What Was the Montauk Monster? The Beach Discovery Explained
What Is The Montauk Monster? What Was Really Found On The Beach?
The Montauk Monster was most likely the decomposed remains of a raccoon or similar land mammal that washed ashore on a beach near Montauk, New York, in July 2008. The loss of fur, advanced decay, and damage to the skull caused the carcass to appear unfamiliar and unsettling, leading to widespread speculation and one of the internet’s most enduring modern monster legends.
Despite this explanation, debate has never fully ended. The Montauk Monster remains a cultural phenomenon because of how it looked, where it appeared, and how quickly the story escaped the beach and entered the global imagination.
This article examines exactly what was found, why it looked so strange, what experts believe it was, and why the mystery still refuses to fade.
The Discovery That Started It All
In July 2008, beachgoers walking along the shoreline near Montauk, a coastal hamlet at the eastern tip of Long Island, noticed something unusual lying in the sand.
The object was unmistakably organic. It was a carcass.
What immediately drew attention was its appearance. The body was hairless, bloated, and partially decomposed. Its skull seemed elongated. The mouth appeared filled with sharp teeth. The limbs looked almost humanoid to some observers, while others thought they resembled fins or hooves.
Photos were taken quickly. Within hours, those images began circulating online.
At first, the discovery was little more than a local curiosity. Dead animals washing ashore was not unusual for Long Island beaches. What made this different was how difficult it was to identify at a glance.
No fur. No clear species markers. No immediate explanation.
By the time the images reached wider audiences, the name had already been coined.
The Montauk Monster.
Where Exactly Was the Montauk Monster Found?
The carcass was discovered near Ditch Plains Beach, one of Montauk’s most well known stretches of coastline. This location would later become central to the speculation surrounding the creature.
Montauk sits close to Plum Island, a small landmass in Long Island Sound that houses a former government research facility. Almost immediately, some observers began drawing connections between the mysterious carcass and the nearby island.
The proximity alone was enough to fuel rumours.
Had something escaped?
Had an experiment gone wrong?
Had a new species been created or discovered?
These questions spread rapidly, especially online.
Read About The Story Of The Michigan Dogman Cryptid Here
The First Photos and Why They Went Viral
The earliest photographs of the Montauk Monster are grainy, unevenly lit, and taken from multiple angles. This worked in the creature’s favour.
Poor image quality removes familiar reference points. Without clear fur patterns, coloration, or scale, the brain struggles to categorise what it is seeing.
Several features stood out immediately:
-
A skull that appeared birdlike or canine, depending on the angle
-
Visible teeth that seemed too sharp for a common mammal
-
A body shape that did not neatly match known animals
-
No visible fur, feathers, or scales
The images were unsettling without being explicit. They invited interpretation.
Within days, blogs, forums, and early social media platforms were sharing the photos with increasingly dramatic captions.
The Montauk Monster was no longer a dead animal on a beach. It was a mystery.
Why Identification Was So Difficult
At first glance, many viewers assumed the carcass must be something exotic. However, experienced biologists and veterinarians often pointed out an uncomfortable truth.
Decomposition radically alters appearance.
When mammals decompose in saltwater, several things happen:
-
Fur detaches early in the process
-
Skin tightens and discolours
-
Fat and muscle collapse inward
-
Facial features become exaggerated
-
Teeth appear larger as gums recede
A raccoon, dog, or similar mammal can become nearly unrecognisable after prolonged exposure to water and scavengers.
This explanation, while scientifically sound, lacked drama. It also did not account for every detail seen in the photos, at least not to the satisfaction of everyone who examined them.
Shop The Montauk Monster T-Shirt
Early Expert Opinions
Several experts were consulted in the weeks following the discovery. Most were cautious in their assessments, as they had not examined the body directly.
Common conclusions included:
-
The carcass was likely a raccoon, dog, or similar mammal
-
Loss of fur and skin distortion explained the strange appearance
-
Teeth and skull shape aligned with known mammals under decay
Notably, no expert definitively identified the carcass through direct testing. The body was never officially recovered for laboratory analysis. This absence of closure created a vacuum.
Where facts ended, speculation rushed in.
The Role of Timing
The Montauk Monster emerged at a perfect moment for viral folklore.
