"Naiataka" Error in Petroglyph reproduction

I had posted this before but the matter came up again recently.

Both Costello and Mackal had published this illustration , said to be a petroglyph representing Ogopogo (Mackal uses the name "Naiataka")

Only the original is on Vancouver Island and this version as shown is incorrect in that it combines two different figures of the original petroglyph frieze. This is a well-known location and the illustration beow is taken from a standard reference work, Rock Art of the American Indian, by Mallory:

:The combination not only mistakenly combines two different objects, the second object which becomes the tail end is obviously a boat.

The actual intended Sea monster is shown below, and it is much more Plesiosaurian. Furthermore Mallory concludes that the indications are this was an attempt to reproduce 'Something which the artist had seen and had stongly in mind', which can be read as "A pre-colonial native sighting of Cadborosaurus, which the artist wished to make a historical recording of"