White Mountain Apache member and Bigfoot researcher A.K. Riley points to an old Bigfoot track near the bank of the White River near Whiteriver. Riley said the print was about a week or so old having been made sometime in early March, but it still showed the imprint of a heel and toes in the dried mud

Is it me, or are the prints pictured above odd looking? I’ve seen many weird prints before from several different countries, but not like these.
What stands out is the odd “cashew nut” shape of the prints. Very narrow looking. The second thing that stands out is the small distance between the tracks. If these were done by a Bigfoot, then it must have one of the weirdest feet and smallest gait out there.

I’m more inclined to think that these prints were done by someone or something else.

I know we have some Bigfoot experts that read GhostTheory daily, so what do you guys make of these prints?

Full source: WMI central

WHITERIVER -It did not take long after the snow began melting for Bigfoot to make his/her emergence from the hills surrounding Whiteriver.

A.K. Riley, former lawman in the community and renowned Bigfoot investigator, found a cache of new prints in the hills surrounding the area, saying he discovered them about middle of last week.
Riley gave The Independent exclusive access to the prints, which came out of the dense, brush-covered hills overlooking Whiteriver onto an extremely rough dirt trail/road, leaving around 20 feet of them before crossing over to the other side and continuing for about another 30 feet or so and then disappearing into the woods.
Riley said he was in the area performing his normal searches for signs of Bigfoot when he came upon the fresh prints, indicating the creature may be on the move again with the snow melting and it being easier to move about in the rough terrain.
Pointing down at the prints, Riley showed where curiosity seekers had already found and destroyed some by leaving their own prints either alongside Bigfoot’s or inside to show the difference in size. He said it is natural for people to be curious and he often finds the same conditions when he comes across Bigfoot prints, but the problem is that after people leave their own shoe-clad impressions in or beside Bigfoot’s and walk all over the area, it compromises the scientific integrity of the prints, often rendering them useless as evidence.
“You can see where they have put their feet beside them to show how much bigger they are, but it messes up the prints and makes them hard to see sometimes,” Riley said while pointing down at the tell-tale impressions.
Before reaching the location of the newest Bigfoot tracks, Riley took The Independent to a riverbank of the White River running through the region and produced an earlier, almost washed-away print which clearly showed a deep impression where a heel would have come down on the ground while walking, as well as the faded impression of toes digging into the soil as whatever it was that left the print continued walking. The print was about 13 inches long and about four of five inches wide and had obviously been there for at least a few days while the fresh prints higher up on the hill were nearly pristine and flat.
“These have been here for some time,” said Riley pointing at the faded earlier print by the river bank. “And you can see some others in the area as well, but they are faint and hard to see, but they were left here by Bigfoot too, probably a few days ago, but with the snow and melting you can not see them very well now.”
Riley said the creature might have been looking for food or simply going from point A to point B while using the river as a guide, but whatever it was doing it left the telltale tracks behind. He said he did not get any new photos of Bigfoot, but he for one has no doubts in its existence.
A woman who lives in Whiteriver and passes on information to and from Riley in his research said she too believes in the existence of the creature. She said on at least two occasions she has seen evidence and heard noises compelling her to believe something is out there.
The woman asked to remain anonymous but said she and her daughter were out in their truck one evening and saw “something” cross the road in front of them that was “big and hairy” with about a three- to four-foot stride, which was able to cross the double-lane road in no more than three steps. She said on another occasion a friend of hers witnessed what she believed was Bigfoot in an abandoned trailer. The woman apparently heard some noise in a single-wide trailer and when she went in to investigate saw what she thinks was Bigfoot hunched over on a corner of the trailer trying to hide.
Riley said that type of behavior is not uncharacteristic for the creature and that it prefers to keep out of sight. Others in Whiteriver were not so sure of Riley’s discovery of new Bigfoot prints saying no scat (feces) or any kind of carcass has ever been produced which could be proven to be Bigfoot or some other unknown creature which could explain the Bigfoot legend. One said until some kind of definitive, scientific evidence could be produced, which would provide undeniable evidence of the existence of Bigfoot, she would not be a believer.
For many years, sightings of Bigfoot have been reported on the Fort Apache Reservation, mostly by loggers and people who work in the woods. White Mountain Apache Police and game rangers with the Wildlife and Outdoor Recreation Division have collected evidence of these sightings over a long period of time. The hair samples that have been sent to the DPS lab for testing have come back “non-human animal origin,” leaving a lot of room for speculation.
Bigfoot believers say the persistence of reported sightings of Bigfoot-type creatures in North America and elsewhere has convinced leading researchers on primates, including Jane Goodall, made famous by her studies of chimpanzees in Tanzania, to call for something never seriously considered before: a legitimate scientific study to determine whether the greatest apes that ever lived persist in the world’s moist mountainous regions.
Critics suggest people mistake bear prints for those of Bigfoot since the forests where sightings most often occur are inhabited by bears. Standing on their hind legs, bears roughly match the description of Bigfoot, but advocates counter that witnesses include experienced hunters and outdoorsmen, who claim to be familiar with bears, and insist that the creatures they have seen were entirely different.