In 2008:
-
Social media platforms were growing rapidly
-
Blogs thrived on sensational discoveries
-
Paranormal forums were highly active
-
Image sharing outpaced fact checking
Had the same carcass washed ashore a decade earlier, it might have appeared briefly in a local paper and vanished from memory.
Had it appeared a decade later, higher resolution images and faster debunking might have dampened its impact.
Instead, it arrived at the precise intersection of mystery and digital amplification.
Read About The Story Of The Dover Demon Cryptid Here
Why “Unsolved” Became the Narrative
Despite expert opinions leaning toward a known animal, the Montauk Monster was quickly labelled “unsolved.”
This framing mattered.
Once something is described as unsolved, it gains permanence. It invites endless reinterpretation. Every new viewer becomes a potential detective.
The lack of a definitive autopsy or DNA test meant no authority could close the case conclusively. Even reasonable explanations felt incomplete.
The mystery endured not because answers were absent, but because certainty was.
The Question That Would Not Go Away
As the images spread, one question dominated discussions:
If it was just a raccoon, why did it look like that?
This question would fuel years of debate, countless articles, and an enduring sense that something about the Montauk Monster was not quite settled.
In the next section, we examine the physical characteristics of the carcass in detail, why specific features appeared unnatural, and how decomposition can transform familiar animals into something deeply unsettling.
The Physical Characteristics That Confused Everyone
To understand why the Montauk Monster caused such widespread confusion, it is necessary to look closely at the physical details visible in the photographs. Nearly every argument, sceptical or conspiratorial, hinges on these features.
At first glance, the carcass appeared wrong. Not merely dead, but unfamiliar in a way that triggered instinctive unease.
The most discussed characteristics were:
-
The skull shape
-
The teeth
-
The apparent lack of fur
-
The limbs and body proportions
Each of these elements seemed to resist easy classification.
The Skull, Elongated and Distorted
One of the most striking features was the skull. Depending on the angle of the photograph, it appeared either birdlike or canine, with an elongated snout and prominent eye sockets.
This led to early speculation that the creature might be:
-
A bird of some kind
-
A reptile
-
A previously unknown species
-
A hybrid animal
However, skull distortion is common in decomposing mammals.
As soft tissue decays, the skull loses structural support. The collapse of muscle and fat can elongate features, pull the jaw out of alignment, and exaggerate the shape of the snout.
In raccoons and dogs especially, the skull can appear unusually long once the surrounding tissue deteriorates.
Saltwater exposure accelerates this effect.
The Teeth That Looked Too Sharp
Many viewers fixated on the teeth.
They appeared sharp, evenly spaced, and predatory, leading some to argue that the animal must have been a carnivore or something more exotic.
In reality, mammalian teeth often look far more threatening after death.
As gums recede:
-
Teeth appear longer
-
Spacing becomes more visible
-
The jaw can open unnaturally wide
Raccoons, for example, possess sharp canines designed for omnivorous diets. When exposed, these teeth can resemble those of a much more aggressive predator.
Without fur or context, the familiar becomes alien.
The Absence of Fur
Perhaps the single most unsettling aspect of the Montauk Monster was its hairless appearance.
People asked:
-
What mammal loses all its fur?
-
Why was the skin smooth and pale?
-
Why were no patches of hair visible?
Water plays a critical role here.
When a mammal dies in water, especially saltwater:
-
Hair detaches early
-
Skin sloughs off
-
Scavengers remove loose material
-
Sun exposure bleaches remaining tissue
Raccoon fur, in particular, detaches easily after death.
By the time the carcass washed ashore, it may have already lost nearly all visible hair, leaving behind skin that looked almost synthetic in texture.
Read About The Story Of The Loveland Frogman Cryptid Here
The Body Shape and Limbs
Some viewers believed the limbs looked humanoid. Others thought they resembled flippers or hooves.
This discrepancy alone suggests perception played a major role.
Decomposition alters proportions. Joints stiffen or collapse. Muscle mass reduces unevenly. When limbs are partially buried in sand or photographed from low angles, scale becomes distorted.
Additionally, raccoon hind legs can look surprisingly human when fur is removed, especially when the body is positioned unnaturally.
The brain searches for patterns. When it cannot find a clear match, it invents one.
The Role of Perspective and Photography
Most images of the Montauk Monster were taken casually, without scale references.
There were:
-
No measuring tools
-
No consistent angles
-
No known objects nearby for comparison
This made it difficult to judge size accurately.
