Within Alberta
Did Anything Land Near Duhamel in 1967?
The Duhamel rings remain Alberta's strongest physical-trace case, but the evidence supports uncertainty rather than a confirmed landing.
On this page
- How the rings were discovered
- What government investigators documented
- Why the case remains unresolved
Page outline Jump by section
Introduction
The marks found near Duhamel, Alberta, in August 1967 are often described as evidence that an unidentified craft landed in a farmer’s pasture. The surviving records support a narrower conclusion: unusual, sharply defined circular traces were genuinely present, Canadian defence personnel inspected them, and the investigation failed to establish how they had been made. No witness saw an object land, no material from a craft was recovered, and laboratory tests found no abnormal radiation.
Duhamel therefore matters because it is Alberta’s strongest documented physical-trace UFO case, not because it proves an extraordinary landing. Its most interesting feature is the tension within the evidence. The rings resembled heavy wheel impressions, yet investigators could not readily explain how such impressions had been produced in isolated circles without approach tracks. A hoax remained possible, but it was never demonstrated. The result was an officially unresolved case whose evidential value has not increased with time.
How the rings were discovered
Farmer Edgar Schielke noticed the first circular mark on 5 August 1967 while bringing cattle home from pasture near Duhamel, south-east of Edmonton and close to Camrose. Heavy rain had fallen during the previous night, but Schielke had not inspected that part of his land for weeks. The discovery date therefore does not establish when the marks were made; they could have been recent or several days old.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
Schielke’s initial reaction was notably restrained. He did not claim to have seen a flying saucer and reportedly did not believe UFOs were responsible. He told investigators that his machinery could not have made the impressions and suggested that some unusual form of lightning might have been involved. The UFO interpretation began to grow after he mentioned the mark to a neighbour, who contacted Ray Sanders, a local teacher and UFO enthusiast. Sanders and other visitors then searched the pasture, found further rings and alerted the press and an Edmonton UFO group.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
This early sequence is important because the site was not protected. Members of the public drove vehicles across the pasture, walked around the impressions and removed samples before government investigators arrived. By the time the official team inspected the field on 11 August, the location had become what investigator G. H. S. Jones called a “seven day wonder”. The principal rings remained distinguishable, but the wider scene had been heavily disturbed.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
Contemporary accounts also differ over the number of marks. The first military message referred to four rings, reflecting what had been reported when the case reached Canadian Forces Headquarters. Jones and Captain Walker later recorded six circular impressions at the site. This is probably not evidence of fabrication by itself: additional marks may simply have been identified during the later examination. It does, however, show why confident modern descriptions of a fixed, pristine formation should be treated cautiously.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
Reports of unusual objects in the Duhamel area preceded the discovery, including a story from two schoolgirls who described a pale object moving near the ground. Jones regarded this testimony as weak because its details resembled familiar published flying-saucer accounts. More importantly, no sighting was securely connected to Schielke’s field, and nobody reported watching an object descend, rest on the ground or leave the marks.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
What government investigators documented
The Department of National Defence responded quickly once the Camrose Canadian brought the case to official attention. A priority message was issued on 9 August, and an inspection team reached the site two days later. Jones represented the Defence Research Establishment Suffield, part of the Defence Research Board, while Captain Walker conducted interviews and prepared a site account. Their involvement made Duhamel more than a newspaper curiosity: it became a documented Canadian military investigation of physical traces.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
The rings measured roughly 31 to 36 feet, or about 9.5 to 11 metres, in diameter. Most were close to circular, although the largest was slightly elliptical. The visible bands were generally five to seven inches wide. They were incomplete rather than closed circles, with gaps on broadly the same side, and were separated from one another rather than forming a single geometric design.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
The physical appearance suggested pressure rather than burning. Grass in the bands was crushed and discoloured, while fresh cattle dung lying across a mark had been compressed. Investigators also noticed repeating impressions that resembled tread, lugs or other projections. Jones thought the traces looked most like the result of rolling contact by a heavily loaded rubber tyre.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
Several observations argued against a fiery or energetic landing:
- There was no scorching or obvious heat damage.
- Loose soil outside the narrow bands was not blasted or displaced.
- No chemical effect was identified.
- Cattle behaviour appeared unchanged.
- Radiation readings at the rings were consistent with normal background levels.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
These negative findings are central to the case. Popular summaries sometimes emphasise the estimated weight needed to form the rings while overlooking the absence of exhaust effects, radiation, unusual residues or damage within the circles. The investigation documented compressed vegetation, not a broader footprint of an unknown propulsion system.
