southernyahoo

Sésquac
  • Content count

    4,946
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

818 Legendary

About southernyahoo

  • Rank
    Bigfoot

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Bigfoot

Contact Methods

  • Have you ever had an encounter with a sasquatch-like creature?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

3,980 profile views
  1. I think they would use a stick like a club mostly. It does take some time in my area to find a solid one for knocking with, and even longer in the dark, so it makes sense that if we are hearing wood on wood we have an animal that can grasp and swing a stick within seconds of hearing a wood knock from another location. I think they do move about in small groups and knocking would help them keep contact with each other while hunting if they had to separate. I remember one person years ago that posted they had seen a BF wood knock and it was trying to flush an animal out of a tree which it was successful in doing. So my theory would be that wood knocking has multiple purposes in rudimentary communication , locating each other , and flushing prey.
  2. Yeah many of us have given much thought to this, but I'm like most who think they must have a stick with them, at least when they are in the act of prowling at night. It would have other uses like knocking spider webs out of the way or clobbering prey. perhaps even like how a blind person might use it. Anyways, here's another file from my collection. I heard these two live, and they had that familiar ring of wood on wood. The response took eleven seconds, and before we even looked for a piece of wood to respond. The two knocks did seem to come from two different locations and they were slightly different in sound and volume. 2-9-08-2-knocks.wav
  3. I kinda doubt anyone knew our recorders were planted where they were, but it was certainly a place where other people might go to hang out at night, so we monitor vehicle traffic into and out of that place. The shooters were either just popping some shots off or responding to other shots or knocks. I hear a few sounds that I think are knocks and not a shooter.
  4. I've been in the field again this spring. We found this seeming volley of knocks and gunfire that occured over a period of about ten minutes. It was cool and calm at about 10 pm at night. This file is condensed to remove all the dead time in between but the knocks and shots are still in the original order. The recorder was placed several miles from our camp, so we didn't hear this live. Knock-shooter volley SS loc 3-4-17.mp3
  5. I don't have a formula for the number of calories a bigfoot would need, but I would expect it to be similar to Neanderthal and man, but not identical to either. Prey animals in their environment might be predictable in behavior, and somewhat corralled by comparison to how a Neanderthal would have hunted. I don't have a problem with a low postulated population density, because I think Bigfoot overcomes that with resourcefulness and long distance communication to find each other and viable mates.
  6. Getting back on topic, I would take segments of territory that are bisected by rivers and streams and search or surveille within a mile of those on either side to find honey holes.
  7. 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.
  8. Perhaps you shouldn't be using the Gorilla formula. We don't see such mass foraging therefore they aren't so reliant upon vegatation for food. If nothing was off the menu, how well could you spot their feeding sign?
  9. I'm sure I'm not thinking they are as large and nomadic as you are. The less they have to move around, the lower the caloric intake needed. This does put a greater emphasis on hiding and sneaking around human intruders, which I think they are better at than the passing enthusiast would give them credit for. Adults 6 to 7 feet tall, family groups maybe ranging from 3 to 6 members.
  10. If you are calculating that all BF are 800lbs, you are likely way off. A honey hole / Oasis will have all sizes and ages.
  11. Hogs could sure fill any voids in the BF diet plan down here in the south. I just don't feel that anyone could keep an accurate counting of how many were eaten by BF or their actual numbers. I'm sure their are estimates that could be made for BF's caloric intake. You could take a guess at what a small unit of them would eat seasonally. "Honey hole" would simply be another word for a place where they have everything at arms reach for sustenance and hydration, while maintaning low human intrusion , plenty of cover and with numerous evasion pathways. Also known as an Oasis. This is ofcoarse if BF doen't find another strategy useful living just on the edge of human habitation and leeching off our crops or discarded foods.
  12. I wouldn't be too sure their impact is measurable and detectable on an environment. Obviously they would eat, but what they eat and where could be quite diverse. Add in the fact that what they eat now is attributed to either some other predator or a natural mortality rate of it's prey. The rate of reproduction of it's prey could be skewed by their presence as well, all hidden in the data, because we don't account for them being there in the first place. I don't believe they would have to ravage a particular area to stay within a 100 square mile range which is only 10x10 , particularly if the area is uninhabitable by people like in flood zones or riparian forests along waterways down here.
  13. Yeah well the habitat has to be sufficient somewhere right? All squatch has to do is run the bear off, but down here there's only small localized populations of black bear. I've not even came across a single track of one in the areas I frequent, but they use to be much more prevalent. You don't have to be impressed with anyone's evidence but your own, and if you can't find definitive tracks in the right places, I guess you can't even get your hunting / research started, because you have a huge range to tackle and you have to be standing where a squatch once stood.......... like in the past day or two. Good luck !!!!
  14. A very relevant question indeed. I know that when very old dna is sequenced like at Max- Planck Institute, they are very careful to have each new segment done about thirty times from independent labs as they build the genome. Contamination is of great concern, especially when attempting this on a species so similar to the one that collected the sample. Degradation is also a problem ofcoarse, but fresh viable samples should be much easier to simply wash contamination away and get a read on the true donor of hair or flesh.
  15. All evidence has it's question marks, it all boils down to what you are willing to act on and spend your time with. Apes/ humans/ primates are vocal creatures, and it isn't unheard of to find new populations of them through careful surveillance and data collection. This article says tracking might have been the origin of science....... http://www.cybertracker.org/tracking/the-art-of-tracking ......but you know as well as anyone else, it's not entirely solid sign that gets interpreted and followed up on.