The Kettle Creek Monster and the Susquehanna Mystery Thing: The Susquehanna River Monsters

 The Kettle Creek Monster and the Susquehanna Mystery Thing: The Susquehanna River Monsters

By Cole Herrold

Waterways have always been areas of high strangeness and places of mystery. Rumors of lake serpents or river monsters have encapsulated the mindsets of communities that choose to call the shores home. There are several famous examples from Champ of Lake Champlain or Chessie of the Chesapeake Bay, yet typically, when one thinks of Pennsylvania and Fortean studies, creatures of this type typically do not come to mind. As a researcher, I’ve found that PA has tons of alleged lake and river monsters, some I’ve covered previously from Raystown Ray to the Allegheny River Monster, and then there's the rivers and lakes that PA shares with other states that have reports of creatures such as the Monongahela River which hosts three different cryptids and Lake Erie which is home to Bessie. Yet there's one river that cuts through almost all of the state and has several monster legends, all of which have seemingly gone unnoticed by most researchers, that being the Susquehanna River.

I live along the Susquehanna River's bank, and I have always heard the same stories of giant catfish that are in every body of water, but years later, I found out seemingly that the water is teeming with several possible cryptids that have been reported throughout time. The Armless Horror of the Susquehanna, an armless aquatic humanoid that was seen shambling in the waters near Cly and Goldsboro, is one such entity that was reported in 1905, but eight years earlier, a totally different type of creature was reported in Clinton County and was seen both in the River itself and the adjoining Kettle Creek where it got the names, the West Branch Dugong, the Kettle Creek Monster and the Susquehanna Seal.

Native Americans in the area of the Susquehanna River, particularly near the Kettle Creek area for generations, had tales of some bizarre creature said to swim in the river, but as with most native accounts, settlers did not take them seriously. As towns and communities began to be built along the river, however, people would report seeing a bizarre figure swimming in the river and habitually knocking over lumber barges, rafts, and boats. On February 27, 1897, the first documented reports of the creature were published in the Daily Democrat; the writer, a man by the name of "John of York" wrote, “A marine animal or sea monster is said to have inhabited the dead water… making his home down in its depths among the big, black rocks.” And would go on in several articles to discuss the various reports and theories revolving around the alleged creature.

Those living around the river or fishing would frequently hear the sounds of slapping water and bizarre noises, which would be described as “strange sounds that emanate from the deep, dark water like the groaning of some expiring giant, then like the struggling and snorting of some big hippopotamus.” And” Those who have crossed the animal’s path heard its terrible roar, his disturbing the waters and lashing them into a foam." Those who would take rafts out onto the river would constantly report having them be capsized by the colossal creature, and several others would report seeing the creature frolic through the rushing water. Descriptions of the creature were never clear aside that it was a dark form, with most terminology used as a sea monster or marine animal or as one quote in the original article states, “He was not the form or image of anything else on earth,” however, eventually one witness would get a good enough look at the creature and describe it something like a cross between a hippopotamus and a dinosaur with a size like that of an ox or a hippo.

In 1889 a huge flood hit, and many felt that the creature had finally managed to make its way back to the ocean; meanwhile, others knew better as rafts and boats were still being bumped and turned over all the way into the 1900s. Sightings and rumors of the creature persisted for some time, and even I had heard tales told by many fishermen of seeing incredibly large creatures dwelling in the river, yet most felt it could be a giant catfish. Then in July of 2009, an official report came to light in the Daily Item. The Daily Item is a local newspaper that is run in the city I live in, and in the July 30^th edition, there was a report published by the Great Outdoors section of the paper writer and local fishing guide Ken Maurer, who when asked if there was anything mysterious that he heard of or new that occurred in the river. Ken would describe a bizarre creature that he had seen on several occasions stating, "At first I thought it was a deer or beaver, but nothing was sticking out above the water. It came to within fifty yards of me, then sank under the surface. As it swam, it pushed a hump of water and a “V” that made a wake. It did this for several hundred yards. It was much, much larger than any fish I’ve ever seen, such as a large carp or a fifty-inch musky. Either the navy is testing a small submarine, or we have our own Loch Ness Monster. I saw it several times and it always sank out of sight before it got close enough to see clearly, almost as if it knew I was there”.

