rushing air. After moving horizontally a fourth of a mile, it arced up and disappeared in the clouds in a few seconds.

       "The Air Force contacted me next day and after a thorough interview admitted that they had located a UFO on radar that night. They told me not to talk to anyone — above all, not to newspapermen. This was mostly for my own protection, they said." Because he believes the UFO secrecy is wrong, this Federal officer would have openly registered his feeling, but it was decided "not to have the ----- (agency) or me involved," the signed report ends.

(NICAP will seek a conference at the agency's Washington office and ask them to confirm this report publicly.)

       On the same night, according to reports NICAP is still checking, a similar glowing UFO (perhaps the same one) touched down on a farm near Blaine, a few miles from Lynden. Reportedly, the farmer phoned the AF radar station at Blaine, but before investigators arrived, the UFO took off, at high speed. Where the machine had touched down, the snow was said to be melted and the ground scorched. The farmer and his family (names in the NICAP interview report) are supposed to have been silenced for fear of panic. We hope to verify or disprove this report in the next issue.                                                                                                                                 

This reference: UFO Investigator (NICAP), April 1965, p. 4      

UFOCAT PRN - 38298

UFOCAT URN – 108505 UFO Investigator, publication of NICAP, April 1965, p. 4

UFOCAT URN – 076547 GEPA – Phénomènes Spatiaux, June 1965

UFOCAT URN – 038293 Flying Saucers – Serious Business by Frank Edwards, p. 94, © 1966

UFOCAT URN – 075655 UFO Nachtrichten, July 1969

UFOCAT URN – 075656 UFO Nachtrichten, July 1969

UFOCAT URN – 136814 UFOs and the National Security State by Richard Dolan, 498-254, © 2000

UFOCAT URN – 182171 UFOs and the National Security State by Richard Dolan, 412-254, © 2002

UFOCAT URN – 165397 *U* UFO Computer Database by Larry Hatch, # XXXXXX, © 2002

UFOCAT URN – 057216 Etudes Statistiques Portant sur 1000 Témoignages, Claude Poher, #0025,


UFOCAT URN – 038299 Computerized Catalog (N=3173), #2548 by L. Schoenherr, no © date

UFOCAT URN – 055203 Etudes Statistiques Portant sur 1000 Témoignages, Claude Poher, #6013,


UFOCAT URN – 057497 Etudes Statistiques Portant sur 1000 Témoignages, Claude Poher, #2730,


UFOCAT PRN – 38301

UFOCAT URN – 038302 Flying Saucers – Serious Business by Frank Edwards, p. 94, © 1966

UFOCAT URN – 182220 Flying Saucer Magazine (Palmer), October 1966, p. 30

UFOCAT URN – 091681 Incident at Exeter, the Interrupted Journey: Two Landmark Investigations

                                        of UFO Encounters Together in One Volume by John Fuller, p. 36, © 1966

UFOCAT URN – 038301 UFO-INFO by Gilbert Bernier, March 1968, p. 1

UFOCAT URN – 038300 Data-Net Report, May 1970

UFOCAT URN – 056735 The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry by J. Allen Hynek, p. 132, © 1972

UFOCAT URN – 096104 Our UFO Visitors by John Magor, p. 211, © 1977

UFOCAT URN – 082206 Physical Traces Associated with UFO Sightings by Ted Phillips, p. 661,

                                        CUFOS, © 1979

UFOCAT URN – 122691 A Geo-Bibliography of Anomalies by George Eberhart, #0044, © 1980

UFOCAT URN – 038303 Condon Committee investigation files

UFOCAT URN – 061781 J. Allen Hynek investigation files, p. 45

UFOCAT URN – 192294 UNICAT computer database by Willy Smith, (727), #396, no © date

UFOCAT URN – 064317 Ted Phillips investigation files, 188

UFOCAT URN – 165398 *U* UFO Computer Database by Larry Hatch, # XXXXXX, © 2002    

UFOCAT PRN - 108504

UFOCAT URN – 108504 UFO Investigator, publication of NICAP, April 1965, p. 4

UFOCAT URN – 038298 A Century of Landings (N=923) by J. Vallee, # 630, © 1969

UFOCAT URN – 122750 A Geo-Bibliography of Anomalies by George Eberhart, #0047, © 1980

UFOCAT URN – 145036 The UFO Evidence: Vol. 2 by Richard Hall, p. 003, © 2000

UFOCAT URN – 145690 The UFO Evidence: Vol. 2 by Richard Hall, p. 170, © 2000     

North America – United States, Washington, Whatcom

Curtis               Latitude 46-35-14 N, Longitude 123-06-32 W (D-M-S)

Blaine               Latitude 48-59-38 N, Longitude 122-44-45 W

Lynden             Latitude 48-56-48 N, Longitude 122-27-03 W

Custer              Latitude 48-55-03 N, Longitude 122-38-12 W

Reference: http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic.            

Blaine AFB        Latitude 48-54-51 N, Longitude 122-43-56 W

Reference: http://home.comcast.net/~blaine757/      

UFO Location (UFOCAT): too many to make any significant input.      


Print this Page