Some believed the carcass was much larger than it actually was. Others assumed it was smaller.
Without scale, the mind fills gaps with imagination.
This effect is well documented in forensic photography. Objects photographed close to the lens appear disproportionately large, while distant features shrink.
In the Montauk Monster images, the skull was often closest to the camera.
Read The Ultimate Cryptid Encyclopaedia
Why It Did Not Look Like a Typical Raccoon
Sceptics often point to one specific issue.
They say:
“I have seen dead raccoons. They do not look like this.”
This statement is usually true.
Most people have seen:
-
Roadkill
-
Recently deceased animals
-
Intact bodies with fur
Very few have seen:
-
Advanced marine decomposition
-
Animals stripped of fur and tissue
-
Bodies exposed to salt, sun, and scavengers
A raccoon that dies inland looks nothing like one that decomposes in water.
The Montauk Monster was not a fresh carcass. It was a transformed one.
Scavengers and Environmental Damage
Before washing ashore, the body likely encountered:
-
Crabs
-
Fish
-
Birds
-
Tidal movement
These forces selectively remove soft tissue.
Eyes, lips, and ears are usually the first to go. This alters facial expressions dramatically, often creating the illusion of a grin or snarl.
The loss of these features contributes to the creature’s unsettling appearance.
Read About The Story Of The Flatwoods Monster Here
Why Experts Hesitated to Be Definitive
Although many experts leaned toward a raccoon or similar mammal, few were willing to state it conclusively.
This hesitation came from one major limitation.
No physical examination occurred.
The carcass was never preserved for:
-
DNA testing
-
Skeletal analysis
-
Veterinary assessment
Without direct analysis, professionals could only speculate based on photographs.
This left room for doubt.
The Psychological Effect of the Unknown
Humans are deeply uncomfortable with uncertainty.
When faced with something that looks biological but unfamiliar, the mind oscillates between two explanations:
-
It is something known, distorted
-
It is something unknown, hidden
The Montauk Monster sat precisely at this boundary.
It looked almost familiar, but not enough.
That ambiguity is what allowed the legend to take root.
Shop The Cryptids T-Shirt
Early Attempts at Debunking
Several bloggers and biologists attempted to overlay raccoon skulls onto images of the Montauk Monster. Some comparisons were convincing. Others were less so.
The lack of consistent photographic angles limited the effectiveness of these attempts.
For believers, every mismatch became evidence of something more.
For sceptics, every similarity reinforced the mundane explanation.
Neither side could fully convince the other.
The Question of Missing Context
One of the greatest obstacles to identification was the absence of context.
No one knew:
-
How long the body had been in the water
-
Where it came from
-
Whether it was already damaged before death
Without this information, reconstruction became guesswork.
And guesswork invites storytelling.
Why the Physical Debate Never Ended
Even today, discussions about the Montauk Monster often return to the same images.
New viewers encounter them without the benefit of expert commentary. They react instinctively.
The images still disturb because they bypass logic and speak directly to something primal.
They show a body that should not exist.
In the next section, we examine the most widely accepted scientific explanations in depth, including the raccoon theory, how decomposition supports it, and where the explanation struggles to fully satisfy critics.
The Scientific Explanations Behind the Montauk Monster
As public fascination grew, scientists, veterinarians, and wildlife experts began offering more detailed explanations for what the Montauk Monster most likely was. While no single authority could close the case definitively, a strong consensus emerged.
The simplest explanation remains the most widely accepted.
The Montauk Monster was a known mammal, altered beyond easy recognition by water, time, and decay.
Read About The Story Of The Skinwalker Cryptid Here
The Raccoon Theory Explained
Among all proposed explanations, the raccoon theory stands out as the most plausible.
Raccoons are:
-
Common on Long Island
-
Strong swimmers
-
Frequently found near coastal areas
-
Known to wash into waterways after death
Several anatomical features in the Montauk Monster images align with raccoon anatomy:
-
Skull length and shape
-
Dental structure
-
Limb proportions
-
Size relative to shoreline debris
When fur is removed and tissue decays, these similarities become less obvious to the untrained eye.
Why Raccoons Decompose So Strangely
Raccoons possess dense fur that detaches early during decomposition. Once the fur is gone, their underlying skin appears thin and pale.
