Posts

Ritchie, Eleanor "A Strange Sea Reptile," The Spectator (25 March 1922)

With reference to this subject I think it may interest your correspondents to hear that the garramooloccwh (not garramooloch, as spelt in your issue of March 18th) is well known in parts of Wiltshire. I inherited one of these animals many years ago, and it has remained until recently a treasured household pet. Owing, however, to its unfortunate propensity for leaping in the air and chasing the air-planes which daily make their way from London to Bristol it has had to be destroyed.

Bacon, J. Ester "A Strange Sea Reptile," The Spectator (18 March 1922)

I was much interested in the letter in your issue for March 4th from my friend Admiral Anstruther with regard to the animal, whether mammal, reptile, or fish, which he saw leap out of the sea to the height of forty or fifty feet. These amimals are well known to the inhabitants of the wilder parts of the coast of Connemara, Mayo and Donegal, and are known as Gorramoolochs. The inhabitants do not, however, often speak of them to visitors, whom they know to be incredulous. As the creatures leap principally by night they are not often seen. They can leap to a much greater height than that seen by your correspondent, and woe to the belated gannet upon which they once set their eye, even though it be flying at a height of 100 feet above the surface of the sea. They follow it like a sleuth hound, and when they get within striking distance launch themselves through the air and, gliding by the aid of their large wing-like fins and guided by the swinging of their tail, they strike it and bring i

Anstruther, Robert H. "A Strange Sea Reptile," The Spectactor (4 March 1922)

In the spring of 1910, when I was in command of the 'Caesar,' battleship, steaming towards the Clyde and between the coast of Ireland and the Isle of Man, I was on the bridge, in broad daylight, when a creature leapt out of the water close to the ship and shot straight up into the air about forty or fifty feet, and came down spread-eagle fashion. It had the appearance of a chameleon, though shorter in proportion, and was about the size of the skinned chow-dogs one sees hanging outside the butchers' shops of Canton. I called the navigating officer from the standard compass, and as he got to my side the creature leapt again, and we both had a good look at it. I have never been able to get any information about such a thing from books or from people, and had almost given up the quest when I saw the banner of the Ancient Town of Rye. The banner is copied from the seal of the town. The seal is very old and represents the arms of Rye (three figures, half lion, half line o' b

Brown, Henry "Bigger Than Nessie," Science Digest, Vol. 62 (1967)

Your item on Dr. Roy P. Mackal and the Loch Ness Monster (This Month, July '67) was especially distressing to me. It is not that the Loch Ness Phenomena Investigation Bureau Ltd. should not keep on investigating, but this group is after minnows compared to the huge Leviathan in waters approximately two hundred miles west of the Azores Islands, in the regular shipping lanes. The Loch Ness Monster, according to other articles I have read is not larger than fifty feet, while the mammoth creature of which I am speaking may be over three hundred feet, possibly five hundred feet. Approximately 1300 hours, 25 June, 1966 while on board a ship en route to New York I saw this tremendous Leviathan partially surfaced in a calm sea. There was not a whitecap to be seen, when all of a sudden there was a breakwater about a mile distant, as the prow of a ship might make. My first glimpse of the greyish-blue sea serpent came as the long round body emerged from the depths and, like a roller coaster,

Beebe, William "A New Deep-Sea Fish," Bulletin of the New York Zoological Society, Vol. 35, No. 5 (1932)

On the twentieth dive in the Bathysphere, at a depth of 2100 feet, we saw two large, elongate, barracuda-shaped fish, which twice passed within eight feet of the windows, once partly through the beam of our electric light. These were at least six feet in length. No direct lights were visible on the head, yet the rather large eyes and the faint outline were distinct. There was a single row of strong, pale blue lights along the side, large and not far from twenty in number. The mouth, with strongly undershot jaw, and numerous fangs illumined either by mucous or indirect internal lights along the brachiostegals. The fish reminded me in general of barracudas, with deeper jaws open all the time. Posterially placed vertical fins were seen when they passed through the electric beam. There were two ventral tentacles, each tipped with a pair of separate, luminous bodies, the superior reddish, the lower one blue. These twitched and jerked along beneath the fish, one undoubtedly arising from a

Barton, Otis (1953) The World Beneath the Sea, Crowell, pp. 43, 158-159

Just as NBC was signing off, Dr. Beebe gave an exclamation. A deep sea dragon at least six feet long crossed before the window and a moment later returned with its mate. Until that time scientists had doubted the presence of such large fish in the middepths. This was the only big dragon on record, and I had missed seeing it!

Anon. "Sea Monster is Captured," The Calgary Daily Herald (24 August 1937)

The monster taken at Fortune Bay was still unidentified two days after it was killed in a 48-hour battle against fishermen's guns and harpoons, and was lying lashed to Capt. Earl Noble's motor vessel Golda awaiting an offer of purchase. If no museum or institution buys the huge carcass, its nine-inch deep coat of fat will be fried into oil. The exact length of the creature is 34 feet. It is finless, but has several pairs of four-foot long flippers. Its tail is nine feet in extreme width; while the mouth, three feet, eight inches across, extends nine feet from the tip of the snouth. The immense fish differs greatly from any whales frequenting Newfoundland waters, and does not fit descriptions of any known fish.