Jones was nevertheless struck by how sharply the marks differed from the many ordinary vehicle tracks left by visitors. The circular bands were more uniform and appeared to reflect greater pressure than a car or lorry tyre. Yet no continuous track led towards or away from them. If a wheel had produced each ring, the equipment either had to be positioned without leaving obvious approach marks or used when the surrounding ground was in a condition that did not preserve them.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
Jones made a rough pressure calculation to explore the possibility of an object resting on a circular support. Assuming that the band required about three times the pressure of a normal truck tyre, he estimated that a vehicle supported around a 30-foot ring might weigh approximately 135 tons. He observed that this was comparable to a large aircraft or, hypothetically, a small spacecraft.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
That calculation is often presented as if the government had established that a 135-ton craft landed. It did not. The figure depended on estimated tyre loads, contact areas, soil response and the assumption that the whole ring was produced simultaneously by downward pressure. Jones also believed that rolling contact could make a similar trace with a much smaller load, perhaps half to three-quarters of a ton, if a heavy wheel could somehow be guided in an accurate circle. The number was an exploratory estimate, not a measured mass or proof of a vehicle.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
Could the marks have been manufactured?
A deliberate construction was among the investigator’s main possibilities. A heavy wheel fixed to a radius arm could, in principle, have been rolled around a central pivot. Another arrangement might have used wheels on a long axle, although Jones considered a structure more than 30 feet across unlikely. Repeated circuits by a motorcycle were also discussed, but no ordinary single-wheel tracks were visible around the circles.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
The hoax hypothesis had strengths. The case developed in an atmosphere of local UFO interest; enthusiasts reached the field before officials; the press was contacted rapidly; and the site was already contaminated when examined. Human beings are fully capable of producing precise circular marks, and later crop-circle history provides abundant examples of formations made using simple tools and advance planning.[trentu.ca]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital CollectionsDigital Collections
However, the original inspection did not uncover a device, confession, anchor points common to every ring or clear evidence showing how heavy apparatus had been moved into place. One circle reportedly contained a small central indentation that might fit a pivot method, but the others did not. Jones concluded that a hoax was physically possible yet would have required equipment and considerable determination. He found no positive evidence identifying a perpetrator.[Experiencer Support]experiencersupport.orgOpen source on experiencersupport.org.
That distinction matters. “No hoax was proved” does not mean “a hoax was ruled out”. The investigation took place after rain, public traffic and sample removal, with no known creation time and no secured chain of custody. Those conditions made it difficult to reconstruct either an ordinary mechanism or deliberate deception.
Natural explanations were even less developed. Schielke’s suggestion of lightning was not supported by burn marks, soil disturbance or another recognised lightning effect matching the repeated circular bands. Wind or animal activity did not readily account for the uniform width, apparent tread pattern and heavy compression. Yet the investigation did not conduct controlled soil-loading experiments or a detailed agricultural-engineering survey that might have tested less dramatic mechanical causes.
What the laboratory tests added
Walker returned on 15 August to collect official soil samples. The decision was influenced by the recently investigated Falcon Lake case in Manitoba, where questions about radioactive material had become central. Duhamel samples were sent for examination, including testing for foreign matter and gamma-ray spectral analysis.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
The results did not strengthen an exotic interpretation. Radiation levels were normal, both in field measurements and later laboratory analysis. No distinctive contaminant or material linked to an unknown craft was reported. By October, the Defence Research Board’s testing had produced no anomaly capable of explaining the impressions.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
These findings narrowed what could reasonably be claimed. The rings were not associated with detected radiation, unusual chemistry, scorched vegetation or recovered debris. The physical evidence was therefore limited to the shape and compression of the ground marks themselves.
The sampling also had unavoidable weaknesses. Some material had already been removed by civilian visitors, and the official collection occurred ten days after Schielke’s discovery. Rain, exposure and traffic may have altered the site. The records do not describe a modern forensic sampling design with extensive control locations, blinded laboratory work or repeated mechanical tests on comparable soil. The tests were useful but not comprehensive enough to determine exactly how the rings formed.
Why the case remains unresolved
Duhamel is unresolved because the investigation ended with several plausible categories but insufficient evidence to choose confidently among them. The Department of National Defence ultimately stated that it could not determine what had caused the impressions. No later official inquiry appears to have produced a solution, and the surviving federal file remains part of Library and Archives Canada’s wider collection of UFO-related records from National Defence, Transport, the National Research Council and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
The case retains evidential interest for three reasons. First, the marks were physical and measurable rather than a fleeting light seen at a distance. Secondly, investigators reached the location while the impressions were still visible and recorded dimensions, surface effects, radiation readings and possible mechanisms. Thirdly, they did not force a simple answer when the available observations failed to support one.[Digital Collections]digitalcollections.trentu.caDigital Collections
Its limitations are just as significant:
- No one saw a landing or departure.
- The marks may have existed for days before discovery.
- The site was visited and driven over before official inspection.
- The reported number of rings changed as the search expanded.
- The traces looked mechanically produced, including possible tread-like impressions.
- No abnormal radiation, chemical residue, debris or biological effect was found.
- The pressure estimate relied on assumptions rather than direct measurement.
- No repeat event or later evidence supplied a missing link.
Later crop-circle research weakens any argument that geometric ground marks are inherently extraordinary, because elaborate formations have repeatedly been produced by people. That general history does not retrospectively prove who made Duhamel’s rings, but it makes a human mechanism easier to accept than it seemed to many observers in 1967.[Wikipedia]WikipediaCrop circleCrop circle
At the same time, later reporting has not decisively debunked Duhamel. No verified confession, reconstruction with the original equipment or documentary discovery has closed the case. Modern retellings mostly reproduce the 1967 observations rather than adding independent evidence. The passage of time has therefore weakened the prospect of a solution while leaving the original uncertainty intact.