Additionally:
-
Fat deposits collapse unevenly
-
Facial muscles recede quickly
-
Jaw alignment can shift
-
Teeth become exaggerated
A raccoon that has spent time in saltwater can appear almost unrecognisable.
This is not speculation. Marine biologists routinely encounter similar transformations.
Comparing Skull Structures
Several comparisons have been made between raccoon skulls and the Montauk Monster.
Key points of similarity include:
-
Elongated snout
-
Pronounced canine teeth
-
Eye socket placement
-
Jaw hinge location
Some critics argue the skull looked too smooth or too narrow.
However, missing tissue, erosion, and photographic distortion can dramatically alter perceived proportions.
Without the skull in hand, these debates remain unresolved.
Could It Have Been a Dog?
Another common explanation suggests the carcass may have been a dog.
Dogs share many anatomical similarities with raccoons, especially in skull and dental structure.
Arguments for this theory include:
-
Canine like teeth
-
Familiar limb arrangement
-
Size compatibility
Arguments against it include:
-
Differences in skull curvature
-
Jaw length discrepancies
-
Lack of clear breed indicators
While possible, the dog theory has slightly less support among experts.
Other Mammal Theories
Several other animals have been proposed over the years:
-
Otter
-
Seal
-
Sheep
-
Large rodent
Each theory explains some features but struggles with others.
For example:
-
Seals have flippers, not limbs
-
Otters retain fur longer
-
Sheep skulls differ markedly
-
Rodents have distinctive incisors
The raccoon remains the best overall fit.
Read About The Story Of The Jersey Devil Here
Why DNA Testing Was Never Done
Perhaps the greatest frustration surrounding the Montauk Monster is the absence of DNA testing.
The reasons are surprisingly mundane.
The carcass:
-
Was not secured by authorities
-
Was removed by unknown individuals
-
Likely deteriorated quickly
By the time public interest peaked, the body was gone.
No sample, no test, no closure.
The Role of Saltwater Decomposition
Saltwater is particularly harsh on organic material.
It accelerates:
-
Tissue breakdown
-
Hair detachment
-
Skin bleaching
-
Structural collapse
Freshwater carcasses retain features longer. Saltwater strips them away.
This explains why many inland animal carcasses appear more recognisable than those found at sea.
Why the Explanation Feels Unsatisfying
For many, the raccoon explanation feels anticlimactic.
After weeks of speculation, the idea that the Montauk Monster was just a raccoon feels disappointing.
Humans crave narrative. We want mysteries to be worthy of their buildup.
A raccoon washed ashore lacks drama.
This emotional resistance plays a larger role than most realise.
The Absence of Official Statements
No government agency issued a definitive identification.
This silence allowed speculation to thrive.
Had an official report been released early, the story might have ended quickly.
Instead, ambiguity became the story.
Plum Island and Scientific Suspicion
The proximity of Plum Island added fuel to the fire.
Plum Island housed a government research facility focused on animal diseases. This led some to speculate that the Montauk Monster was the result of an experiment gone wrong.
While there is no evidence to support this, the coincidence was irresistible.
In folklore, location matters as much as evidence.
The Internet’s Role in Rejecting Simplicity
Online communities thrive on complexity.
The idea of a mysterious creature is more engaging than a decomposed mammal.
Every unanswered question became proof that the truth was being hidden.
This dynamic ensured the Montauk Monster would outlive its physical remains.
Why Experts Avoid Absolute Language
Scientists are trained to avoid certainty without data.
This caution, while responsible, can appear evasive to the public.
Statements like:
-
“Most likely”
-
“Consistent with”
-
“Appears to be”
Leave room for doubt.
That doubt became the foundation of the legend.
A Mystery Sustained by Absence
The Montauk Monster persists not because evidence supports a cryptid, but because evidence cannot fully eliminate the possibility.
Without a body, there is no final answer.
This absence keeps the door open.
Where Science Ends and Culture Begins
At a certain point, scientific explanation gives way to cultural interpretation.
The Montauk Monster crossed that threshold quickly.
It became less about biology and more about belief.
In the next section, we explore the conspiracy theories, Plum Island speculation, media amplification, and how the Montauk Monster became embedded in modern folklore.
Plum Island and the Birth of the Conspiracy Theories
No discussion of the Montauk Monster is complete without addressing Plum Island.
Plum Island sits just offshore from Long Island and has long housed a government operated animal disease research facility. The moment people learned where the carcass was found, connections were drawn almost instantly.
