All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. I had one situation where two deer ran across a logging road right in front of me and I had to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting them. That is pretty normal for deer to do something stupid around vehicles. What was not normal was they turned around after they crossed and looked back where they had come from. Neither deer looked at me in my truck. As I sat there looking in the direction they had come from and had looked towards, I smelled a nasty skunky smell. Somehow I don't think they were terrified of a skunk. I did not see anything and drove off. In retrospect I should have parked and headed towards where they were staring. I wonder how often a BF waits until a vehicle passes then walks across a road. Probably more often than crossing in front of a car. And most people would never notice it.
  3. Today
  4. You know, this is very fortuitous. Who is going to fork over the money to mount up a search for the creature to prove she was lying? Think about it. Will the insurance company? If they dig out the vehicle's equivalent to the airplane's "black box" what will it show? It should show speed, breaking, and evasive actions. Most people aren't even aware that vehicles are even equipped with such technology and have been since the prototypes in some were installed back on 200 or 2002. Some European imports have still not install it though. The "device" should give all the info of what happened seconds before the crash. If a private individual wanted to get that info it would cost about $2000. I know all this because of an accident my son was in in a new truck and it was deemed not his fault. Now if the electronics says that's the driver in that story is telling the truth about an avoidance maneuver then the vehicle's recorder will show it. Let's see if they believe her and if they do it would HAVE to get some folks thinking. Folks with plenty of money like the insurance companies.
  5. Thanks, That would make more sense for the number of bears.
  6. It seems to me that this type of activity started subsiding about the time that the Henry and Winchester rifles became prevalent if we consider the historical accounts. 16 rounds in rapid succession would make anything think twice, let alone something even slightly sentient. Lots of the native tribes spoke of different types of these creatures, some who were or are more predictably violent and aggressive. I lean toward this myself. I would think long and hard about taking any kind of presumptions good or bad for granted when approaching an area that is remotely suspected of being habituated. Some of the most prevalent Bigfoot related media content out there is teaching people to provoke them. My families experience with one as a kid was enough to know that just being in an area they are in can be enough for them to become pretty aggressive and intrusive. The size and physical attributes of this creature lend us as a species to be very wary of even half hearted aggressive intents on their part. Pretty smart if you ask me. I've never traveled the woods unarmed and never will. The first time you come across cloths and a backpack on a game trail in the middle of nowhere it makes you think long and hard about just how vulnerable you are out there.
  7. Dontcha just hate it when that happens?!
  8. Bigfoot or not, you have got to watch the road ahead.... http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/26/bigfoot-blamed-in-idaho-car-crash.html
  9. Yesterday
  10. West side of what? I-5? Mount St Helens, Adams? West of the Southern Cascades in General? West of the peaks in the Gifford Pinchot? You might be talking about somewhere around 20,000 bears?
  11. 30,000 black bear in Washington state with well over half of them living on the west side I would guess. The Quinalt Indians claim SE Alaska like densities on there reservation.
  12. Quoting evidence cinches my case. There are no elk tracks where they must be in the Skookum Cast for that to be an elk. And what would you know about the BFRO? I'm not trusting anybody who seems to think elk levitate, personally.
  13. Hi SWWASAS. Two things after reading your post. They stem from how wild animals respond to Humans: For the most part they run away or otherwise vacate an area. This is GENERALLY true although some circumstances will result in something other than that general response to our presence. So, that said one response by animals including BF is to disappear somehow when we come onto the scene. The second may or may not be thought of as relevant. And that is that Sasquatch, like us, is also bipedal. So would the animal reaction to them be the same as the animal response to Humans? In other words, beyond more familiarity with Sasquatch, would animals in the wild respond to a BF's presence in the same manner as they respond to Humans? If so then it is quite reasonable to say that a BF would have a place to themselves if animals scatter they same way in which they do when we walk onto the scene. If that's the case then what does it do for say a population of bears in a given locale. Do you think they wouldn't care one way or another or would they leave. Have you or anyone else noticed any differences in that regard in an area you frequent? Is it even worth considering as a clue to whether or not there is a Sasquatch presence where and when you go to your respective research areas?