What Duhamel actually establishes
The Duhamel investigation establishes that six ring-like impressions were ultimately documented in an Alberta pasture and that contemporary defence investigators considered them unusual enough to examine seriously. It also establishes that the marks were compatible with heavy mechanical pressure and lacked the secondary effects that might have made an unknown aerial vehicle a stronger inference.
It does not establish that a spacecraft landed, that the calculated 135-ton load represented a real object, or that nearby UFO stories were connected to the field. The most defensible assessment is that the traces were unexplained at the time, probably artificial or mechanical in character, but too poorly preserved and insufficiently witnessed to identify their maker.
That measured conclusion is why Duhamel remains important within Alberta’s UFO history. It is neither a confirmed landing nor an empty legend. It is a genuine but limited physical-trace investigation in which the evidence was strong enough to create a puzzle and too weak to resolve it.
Amazon book picks
Further Reading
Books and field guides related to Did Anything Land Near Duhamel in 1967?. Use these as the next step if you want deeper reading beyond the article.
UFOs and Government: A Historical Inquiry
Governments around the world have had to deal with the UFO phenomenon for a good part of a century. How and why they did so is the subjec...
UFOs Explained
Analyzing several UFO cases, the author exposes the myth of extraterrestrial visitors to earth.
The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark
NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER • From the renowned astronomer and author of Cosmos comes a “powerful [and] stirring defense of informed ration...
The UFO Files: The Inside Story of Real-Life Sightings
'What does all this stuff about flying saucers amount to? What can it mean? What is the truth?' Winston Churchill, prime minister's perso...
eBay marketplace picks
Marketplace Samples
Live-tested eBay searches with available results related to this page.
Selected fromUFO collectible oneBay.co.uk.
Endnotes
1.
Source: digitalcollections.trentu.ca
Title: Digital Collections
Link:https://digitalcollections.trentu.ca/_flysystem/fedora/2022-04/A_History_of_Canada_s_UFO_Investigation_1950_1995.pdf
2.
Source: canada.ca
Title: ‘s UFOs: The search for the unknown
Link:https://www.canada.ca/en/library-archives/collection/research-help/science-technology/ufos.html
Source snippet
Canada's UFOs: The search for the unknown - Canada.ca...
3.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Crop circle
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_circle
4.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Duhamel, Alberta
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duhamel%2C_Alberta
5.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Falcon Lake Incident
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Lake_Incident
6.
Source: Wikipedia
Title: Shag Harbour UFO incident
Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shag_Harbour_UFO_incident
7.
Source: experiencersupport.org
Link:https://www.experiencersupport.org/declassified/onsite-inspection-of-ufo-landing-marks-at-duhamel-camrose-county-in-alberta
8.
Source: experiencersupport.org
Title: Points of Interest RCMP UFO Report: Regarding UFO at Falcon Beach, Manitoba
Link:https://www.experiencersupport.org/points-of-interest
Source snippet
Points of InterestRCMP UFO Report: Regarding UFO at Falcon Beach, Manitoba - May 26 1967... Onsite Inspection of UFO Landing Marks at Du...
9.
Source: experiencersupport.org
Link:https://www.experiencersupport.org/evidence_category/residual-evidence
Additional References
10.
Source: sfgate.com
Title: Real culprit behind crop circles Skeptics point 2603242
Link:https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Real-culprit-behind-crop-circles-Skeptics-point-2603242.php
Source snippet
Real culprit behind crop circles? Skeptics point to the media12 Jul 2003 — A crop-circle craze in England was exposed as the handiw...
11.
Source: youtube.com
Title: UFO Mystery Unveiled | Falcon Lake | The Full Documentary Sci-Fi Movie
Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbQOBqrCLKI
Source snippet
Canada's First Reported Crop Circles - Duhamel, Alberta 1967 Strange North · 1.7K views The Alberta UFO Wave of 1967 Strange North · 16K...
12.
Source: thecanadianencyclopedia.ca
Title: ufos in canada
Link:https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/ufos-in-canada
Source snippet
20 Oct 2020 —... UFO landing pad in St. Paul, Alberta. The time was ripe for a fresh look at UFOs. The cases of the Falcon Lake Incident...
13.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/albertastorm/posts/1005516020961037/
14.
Source: scribd.com
Link:https://www.scribd.com/doc/294127690/Crop-Circle
15.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/234039950342068/posts/250414998704563/
16.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/WiltshireBBC/posts/nearly-25-years-after-the-largest-and-most-complex-crop-circle-ever-recorded-was/1647003604092533/
17.
Source: reddit.com
Link:https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/nzbfq4/the_duhamel_alberta_canada_case/
18.
Source: dokumen.pub
Link:https://dokumen.pub/the-ufo-files-the-canadian-connection-exposed-9781554886999.html
19.
Source: facebook.com
Link:https://www.facebook.com/groups/physicsisfun109/posts/712034051475442/