The logic went like this:
-
A mysterious carcass appears on a nearby beach
-
A secretive research facility studies animals offshore
-
Therefore, the two must be connected
This reasoning required no evidence, only proximity.
Read About The Story Of The Wendigo Here
Why Plum Island Became Central to the Story
Plum Island already carried an aura of secrecy. For decades, it had been the subject of rumours involving:
-
Classified research
-
Restricted access
-
Government experiments
-
Exotic diseases
When the Montauk Monster appeared, it fit neatly into an existing narrative.
The creature did not need to be proven unnatural. It only needed to feel out of place.
That feeling was enough.
The Experiment Gone Wrong Theory
One of the most popular ideas was that the Montauk Monster was an experimental animal that had either escaped or been disposed of improperly.
Versions of this theory suggested:
-
Genetic manipulation
-
Hybrid animals
-
Disease research accidents
-
Bioengineering experiments
There was never any supporting evidence.
But conspiracy theories rarely rely on documentation. They thrive on implication.
Why the Theory Spread So Quickly
Several factors made the experiment theory irresistible:
-
Government secrecy is easy to imagine
-
Scientific facilities are poorly understood by the public
-
The carcass looked unnatural
-
No official explanation shut the theory down
Each unanswered question strengthened belief.
Media Amplification and Sensational Coverage
Once mainstream media picked up the story, tone began to shift.
Headlines leaned into ambiguity:
-
“Mystery Creature Found on Beach”
-
“Unidentified Animal Baffles Experts”
-
“Montauk Monster Stirs Speculation”
Very few headlines stated plainly that the carcass was likely a known animal.
Ambiguity drives engagement. Certainty ends discussion.
How Language Kept the Mystery Alive
Words like:
-
Mystery
-
Unidentified
-
Bizarre
-
Unknown
Appeared repeatedly in coverage.
Even articles that mentioned raccoon theories often buried them near the end, after paragraphs of speculation.
This framing shaped public perception.
People remember the mystery, not the footnote.
The Role of Early Internet Culture
In 2008, online culture rewarded strangeness.
Blogs competed for attention. Forums dissected every image. Comment sections filled with increasingly elaborate interpretations.
The Montauk Monster became a shared puzzle.
Every new theory felt like participation in something larger.
Why No One Wanted Closure
As explanations accumulated, enthusiasm waned.
But rather than fading away, the mystery hardened.
Believers rejected debunking efforts. Sceptics grew frustrated. Casual readers remained intrigued.
The Montauk Monster was no longer about what it was.
It was about what it represented.
The Monster as a Symbol
For some, the Montauk Monster symbolised:
-
Distrust of institutions
-
Fear of hidden science
-
Anxiety about genetic manipulation
-
The unknown lurking beneath the surface
These themes resonated deeply.
The carcass became a canvas for collective unease.
Internet Folklore Takes Hold
Unlike traditional folklore passed down through generations, internet folklore evolves in real time.
Each retelling adds new details. Each theory reinforces the story.
The Montauk Monster became a modern myth, shaped by:
-
Memes
-
Comment threads
-
Amateur analysis
-
Re shared images
Truth became secondary to narrative.
Why Debunking Failed to Kill the Story
Debunking requires trust.
Many readers distrusted experts. Others distrusted institutions. Some simply preferred the mystery.
When explanations failed to convince everyone, the story persisted.
Silence from authorities only worsened the problem.
The Absence of a Body as Proof
For believers, the missing carcass became evidence itself.
Why was it removed?
Who took it?
Why was it not preserved?
In conspiracy logic, absence confirms suspicion.
The lack of physical evidence kept the door open.
Read About The Story Of The Mothman Of Point Pleasant Here
From Mystery to Legend
By the early 2010s, the Montauk Monster had completed its transformation.
It was no longer a recent discovery. It was a legend.
People encountered it not through news articles, but through retellings.
Each retelling stripped away context and reinforced mystery.
The Problem With Final Answers
Any definitive explanation threatens the story.
Once something is fully explained, it loses power.
The Montauk Monster survives because it sits just beyond certainty.
In the final section, we examine why doubt persists, how modern audiences reinterpret the mystery, and what the Montauk Monster ultimately reveals about belief, fear, and the internet itself.
Why Doubt Still Persists
More than a decade after the Montauk Monster first appeared, the debate has never truly ended.