  14. Tracks are problematic given time afield, season, weather, etc. BFRO has it's reputation, but in general has done good work: Excellent website in my opinion. Thought you folks might like a look at the Skookum site one year after the event. I dug out two pails of soil to send to Loren Coleman for an exhibit. The trees are bigger now. On the other side of the road is about an 8 ft. bank depending on where. For strange reasons "kids" still drive through the hole when it's wet. As you can imagine, when dry, the soil is not conducive for imbedded tracks. Since it was wet at the time of the Skookum cast, you can make your own judgment as to tracks. Lots of elk and bear in the area. One associate got a clear view of a wolf from his mountain bike.
  15. My Bigfoot "Honey Hole" is here at the BFF where I get all the news and information on happenings in the BFworld. That's why I contribute to the Bigfoot Forum Fund drive, and you should too. Contribute here http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/announcement/45-help-the-bigfoot-forums-with-our-fund-drive/ Questions asked and answered here... Play trivia, win a donation...
  16. My experience may not be typical but it sort of points to the relative numbers of BF related to other known to science creatures in my research area in 10 years of time in the field. Mind you this was an active BF area in SW Washington. An area without BF may have more cougars or other predators as a result. Total number of face to face BF encounters = 3 if you accept a growl or chest beating as 2 of the encounters. Total number of face to face cougar encounters = one. Total number of black bear encounters = 2. Nearly an equal number of foot print finds between bear and BF and cougar. One wolf track. No porcupines or wolverines seen nor tracks of them. Fresh deer and / or elk tracks found nearly every time out. This is a big guess but based on sighting and footprint finds, I would guess in my research area when it was active there were nearly an equal number of cougar and BF. Both BF and cougar are reclusive and don't want to be seen. Neither are seen as often as bear. Wolves have just moved into the area and that number is probably not representative of anything. Cougar and BF may have a symbiotic relationship by feeding on remains of each others kills. Perhaps BF takes them away? An apex predator that also scavenges in certain circumstances would also be an apex scavenger. BTW has mentioned a there may be a relationship between cougar and BF kills.
  17. Looking at southernyahoo's "equation" and the results I came up with? Average BF area is one for every two hundred square miles. Don't know how to factor for a family unit. Bears apparently only need 15-30% of that area so multiply 70 or 180 by 3-6 bears. So competition may average 200 to 400 per 70 Sasquatch for the Olympic Park or around 500 to 1,000 for 180 Sasquatch just for the Olympic Peninsula. It was difficult to find a bear population figure for the Olympic Peninsula alone. In fact I never found the number of bears there in all my digging. Someone else may know where to look.
  18. Norse, can you say for sure that all those cougar kills are what they seem to be? And all the stumps are torn apart by bears? Do you find tracks identifying the animals at every location you find? Because I sure don't. One thing I have found in my studies is that cougar feeding sites and bigfoot feeding sites are very similar. More similar than any of the other animals.The point I was trying to make, at least in the area where we are going, is that there is enough evidence of foraging to include bigfoot. That IS what you were originally getting at. There are lots of smaller animals that no-one would even notice if they were being fed on. I know we don't find all the evidence of foraging that a cougar or a bear leave. The bones aren't piled all in one place (although I've heard it reported that such places have been found) and the ripped stumps are spread out over miles of territory. I've said it before, if bigfoot exists and has been living in the ecosystem for thousands of years then that same ecosystem would be able to sustain what you have decided has to be mass devastation just to stay fed. Their dietary requirements would not have changed in recent years. Other people have found similar evidence on bones as we have. I've contacted some. Sometimes I get a response, other times I'm still waiting. It may be a WAG but I think it's a reasonable one. Very similar to what I've calculated as well. For those that have a problem with those numbers, divide it by 200 instead. You still get some interesting numbers. Another thing I thought I would mention is that no, we are not tripping over bones everywhere. We walk through the forest spread out like a search and rescue team to see what we can find. Sometimes it works, most of the time we find very little. And no Finding Bigfoot wouldn't. We've never found any bones in the dark. That's a daylight process.
  19. WAG or not here goes: Olympic National Park- 1,442 sq. mi. gives around 70 for a Sasquatch number. The entire Olympic Peninsula at 3,600 sq. mi. results in a figure of 180 creatures.
