Most people have probably heard of the Loch Ness Monster, the giant reptilian creature that supposedly haunts the famous Scottish lake. In recent years, poor old Nessie’s reputation has taken somewhat of a battering, especially with the discovery of the original toy model used in the well-known 1934 photo that launched the latter-day Nessie craze. However, cryptozoologists and other fans of legendary creatures can take heart in the fact that several lakes in America may be playing hosts to similar monsters. And perhaps the most famous resides right here in Vermont. It goes by the name Champ, and many believe it lurks beneath the cool, silvery waters of our own Lake Champlain.
Quite a number of people have reported seeing Champ over the years, including according to legend none other than Samuel de Champlain, the great French explorer whose name now graces the lake. (More on this point later.) Exactly what Champ looks like seems to vary rather widely, from a relatively mundane 6 foot long alligator-like creature to the stereotypical aquatic dragon 40 feet or more in length. And unlike others of its ilk, Champ has actually been captured on film, in what many believers and skeptics alike feel is the best photograph ever taken of a lake monster. This famous photo, snapped on July 5, 1977 by a Connecticut mother of two (31 years ago today), appears to show an unknown, long-necked animal, looking for all the world like a plesiosaur, an aquatic reptile that scientists maintain went extinct some 65 million years ago.
Other than this photograph, the main evidence in favor of Champ’s existence consists of eyewitness accounts. Nearly everything else – biology, geology, paleontology – weighs very, very heavily against it. For instance, Champ could not have arisen within Lake Champlain itself, since the lake has only been around a few thousand years, far too short a time for such a creature to evolve. Previously Champlain was a salt water bay for several thousand years, and before that the entire area was buried under a mile or more of glacial ice. Thus Champ must have migrated to the lake from elsewhere, perhaps while it was still connected to the Atlantic Ocean. However, no trace of any animal even remotely fitting Champ’s description has ever been found anywhere in the world, at least not since the plesiosaurs went extinct (and 65 million years is far too long a time for a large, air-breathing creature to survive without leaving any sign at all of its presence). Further, we’re talking about a breeding population, not a single specimen. Thus a minimum of hundreds, perhaps thousands of individual Champs must have lived in the lake over the centuries. Yet no bones have ever been found, or carcasses washed ashore. And presuming Champ is an air-breathing reptile, how does it survive in winter while the lake is frozen over? Until such questions are addressed, mainstream science will likely continue to regard Champ with a very dubious eye.
Then what are people who claim to have seen Champ actually seeing? Some have speculated that many purported sightings are in fact caused by otters. It may seem far-fetched or even insulting to suggest someone could mistake a cute, cuddly mammal for a 40-foot serpentine reptile. But otters can be considerable larger than some people anticipate (up to five feet long) and allowing for the common habit people have of overestimating the size of unfamiliar things, it’s not too difficult to imagine a single otter accounting for some of the smaller Champ reports. Perhaps more interesting, otters also have the habit of swimming single file in groups. A line of otters swimming nose to tail can look all the world like a single huge, multi-humped snakelike creature undulating through the water. Another likely suspect is the sturgeon, a prehistoric looking fish with an alligator-like snout. Sturgeon can grow up to six feet or more in length – and to those encountering it suddenly for the first time, it may appear two or three times that size. (A careful re-reading of Samuel de Champlain’s original description makes it clear that he was in fact talking about a sturgeon, not a giant reptilian monster. Thus Champlain cannot really be counted among Champ witnesses.) And of course, given human nature, it seems almost certain that at least a few of these sightings are simply hoaxes. In the end, there is far too much ambiguity and unresolved questions with eyewitness accounts to accept them at face value, especially when you consider all the scientific obstacles to Champ’ existence.
But what of that 1977 photograph? Even here, there are serious questions. For example, the woman who took it snapped only one picture, and then sat and watched Champ for several minutes without bothering to take another, behavior that can at best be described as unfortunate and at worst suspicious. She did not keep the negative, and cannot even remember where the encounter occurred. The image on the photo is lacking in details that could help determine important considerations such as distance and size; basically it’s just a rather undefined silhouette against a watery background. The woman herself said the creature appeared some 12 to 18 feet long and was 150 feet away, although if the distance is correct (and again, people tend if anything to overestimate things) the object in the photo must have been much smaller. Analysis of the picture appears to suggest it was taken on a sand bar, in water far too shallow to hide (as the picture appears to show) the bulk of a large creature’s body. And so on. In short, the 1977 photograph, although interesting, is proof of absolutely nothing without more corroborating evidence.
I suppose some may ask, what’s the harm in believing in Champ? I personally feel that there is indeed harm, since it helps breed a sort of intellectual laziness whenever we promote fantasy because some think it’s more interesting and exciting than dull old reality. For instance, last year I visited the Echo Lake Aquarium and Science Center in Burlington. Among the exhibits was a short continuous loop video that discussed Champ. The video, which appeared to be aimed primarily at children, followed the usual format of the genre: lots of “maybe, what if, who knows” testimony from believers, interrupted by a brief sound bite or two from a token skeptic, followed by more believers. The overall thrust of the presentation was that the existence of Champ is still very much an open question, an astonishing thing for a facility with the word “science” in its title to suggest. Meanwhile, without moving from the spot I could turn my head and see an absolutely beautiful and fascinating display of Lake’s Champlain’s true monsters, giant sturgeon, catfish, lake trout, salmon, and other species that are every bit as interesting and mysterious as Champ, while enjoying one huge advantage: they happen to be real. It can be easily argued that any institution that expends time, effort, and money on pseudoscience like the Champ video, rather than educating people about (and thus helping preserve) the real deep-water citizens of Lake Champlain, does its public a grave disservice.
Dick McCarrick
dmccarrick@vermontel.net