This persistence is not driven by new evidence. No additional photos have surfaced. No samples were recovered. No new witnesses emerged.
Instead, doubt survives because the original event left too many gaps.
People do not struggle with answers, they struggle with uncertainty.
When a story ends without a definitive conclusion, it invites reinterpretation forever.
The Power of First Impressions
For many people, their first encounter with the Montauk Monster is still a single image.
That image is:
-
Unfamiliar
-
Disturbing
-
Difficult to categorise
First impressions anchor belief. Once the brain labels something as strange or unknown, later explanations feel like rationalisations rather than answers.
This cognitive effect explains why even strong scientific explanations fail to convince everyone.
The Role of Internet Memory
The Montauk Monster is remembered not as an article or a report, but as a moment.
A moment when the internet collectively paused and asked a question.
That shared curiosity is preserved in:
-
Archived blog posts
-
Re uploaded images
-
YouTube retrospectives
-
Social media threads
Each retelling strips away nuance and preserves mystery.
Why “Most Likely” Is Never Enough
Science deals in probability. Folklore deals in certainty.
Statements like:
-
“Most likely a raccoon”
-
“Consistent with mammal decomposition”
-
“No evidence of anything unusual”
Do not satisfy the same emotional needs as:
-
“This is exactly what it was”
-
“Case closed”
Without absolute closure, belief fills the gap.
What the Montauk Monster Really Reveals
At its core, the Montauk Monster is not about biology.
It is about:
-
How humans respond to ambiguity
-
How images override logic
-
How stories evolve online
-
How mistrust shapes interpretation
The carcass was the catalyst. The reaction was the story.
The Final Verdict
Based on all available evidence, expert opinion, and known decomposition processes, the Montauk Monster was almost certainly the remains of a raccoon or similar land mammal that washed ashore in 2008.
There is no credible evidence supporting:
-
A new species
-
Genetic experimentation
-
Government involvement
-
A cryptid or unknown animal
What made it extraordinary was not what it was, but how it looked and how it was discovered.
The mystery lives on because it sits at the intersection of science, fear, and storytelling.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the Montauk Monster?
The Montauk Monster was a decomposed animal carcass found on a Long Island beach in July 2008, most likely the remains of a raccoon or similar mammal.
Was the Montauk Monster real?
Yes, the carcass was real. The mystery lies in its identification, not in whether it existed.
Was the Montauk Monster a cryptid?
There is no credible evidence that it was a cryptid. Most experts believe it was a known animal altered by decomposition.
Why did the Montauk Monster look so strange?
Saltwater decomposition, loss of fur, tissue decay, and scavenger damage can drastically alter an animal’s appearance.
Was the Montauk Monster connected to Plum Island?
There is no evidence linking the carcass to Plum Island or any government research activity.
Was DNA testing ever done?
No. The carcass was never officially recovered or preserved for DNA analysis.
Could the Montauk Monster have been a dog?
Some experts have suggested a dog was possible, but the raccoon theory fits more anatomical features overall.
Why do people still doubt the explanation?
The lack of a definitive autopsy and the unsettling appearance of the carcass leave room for doubt and speculation.
When was the Montauk Monster found?
The carcass was discovered in July 2008 on a beach near Montauk, New York.
Is the Montauk Monster still unsolved?
Scientifically, the explanation is largely agreed upon. Culturally, the mystery persists.
Why the Montauk Monster Still Matters
Stories like this endure because they remind us that the world still feels unpredictable.
A single image, a single discovery, can ripple outward and become something far larger than itself.
The Montauk Monster was never just a body on a beach.
It was a moment when the unknown felt close enough to touch.
Explore More Strange & Twisted Cryptid Content & Apparel
If this article on The Montauk Monster has ignited your curiosity for the strange and unexplained, we invite you to explore our extensive collection of the bizarre and the terrifying featuring Cryptid stories from around the planet. Discover other tales that blur the lines between myth and reality:
- Strange & Twisted Homepage
- Strange Stories & Twisted Tales Archive
- Strange & Twisted Collection of Cryptid Themed T-Shirts & Tees
Shop The Mothman T-Shirt
Shop The Sasquatch T-Shirt
Shop The Chupacabra T-Shirt
Shop The Jersey Devil T-Shirt
Shop The Flatwoods Monster T-Shirt