"ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN" UNMASKED

Press, Volume XCIV, Issue 28020, 14 July 1956, Page 11

"ABOMINABLE SNOWMAN" UNMASKED

Red Bear Believed Guilty Of Himalayan Fraud

[By the Science Correspondent of “The Times”]

The problem of the “Abominable Snowman,” which has troubled western explorers of the Himalayas since the first Mount Everest expedition of 1921. seems at last to have been cleared up—and in a way satisfactory to honour and sanity.

That it was in need of clearing up has been shown lately by Dr. W. L. Strauss, of the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore; “During recent years stories have been coming out of India and Tibet about a giant mammal that lives above the snow line. According to some accounts, this creature is more than 7ft in height, walks erect, has an apelike head and face, and is covered with heavy blonde or reddish hair . . .

the implication is that it is some sort of giant primate. Huge footprints in the snow, at heights of from 10.000 ft to 21.000 ft above sea level, and attributed to the ‘snowman.’ has been reported by a variety of people. . . . From Himalayan expeditions have come actual photographs of the footprints.” Langur Monkey Puzzle The British Museum (Natural History) has entered twice into the argument. In 1937 tracks photographed by Dr. F. S. Smythe in the Garhwal Himalayas were identified by the late Mr R. I. Pocock as those of the “Red Bear,” Ursus arctos isabellinus. In 1951 tracks photographed by Mr Eric Shipton were said to be not those of a bear but more probably of the langur monkey, Presbytis entellus achilles, and an exhibition in support of this theory was arranged at the museum. Later, two Norwegian engineers, Aage Thorberg and Jan Frostis, while prospecting for uranium for the Indian Government, had an encounter with two langur-like animals, one of which bit Frostis. The most recent contributor is Sreemat Swami Pranavananda, an Indian religious notable, who has travelled much in the Himalayas and Tibet, has received support in his geographical work from the survey of India, and in an account published in the Indian Geographical Journal gives the impression of being careful and critical in his collection of information. His account seems almost conclusive on the main point: that, whatever other animals mav leave tracks above the snow line, the animal of the legend is the red bear. Man-Bear Mistranslated Sreemat Pranavananda states that the red bear, familiar to Tibetan shepherds as an animal, is known to them usually as the mi-te (“man-bear,” because it walks on its hind legs), but sometimes as the kangmi (“snowman”). These two. alternative, names being combined, the first—which can also be written as mi-tre, with a very lightly sounded r—had been mistranslated (as if without this fine distinction of sound) as “abominable, filthy, or disgusting.” So the “Abominable Snowman’’ was born. The Sreemat emphasises also that Tibetan shepherds distinguish the mi-te. as an animal and in speech, from two other bears; and that the main cause of confusion was lack of thorough investigation on the Tibetan side of the Himalayas.

He first heard of the mi-te in 1935 from a Tibetan shepherd pilgrim who told him of attacks on sheep in a place, the Kyang Chhu, which is at 16.000 ft altitude; when fired at, it had at first run off on all fours, and later stood up on its hind legs. It was as tall as a man. and light or reddish brown in colour. Two years later he received a similar report from one of the headstreams of the Brahmaputra. However, the most detailed account had come to him in July, 1953. in response to a request to Tibetan friends in the Manas region to collect information by offer of a reward. The most circumstantial in its tying-up of name, animal, and footprints was of a mi-te which in February of that year visited a camp at 15.000 ft on the Tag Tsangpo. on the south-east side of Manasarovar. It was seen in the valley, moving sometimes on all fours, and sometimes on its hind legs. The account was as follows:

“The footprints of the mi-te left on the hard ground scantily covered by sand measured 16 fingers or Ilin m length, and seven fingers or sin in breath. The legs (i.e., hind less) had five toes each, and the hands (lhakpa) only four toes, or only four toes could be seen in the imprints. . . . The toes were two fingers or Ijin long. . . The animal when on its hind legs was described as being taller than a tall man. The colour of the bear was dark brown, though the shade varies from one part of the body to another The body of the animal is. covered with a thick coat of reddish brown hair and the hairs on the face are pretty long. Ten days after, when the shepherds had gone up the valley, thev marked the footprints of the mi-te on the snow fields to be a subit (18in) in length and corresponding width, with no traces of toes.” Said To Attack Yak Mi-te were also reported to attack yak, and man when alone, and often to make excursions into the snow fields and on to glaciers. He himself had found vegetation at heights up to about 20.000 ft: and in regard to the enlargement of track marks by the melting of snow round the edges, he had been able to connect 21in footprints in a difficult and rarely used pass with the passage of a lama through it some 25 days earlier. He had also an unconfirmed report of hibernation by the mi-te under rocks or in a cave. On this evidence, supporting his own directly obtained reports, he

concludes that the “so-called ‘Abominable Snowman’ ” is none other than the red bear of the Himalayas. Bu. it is not alone ’in leaving tracks on the high snow. Tracks of other animals, such as those of the wild yak. the Tibetan wild horse. Tibetan antelope, and musk deer, he saw, sometimes for miles on end, during the winters of 1935-37 and 1943-44. Other possibilities were the - lynx, snow leopard, and wolf. But he is sceptical about the langur, which “mostly get down to warmer regions much before the snowfall.” That may be their usual behaviour. But “snowman” or no, there remain the British Museum identification and the later Norwegian encounter; at biting range, even two university-trained engineers seem unlikely to have taken any other animal for a monkey.