The first mentioned sighting of a beastie was in the seventh century, when it is said that a large fish was threatening some monks, but St Columba, reputed to have a loud voice, shouted and drove it away, but this story is linked to the river flowing out of Ness into the North Sea, and for hundreds of years no more was seen. There never was a mediaeval legend of a Loch Ness monster.Not even nineteenth century Victorians, ever keen on highland lore, had heard of it.
The story hit the press in 1933 when some tourists driving along the Lochside road at night claimed to have seen a beastie that had crawled from the water. The press got hold of the tale, and it took on a life of its own. Soon there were monster pictures, all hoaxes; and there were genuine mistakes, when people mistook logs afloat in the loch for Nessie.
Yet some sightings will not go away as easily. In the 1950s monks and schoolboys from Fort Augustus Abbey school who were fishing in the loch saw a brown back emerge from the water. They merely reported the incident and made nothing financially from it, so it is hard to make a claim of lies against them.
Many echo soundings have been made and nothing conclusive came into sight.One sounding saw some large objects moving around at the bottom of the loch, but some scientists suggested that they were sunken logs, but this explanation is not proven. Only one photograph, which appeared to show fins on a fish, seemed to confirm the monster, but it was noted that there was no scale against which to gauge the size. So nothing has been proved or disproved at the moment.
Some support for the theory that there could be something down there came in the 1980s when an angling boat in Loch Morar was attacked by a sharp toothed beast, which bit so hard into a metal oar thrust down its mouth by the frightened fishermen that it left teeth marks. Loch Morar is very close to the sea, only a few yards, so it is likely that what attacked the fishermen was a conger eel, but it soon gained the name Morag. If there could be a beast in one loch, why not in another? There is certainly a case.
Stories of lake creatures began to appear in Ireland when some anglers saw a large back emerge from the water in Lough Rea, but the Irish sense of humour took over and soon there were reports from many loughs, even ones only as deep as pond. The Lough Rea case was possibly a large pike or an eel, but nothing has been heard of this for many years.
Recent studies have found no catfish or surgeon dna in the loch,but plenty of eel dna. Conger is a possibility, but it would not have an easy journey from the sea.
The situation in Loch Morar, which is very close. to the sea, is more conducive to conger. In
Morar a large eel attacked a boat containing anglers some years ago and they had to fend it off with a metal oar. The beast left teeth marks in the oar.
The catfish theory can be quite persuasive, particularly when couched in the early 20th-century sightings. Introduction in the 19th century by sport-loving men and oblivion in the 20th-century by world war-fighting men explains sightings between the two world wars.
But would it also be possible that maybe some conger eels and some sturgeon spell -- ;-D -- catfish in need of downtime from amusing all the visitors seeking to see if not photograph Nessie?
Further information. on the monster. A team of New Zealand scientists have found that there is no reptilian DNA in the loch, and while they do not discount the presence of catfish they have discovered much eel DNA. They suggest that the Loch Ness phenomenon may be a large eel.
I have looked up the latest findings, and I am surprised at the depth of the trench. What the report said is that a sonar detector revealed a very deep trench at the bottom of the loch, in which he spotted a large hump backed object. On a later scan this object had moved, and he believes that this indicates that it is animate, though we cannot be certain. The trench is named Keith's Abyss or Keith's Crevice. Interestingly is near Urquart Castle where most sitings have been made.
Keith's Abyss is twice as deep as the North Sea, so the possibiilty of a tunnel from it to this sea is unlikely. What would cause such a tunnel to exist is a mystery.
No I have not seen it. I turned on for my normal lunch routine of watching the news, but found that it was Prime Minister's Question Time. Tedious propaganda
have you seen today's news about Loch Ness and the monster. Very interesting .
I am still open minded having been there. I would never dismiss it.
If you search for ''plesiosaurs on ice'' you will find a very interesting article on the purported survival of reptiles at low temperatures. There is also this to consider: if plesiosaurs survived into modern times where have they been? Certainly not Loch Ness (which is only 30 miles from my home by the way!) for that loch didn't form (as a loch) until about 12,000 years ago. It is indeed a puzzle!
This is interesting and is certainly relevant. I still reject the plesiosaur theory because reptiles are cold blooded and so need to warm their bodies from the sun's heat. Not only is Scotland cold, but the waters of Loch Ness are very cold, so I cannot see a plesiosaur surviving there, and anyway, the Loch was ice covered for thousands of years during the Ice Ages, so the survival of any creatures there seems unlikely.
Latest research indicates that plesiosaurs weren't egglayers - they bore live young - so I still consider it a possibility!
Thank you Carly. I note that you are new to Wizzley. It is good to have you here and I look forward to reading your work.