A couple weeks after the publication of this account, a larger article came out on August 16, 2009, entitled “Mystery of the ‘thing’ deepens” Ken would return to write about the bizarre beast said to exist in the Susquehanna. In it, he would elaborate on his own encounter as well as how a friend and unnamed acquaintance had seen the creature in the dark waters of the river. Ken stated that he first found out about the creature in 2001 when a good friend of his told him about a bizarre creature he saw swimming in the river that he proceeded to describe as a small submarine that was about to surface. He at the time thought his friend was either making it up or mistaken until the two decided to go out fishing on the river one evening and as the two waited for something to bite their lines, the two saw the mysterious object seemingly rise up out of the water. Ken tried to rationalize what kind of creature this could be, but he could tell that it was not a mammal as its head never rose above the surface and that it was big enough with its wake to create waves that splashed along the shoreline as the creature moved. When the creature got bout 50 yards away, it submerged from sight. Over the next two years, Ken would report seeing the creature several times, and it always managed to disappear before he could get a clear look as to what the creature could be. Years later, in 2009, an acquaintance of his, after reading the original reported encounter in the July 30^th edition, came to him and told him that he too had seen the strange creature, but this time a couple miles downstream from where he typically saw the creature. The two discussed their sightings and came up with very different possibilities as to the identity of the animal; his acquaintance felt that based on the size, it had to be a mammal, possibly a seal or otter, but Ken, even after comparing his encounter with his acquaintance still felt it must be some sort of fish and thought that maybe it was some sort of colossal carp. Ken feels that this creature is extremely rare as sightings are practically nonexistent and only seem to be reported by fishermen and people who are constantly on the river; in fact, he hadn't seen for years since his string of sightings; however, he was made aware in the summer of 2008 of a man who encountered a similar creature in the same general area.

As with most cryptid sightings, there is often a stigma that comes with reporting an encounter, and Ken was no stranger to that. At the beginning of the follow-up article, he mentioned how he received some backlash with his sightings as many had come to question his mental state, eyesight, and whether what he had seen was a figment of his imagination. Yet I think it's very important and applaudable that he did, so this is a creature that needs to be investigated further. Also, the fact that Ken is as close to an expert as one can find when it comes to the species that are supposed to be in the area and that he could point out that clearly, this does not belong is extremely important and adds more credibility to his claims than a lot of the other kinds of cryptid sightings that are out there where the animal is not completely visible.

Aside from Ken Maurer, who reinvigorated tales of a strange creature in the Susquehanna and called the creature he saw the Susquehanna Mystery Thing, Paranormal Researcher Lou Bernard is another person for who we have to thank for keeping this creature alive as he has in recent years written several articles, done several Susquehanna River investigations looking for the creature, and discussed the creature in great lengths at several presentations at nature parks near Kettle Creek and libraries. He has as recently as July 2021 looked for the creature and has managed to bring this creature to the attention of the people, specifically around Clinton County. Now it is important to note that the Kettle Creek Monster and the Susquehanna Mystery Thing are often never connected. I have a strong suspicion that they very well might be the same creature as the descriptions seem to be very similar to a mammal or fish-like creature that is rarely seen and seemingly large in size. If this is the case, I think that the creature should, for the sake of simplicity and completeness, be called the Susquehanna River Monster or Monsters.