  20. You could probably guess at Patty's weight. Use that as an average for adults and then figure in some of a family group as being younger and less heavy. Take the total number of square miles encompassing suitable habitat within a region, divide it by 100 and then multiply by 5 and you might be close to the number of sasquatch I would guess there are. It's still a WAG though.
  21. Consistent evidence? I do. I've had a cougar kill with in 50 yards of my house, and always find deer bones on the ranch. I've walked into a angry hornets cloud because a bear had been ripping the log apart minutes before. We treed cats with hounds in winter and bears in fall. I can call bears in with a mouth call. I see tracks all of the time. Skunk cabbage ripped out, huckleberry bushes eaten, stumps torn asunder, rocks flipped...plus tons and tons of scat. I have no problem pointing to the harvest evidence from Bears or Cougars. And in your unique case your trying to seperate out the mundane from the extraordinary evidence. That's all fine and dandy. But who else in the country is sending you bones that have giant concave tooth marks chipped out? If we have a large coast to coast population of these things? The landscape should be littered with these bones your finding? Right? Especially in areas void of bears or cougars it should be a no brainer..... The Finding Bigfoot crew should be tripping over these bones with each outing in each state if they truly are in "squatchy" areas.....your garage should be full of deer bones people have sent you. And Im sticking with deer as a rule of thumb because it's by far and away the most populated ungulate in the US mainland. Most states do not have Elk or Moose or Caribou.
  22. I'll bet you would too Inc1 my man! Been trying to persuade my spouse to get on the road earlier than planned to maybe see the eclipse in Oregon but it doesn't look like we'll be heading out that early. The plan is a northern summer=style route through Canada to the Dakotas and on thru the Teton Range and end up in Port Angeles, WA to see an old friend. Then head down to Tahoe to see more friends and hang out for a while around the lake and mountains looking for you-know who After that trek then we plan meander back this way on a more mid-country route so a blast through NE is certainly not out of the question as far as I'm concerned. Prolly be tired of the road so the quicker home the better. All in all, a month, or a bit more, round trip. Tenting most of the way with our dog, Eddie
  23. Let's be honest here and look at some numbers for known animals. Cougars kill the same amount of deer per year as Norseman's estimate for a bigfoot requirement. In areas such as WA state were cougars are known to fill every available niche of habitat that fits their needs, how many cougar kills has anyone found to support those numbers? There are a lot more bear numbers in the state than cougars. Does anyone consistently find evidence of all those bears foraging for whatever it is they are finding to eat? Are we able to tell the difference between the above mentioned animals and bigfoot when evidence of feeding behavior is found? In the area we research we have found over two dozen elk and deer kills now. The age of these sites are within the last two or three years. Some show the evidence we are looking for in possible bigfoot feeding behavior. Elk are a lot bigger than deer so the requirement for animals killed is a lot less than would be required if deer were the only prey. This area is about 2 square miles. So if it's a cougar doing all this killing and feeding it's only about a 50th or less of a cougar's range. Makes me wonder how much we haven't found in a larger area. So with those numbers and considering a larger area, there is more than enough evidence to support a couple cougars (male and female, since only their ranges overlap), some scavenging black bears and a few bigfoot as well. So I beg to differ when it's said there is no evidence of feeding. I have no idea what the bigfoot population is but look at it this way; when researcher encounters, sightings and finding fresh evidence occur at the same time over large widespread areas it is not the same individuals we are seeing or experiencing. Unless portals are coming into play.
  24. Every ten years, or so, a black bear is reported on the NW border of Nebraska/Wyoming. Some love-crazed stud bear out wandering around, looking for a confused sow. We have far more moose reported, across the wide breadth of our state, but they get a brain worm that causes them to wander. That being said, the upcoming total solar eclipse will traverse more miles across my state than any other of the 50. C'mon out to witness, I'll provide a helluva couple days entertainment!
  25. Nope, not too far off at all. A beautiful thing......well, that's what my Bigfoot said anyway. All kidding aside, and kinda on the recent few posts, any Black Bears in good ol' NE? Or are they all mistaken for Bigfoots Figured there might be some left over in your back yard from their making it down to the eastern OK/AR forests?
  1. Load more activity