This case obviously means a lot to me because of the fact that this is the closest I'll come to live on the shores of Lake Champlain or Loch Ness or Lake Iliamna, and these types of cryptids have always been a favorite of mine. Yet while I'm only a stone's throw away from the Susquehanna, I have never seen anything too incredibly bizarre aside from some of the people that decide to engage in aquatic recreation. With this creature, if it exists, there are several possibilities as to what it could and couldn't be some extremely plausible others not so yet the most peculiar thing about this is that how did this creature manage to make its way into the river. One idea as to how the creature managed to get into the river, which appeared in the Daily Democrat, was that during a heavy flood, the creature managed to swim up from the ocean or a nearby bay like the Chesapeake and followed several other fish species which it used as food. Eventually, the creature made its way to where the Kettle Creek area was and, finding an adequate supply of food, decided to reside there and proceeded to get stuck firmly in that location once the waters receded. One idea that "John of York" hypothesized was that the creature became too large from the abundance of food that it, even with the smaller waterways, could not return back to the ocean.

Scientists during the time the creature was initially sighted had several ideas of what the creature could be; some from a more skeptical standpoint felt that the creature was a sea lion based on the roaring sound the creature supposedly made. Others suggested perhaps it was a whale or a shark and another group suggested that perhaps it was a prehistoric reptile that made its way from the ocean. A prominent theory at the time was that underneath the river were a series of tunnels that led to the ocean; it is believed that these tunnels and caverns were easy enough to maneuver through and that they perhaps were the key as to how the creature got there. "John of York" would mention these caverns as well as a possible shelter for the creature to escape bad weather and, of course, people. However, no real expedition or investigation was conducted as "John" states, “with some arguing for and some against his existence. No one seems willing to investigate for himself, as the water is said to be of great depth, so that it would be accompanied with great danger, for the dugong is said to be a man eater.”

These theories are similar to theories that are connected with other river monsters and lake monsters. Nessie and Champ are believed to of traveled into Loch Ness and Lake Champlain through underwater caverns, and the St. Johns River Monsters (see entry) also were believed to of come into the St. Johns from the sea. I personally think there may be something to this with some accounts, but I am not sure when it comes to the creatures reported in the Susquehanna.

While the possibilities as to how this creature or creatures made their way into the Susquehanna are numerous, so too are the possible identities. Early scientists, as previously stated, suggested everything from a marine reptile like a plesiosaur or mosasaur to a mammal like a whale or a seal, and Ken Maurer had felt that what might be there in the river is some form of colossal carp or other fantastic fish. All of these possibilities are the same that show up time and time again in almost every lake or river cryptid encounter. I think it's safe to rule out a marine reptile as if the creature was a reptile; there would be reports of it coming up to breathe air more often, which we really don’t have.

A hypothesis I came across regarding this creature is that perhaps it is a relic member or descendent of Hynerpeton. Hynerpeton is an amphibian species that lived in the rivers and ponds of Pennsylvania in the Late Devonian period. The creature was estimated to grow to about 2.3 ft long; however, the fossil found was an incomplete skeleton much like Gigantopithecus, so there's a lot of speculation as to how this creature was, so there's a chance that the fossil collected could be from a juvenile or that the creature could be even larger than what has been estimated. I find this hypothesis interesting for several reasons amphibians actually have the incredible ability to breathe through their skin and can hold their breath for incredibly long periods of time, usually between 4-7 hours; this could help a large creature evade being seen, and if this creature is more aquatic than land oriented it could have capabilities that could put to shame all those of currently studied amphibians.

The fish hypothesis is interesting when one looks at the description of the creature, which is often described as submarine-like. I instantly compare it in my head to the Lake Iliamna monsters, which are often described as being large aluminum-colored submarine-like creatures which most liken to a large fish. Similar submarine-like descriptions have been used to describe the Loch Ness Monster, which some researchers feel might be a giant variety of eel. As mentioned earlier, there are countless stories in the Susquehanna of colossal catfish that possibly might be actually close-up encounters with the creature everyone else refers to as a mystery thing or monster.

Another possibility that I think is less likely since there should be more land sightings or loud noises associated with modern sightings is that it could be a seal or otter. Seals and otters are highly intelligent and could be capable of reacting more quickly to humans than other creatures to evade them. However, if a creature like a seal or an otter was in the river, it would be extremely noticeable, and that there would be places where it would come ashore, so I truly think that this is not what the creature (s) is.

A final possibility I feel I must include simply because of how ingrained it is in Pennsylvania Cryptozoology is that it could be a giant snake. Giant Snakes are insanely common in Pennsylvania, almost as common as Bigfoot, Thunderbirds, or Mountain Lions in Pennsylvania reports. There's the infamous Broad Top Serpent, a 30-40ft black snake as big as a stovepipe that makes its home on Broad Top Mountain a similar secretive serpent known as the Devil's Den Serpent is reported in Gettysburg and is only slightly smaller. In the lake Wolf Pond, a lake monster that I covered a long time ago (see entry) was described as being a colossal snake black or dark in color with peculiar rings along its back, and much like the Kettle Creek Monster, it had a penchant for knocking over and capsizing boats. I also entertained this notion with Raystown Ray since many of the sightings and descriptions are very similar to a colossal snake. Perhaps that is what this creature could be since snakes do tend to swim and spend a lot of their time in the water. The only problem with this, especially with Ken's sightings and research, is that the creature seemingly moves more like a submarine than a serpentine form implying more bulk and appendages to move its form, so chances are this creature is not a super snake.

The mystery of the Susquehanna River Monsters to me is extremely interesting, mainly since this is a subject I can investigate practically on my own front yard. I have no clear definitive answers to what these creatures might be even though there are several things I feel we can rule out, and I'm flabbergasted that there has not been more research done or at least written about on the subject aside from a few articles in the Daily Item and several online sites. This is perhaps one of the least talked about river monsters that I’ve found, and so I feel that further inquiries need to be made to get more information on this beast as clearly others had to of seen it. This creature, while not perhaps as memorable as Pinky from St. Johns River or the White River Monster, does hold a special and important place in the halls of Pennsylvania Forteana and so deserves to have its time to shine and will definitely be a creature I have to investigate personally very soon.

Quick Facts:

Species/Potential Species: Mammal, Reptile, Fish

Location: Kettle Creek, Susquehanna River, Lock Haven, Clinton County, and Northumberland County, Pennsylvania

Sighted: Native accounts -Modern Times

Works Cited:

Bernard, Lou “Deep thoughts about the Susquehanna Seal”. The Express. December 30, 2017. https://www.lockhaven.com/news/community/2017/12/deep-thoughts-about-the-susquehanna-seal/. Accessed November 20, 2021.

Bernard, Lou “The discovery of the Susquehanna Seal” The Express. August 14, 2021. https://www.lockhaven.com/news/health-and-home/2021/08/the-discovery-of-the-susquehanna-seal/. Accessed November 20, 2021.

Bernard, Lou “Seal of Approval: The Monster of the Susquehanna” PA Wilds. May 6, 2019. https://pawilds.com/monster-of-the-susquehanna/. Accessed November 20, 2021.

Tabitca “Kettle Creek Monster ?” Cryptozoo-oscity. June 24, 2020. http://cryptozoo-oscity.blogspot.com/2020/06/kettle-creek-monster.html. Accessed November 20, 2021.

Daily Democrat (Clinton County, Pennsylvania) February 27, 1897

Daily Item (Sunbury, Pennsylvania) July 30, 2009

Daily Item (Sunbury, Pennsylvania) August 16, 2009 

Armless Horror of the Susquehanna

 The Armless Horror of the Susquehanna

By Cole Herrold

The world of Cryptozoology is chock full of strange chimeras, hairy hominids, prehistoric remnants, and beasts that seem to have escaped from a 1950s drive-in monster movie. In the annals of cryptozoology, countless of these drive-inn monsters were reported, especially throughout the 1950s and 1970s. Tales from Ohio of the Loveland Frogman have echoed in the Little Miami River since their initial report in 1955. The Lake Thetis Monster, a kind of Gill-man from British Columbia, has one of the most cinematic encounters reported. The creature was seen rising from the dark, murky depths, which resulted in the beast to charge after two eyewitnesses hanging around its aquatic domain. These creatures from the black lagoon have captured the imaginations of many a paranormal investigator and cryptozoologist, but there is one case that occurred before any of the previously mentioned beasts that have not been brought to the surface of the vast public. This strange creature is a haunting part of Pennsylvania's rich lore and history and one I have come to call… The Armless Horror of the Susquehanna.

The Susquehanna River is a large body of water that stretches throughout New York, my home state of Pennsylvania, and empties into the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. My hometown is actually located right on the river itself, with my house facing the darkened water that surges down throughout the state. The river has always been a source of recreational boating, tubing, swimming, and fishing. Growing up, I would hear tales of monster catfish and carp that would hide in the muddy sections of the river, but never would I have dreamed of something much more mysterious swimming below the churning brine.

The story of the Armless Horror is recorded briefly in the October 23^rd issue of the Wilkes-Barre Record in 1905. The events of the article occurred the day before publication near the town of York Haven, which is located in York county. York County is at the very bottom of the state, and the mighty banks of the Susquehanna separate York from Lancaster County. This area of Pennsylvania is a mixture of both relatively decently populated towns and cities as well as vast areas of back road type communities. These communities are where the scene takes place.

Photo of the Susquehanna River and Three Mile Island taken in November of 2020 this area is an approximate section of the river where the sighting should have taken place.

The Record describes in the exceptionally short article the events of two anonymous couples and their encounter with something that biologically should not exist. The Record describes how in broad daylight, the two anonymous couples out near the river observed what the title of the article rather blandly states as "Fish Walks Like Man." The creature is described as the following: "The creature, whether fish or animal, is described to be as large as a man. When seen, it came out of the water erect like a man and is described as looking like a man but without arms". The article does not state where the beast was headed or if it even came on land or simply arose cinematically from the muck and churning mire.  The article does not even describe the actions of the witnesses. Were they curious, terrified, or simply trying to process the strange apparition before them? The article does give us this one insight into the witnesses' thought process to what occurred, and that is "Those persons who have seen it declare they are not the victims of an optical illusion." The article's author who tries to give as much credence to these anonymous witnesses as possible states" As it was seen in broad daylight more credence is given to the story than would be if it had been seen at night, when people are more prone to see "things".".

While the exact location of where these anonymous couples encountered the beast is not stated, the article does say that the sighting had reached the ears of people residing between Cly and Goldsboro. Cly is a small community in Newberry Township that is actually right along the bank of the river, and Goldsboro is located north of Cly. The total distance between the two boroughs is a mere 2.4 miles, which is not an extensively long stretch of the river. Arguably it is a safe bet to the point that this particular section of the Susquehanna is the approximate location where the sighting took place.  Both communities are located along the bank of the Susquehanna and interestingly enough located by Three Mile Island and several other smaller islands. Three Mile Island is home to the infamous Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station and is considered part of Dauphin County. The Island was home to a partial meltdown in 1979 that resulted in the leak of radioactivity.

Photo of Goldsboro Sign taken back in November of 2020 while researching the Armless Horror case

Even with figuring an approximate location of where this creature was spotted, we are still no closer to determining what this beast is. This creature, as with most cryptids, is something we have never seen before. There are no bipedal fish and no reptiles that bipedally walked exactly like a hominid in the fossil record. This aquatic monstrosity, scientifically speaking, should not exist. So, what are some possible explanations for the phenomenon? Well, here are some of the possibilities ranging from most probable to most unlikely.

One of the most common possibilities with any monster report is a newspaper hoax. At the same time, this account does take place later on than the typical Hoaxed papers. A monster story is still a perfect way to get individuals to pick up and purchase a paper. The account also raises several red flags like the nameless witnesses. The paper could attempt to hide this possible controversy by making their monster appear in the day so it would not be mistaken for anything other than what was reported. While this seems to be the most probable explanation, the simplicity of the article appears to be the opposite of what we would see in a newspaper hoax. If the article really wanted to capture some public notoriety at the time, you would think that the creature would come out of the river and attack the witnesses or at least capsize the boat. The article even seems to try to lend credence to the witnesses by expressing the difference between seeing a creature in the day versus night. As for the anonymity aspect of the witnesses, this could be to avoid ridicule or mocking, which is a reasonable response to reporting an encounter with a beast. With this lack of sensationalism and the article's attempt to not only lend credence to the account with the author's rationale but the simplicity, it does appear that the witnesses, whoever they may have been, had actually seen something strange. The question remains, what?

Could it have been someone in an early diving suit? Diving suits and wetsuits are not new inventions. The earliest diving suit was made in the 1700s and was a clunky, heavy piece of maritime technology. As time went on, however, the diving suit became more streamlined and less bulky, but even in the early portion of the 1900s, the suits bore a resemblance to droids from Star Wars. It is very possible that the witnesses misidentified a diver for a monster. There are also the possibilities of a hoax with a diving suit. A suit with its arms wrapped or sewn to the sides might give off the impression of the creature being an armless creep from the deep. The only possible problem with this hypothesis is with the restriction of movement in the suit. At the same time, there are individuals who, due to accidents or birth conditions, have been able to dive without the use of arms. Typically, they do need some additional help unless they are truly masters at diving. It's always smarter and safer to always have others with you when doing anything underwater, and if the witnesses themselves did not perpetuate it as a hoax. There's not enough information to truly paint a picture of who else could have been out on the water.

The most common skeptical take on any cryptid report is misidentification. So, one would have to include the possibility of an individual mistaking a common or invasive species as what they are witnessing. There are many large species of fish that swim up and down the Susquehanna. The largest species of known fish being muskies and catfish, and like most fish, they will come up to the surface of the water if there is not enough dissolved oxygen in the water for them to breathe. Fish will also come to the surface to feed if need be. In 2019 a 50lbs flathead catfish was reeled in, breaking the state record. With that said, a 50lbs catfish is a big fish but nowhere near the size of the creature reported in the Record. With that said, that could be the result of classic "fish stories" where the witness exaggerates the size of the fish for a reaction. A man-size Fishman monster could actually be, in reality, an oversized catfish.

Other organisms could be beavers, muskrats, river otters, raccoons rearing up to head onto the bank. These, to me, are extremely unlikely, but for the sake of argument, they should be included. A black bear, while not as aquatic as the others, could also be a possibility, and it would be closer in size to what has been reported, but a black bear has evident arms and ears, which is entirely opposite to that which has been reported.

An undiscovered species is arguably the final possibility for what this creature could have been. While some can argue that Pennsylvania is a strange location for a species to remain hidden for countless years, the state itself is vastly forested and full of small islands and deep sections of rivers that some small troop of an undiscovered species could carve out a section to remain unseen. Interestingly enough, creatures similar in description to The Armless Horror were seen in Ohio and Kentucky. These creatures are described as armless, and both are semiaquatic in nature. The most famous of these two lesser-known cryptids is the Charles Mill Lake Monster, which was seen in 1959. Its description is shockingly identical to that of the Armless Horror, everything down from the lack of arms to its bipedal locomotion.

This case, to me, is interesting for several reasons and why I felt the need to write this article. For one thing, the general lack of sensationalism in the article for something that very easily could have fallen in the same category of the countless penny dreadful type monsters seen throughout the decades of yellow journalism. In the 1800s, monster attacks were a dime a dozen lake monsters ate numerous individuals swimming in their abodes, Spring Heeled Jack of London belched blue flames and tore at the flesh of young London women, even possibly killing them in some accounts, even bigfoot type creatures seemed to be overly aggressive as countless articles reported them devouring children and attacking horse-drawn carriages. This case has none of that and echoes a lot of modern monster reports that we take very seriously, seeing as it is a creature that simply appears mysteriously, and that is it. Granted, there is a lot of ambiguity in the article in the Wilkes Barre Record that does not describe what the creature did after being sited or how the witnesses reacted; one can imagine they hightailed it out of their obviously, but the lack of action is something that is reminiscent of many bigfoot reports where the creature simply walks across the road into the woods or a lake monster sighting where it appears above the surface and submerges. These accounts are almost believable in their simplicity as opposed to something more extravagant, that is what one would have expected in an encounter with the unknown, and this case is no different. 

Another element is the description I have stated previously about the depiction is similar to other creatures reported in the late 50s, and the concept of a fish-man in the media was not common in 1905. The account taking place in 1905 is almost fifty years older than the most famous aquatic humanoid in pop culture the Gillman from the Creature from the Black Lagoon, so unlike other marine humanoid encounters, the chance of a lie or hoax inspired by this film or a similar film is quite literally out of the water. Folklore around the world describes merfolk, or semiaquatic human-like creatures whether it be the Mermaids, Dagon, River Sprites, Nixies, Merrow, Selkie, Finfolk, Kappa, Neck, Ceasg, Amabie, Ningyo, Naga, or Melusine that appear as a chimera of various aquatic organisms or as elementals that reside in bodies of water and are bipedal in nature. While some folklorists could argue that there is some underlying cross-cultural trend, whether it be these creatures are manifestations of our fears of deep pools, which are environments very much alien to us, or that they symbolize our connection or the deification of nature. There is another possibility, however, that these cultures, many of whom developed these stories independently from each other, are, in fact seeing species hitherto unknown to science currently.

While it is safe to say that gathering any more specific information on this particular case would be almost impossible unless by some miracle a diary or the descendants of those unnamed witnesses come forth with more details, it is still an enduring mystery, and while the account is relatively short and somewhat vague as with most potentially real cryptid encounters the impact is significant, Not just for those who have encountered a strange creature but also for those who actively read, search, or theorize about the subject. For every new or under looked through case that we do not consider can result in ideas or connections being lost. Yet whether it's lake serpents, Bigfoot, Mothman, or something far more mysterious, there is something that drives all of us as humans and makes life indeed more interesting if not more meaningful for those of us genuinely encapsulated by the possibility of those mysteries still hidden in nature.

Quick Facts:

Species/Potential Species: Amphibian/ Fish

Location: Susquehanna River, Cly and Goldsboro, York County, Pennsylvania

Sighted: October 22, 1905

Works Cited

Coleman, Loren, Curious Encounters: Phantom Trains, Spooky spots, and Other Mysterious Wonders. Faber and Faber. 1985.

Hayes, John “50-pound flathead catfish caught on Susquehanna River sets Pa. record” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. May 9, 2012. https://www.post-gazette.com/life/outdoors/2019/05/09/Pennsylvania-catfish-state-record-Susquehanna-River-flathead/stories/201905090101. Accessed November 14^th, 2020.

The Wilkes-Barre Record “Fish Walks Like Man. Strange Animal Alarms Pennsylvania Residents Along Susquehanna” October 23^rd, 1905

“The story of early diving suits, 1900-1935” Rare Historical Photos. June 18, 2020. https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/vintage-diving-suits/. Accessed November 5^th, 2020.

“The Susquehanna River” Susquehanna River Valley. https://www.visitcentralpa.org/things-to-do/the-susquehanna-river. Accessed November 5^th, 2020.

“Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. November 29, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_Nuclear_Generating_Station. Accessed November 30, 2020.

“Dissolved Oxygen (DO)” https://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/sites/enr/files/dissolved_oxygen.pdf#:~:text=Fish%20and%20other%20animals%20that,water%20need%20oxygen%20to%20live.&text=For%20example%2C%20Northern%20Pike%20cannot,the%20strongest%20fish%20may%20suffocate. Accessed November 22^nd, 2020.