BobbyO

Analytical Research - Sightings Database

168 posts in this topic

Before you think on it too much, I still think they are also used as a warning signal that we are there. Because of a couple other experiences I've had. Both times the knocks were a result of our being in the area. One was probably because we surprised them. I'm pretty sure the other time I was actually being observed from the ridge above. 

 

So possibly double duty on the knocks. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hiflier said:

If the creature sees Humans as the same kind of intrusion then a tree knock might be the first go to from experience.

 

Yes, I agree which is why I kept the thought on Humans in the habitat. IOW, Humans and bears may very well get the same treatment. There's a different outcome though. Bears probably just leave the area. Humans may not but instead they might just hang around and even do a few knocks of their own. Not being armed in the woods I probably would do what the bears do- exit the area- machete and folding saw in hand. The tools I would use to extract as much of the important-to-science parts from a carcass or skeleton as I could safely carry out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My experience with one set of wood knocks was when a BF nearly blundered right into me.      4 rapid knocks.   I have trouble assigning any interpretation to that other than it was a warning for another BF it had been whooping back and forth with.    That brings up a question for those who advocate that BF is telepathic.     Why in the world would BF tree knock,  rock clack.   or do anything so ordinary when they can,  transmit complex thoughts via telepathy great distances?    Just curious what a telepathy advocates explanation would be for that.  

Edited by SWWASAS
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree on the communication aspect.  Why would they coordinate with calls and other audible signals if....

 

With regard to bears, I was principally asking how many reports there are that include both squatch and bears.  I'll wager that there are no bears in any area where squatch are staying for any length of time.

 

I'd also wager that any area with a surfeit of squatch sightings has a dearth of bears.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall one sighting report where a person blundered into a bear with a cub.     The person expected to be charged but the bear was looking in another direction.     When the person looked where the bear was looking, he saw a BF.     That pretty well tells me what the pecking order in the woods is with humans, bears and BF. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's interesting, Randy....so  I guess we're all down another notch on the food chain!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2017 at 3:47 PM, JDL said:

I'd also wager that any area with a surfeit of squatch sightings has a dearth of bears.

JDL

I am not sure about this JDL. I do not believe that there is a large population of Bigfoots compared to bears . Yet every so often people get glimpses of them and the same goes with bears, Ok, lets say that these creatures have ape in them. Wht do apes do? they move and eat long distances. So maybe these creatures hang in small groups ( speculating) if they do then they move together. But every so often they stay in one spot and move on to another spot and so on until they return to where they started. Bears do this too, except now lets say they have Human as well as ape. Now we have a creature that has manged to survive that bears cannot do.

 

So maybe as far as bear and humans and spotting them while casually walking are equally rare as seeing bigfoot. But here is a data base along with google data base to compare bear to bigfoot sightings. I see it like this , we have two big creatures competing for the same food source for survival. There seems to be more bears then these creatures or we be seeing them in streams competing with the bears.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

I recall one sighting report where a person blundered into a bear with a cub.     The person expected to be charged but the bear was looking in another direction.     When the person looked where the bear was looking, he saw a BF.     That pretty well tells me what the pecking order in the woods is with humans, bears and BF. 

 

 

I also recently read the same report and found it to be very interesting (and the witness sounds credible; although I have done no due diligence).

 

The report was posted on Will Jevning's blog in Dec-2016 and is under the title "The David Mills Story - Kitsap County, WA".

See link below:

 

http://williamjevning.com/the-david-mills-story-kitsap-county-washington/

 

Nonetheless, the story was originally reported in "The Province Newspaper", British Columbia, Canada  by George Raitt on Nov. 14,  2000.

 

The original story in 2000 is found in the Bigfoot Encounters website (see link below).

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/province.htm

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2017 at 3:47 PM, JDL said:

Agree on the communication aspect.  Why would they coordinate with calls and other audible signals if....

 

With regard to bears, I was principally asking how many reports there are that include both squatch and bears.  I'll wager that there are no bears in any area where squatch are staying for any length of time.

 

I'd also wager that any area with a surfeit of squatch sightings has a dearth of bears.

 

Black bears co-existed quite well with said biped in the area where I encountered sightings, pre- and post-sighting. 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems this bear and bigfoot discussion is going on in a couple threads currently. My two cents, they do coexist but just avoid each other. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think the BF/bear arrangement is complex. Getting along and sharing habitat may mean giving a wide berth to whichever is the top dog in close proximity. Bears have a great sense of smell and BF footprints along with BF odors from upwind allows for good warning. Sasquatch have tree peeping and one may assume they know about wind. If a BF comes out of the winter hungry then a hunting party could grab a bear cub or two in the Spring season. Female bears as it is are wary of male bears if they are with cubs and I wouldn't think having Sasquatch in the same area makes things any easier beyond keeping male bears at a distance. As I mentioned the arrangement could be a delicate one until everyone is feeding normally and the cubs get bigger.

 

Other factors might change those relationships year to year when drought or fire enters the picture. So somehow I don't think the situation between the two species is always amicable or tolerated when other pressures are present. Knowing the history of a region also may help take some of the seeming randomness out of the sightings record.

Edited by hiflier
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 1/7/2017 at 1:05 PM, guyzonthropus said:

That's interesting, Randy....so  I guess we're all down another notch on the food chain!

Not sure if it is food chain related or scared of each other chain.   I think it more likely the latter.    Quite frankly I am more afraid of bears, especially with cubs involved, than I am BF.    But likely a bear knows he/she is more in danger of BF than a human even if eating each other is not involved.    Bears with cubs react on a instinctive gutteral level without much thought as to their own danger.     I could see a mother bear charging a BF to protect her cubs.   Bears probably don't have a good handle on statistics and probabilities.    On the other hand BF may because of their inclination to avoid humans.    

Edited by SWWASAS
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2017 at 1:43 PM, Redbone said:

I just added them up 920 total BFRO reports left to classify, and probably many more to edit and correct.

 

At this point I'm pretty much only working on BFRO reports. Once finished we move on to other databases like John Green's. We need it set up so we can link each report though.

In Oregon (160?), California (190), and Florida (106) alone there are hundreds of BFRO reports left to classify. Another 161 or so (combined) in Georgia (24), South Carolina (29), North Carolina (41), West Virginia (29), Louisiana (25), and New Hampshire (13?). Then there will be Alaska (22?) and all of Canada (290?), places I haven't even looked at yet. There's definitely a light at the end of the long tunnel now, but are still probable months from being done.

 

Updated SSR Database numbers - 1 month later

Georgia, North Carolina, West Virginia, New Hampshire, and Florida are all DONE plus Nova Scotia (which only had 2 reports).

Alaska was and is basically done, but I still have 13 AK reports to check for accuracy. (13)

 

BFRO reports left to classify: 596 (400 in US and 196 in Canada)

California (190)

Oregon (164)
South Carolina (24)

Louisiana (22)

BC (82)     AB (32)

MB (23)    ON (41)

NB (6)       QC (3)

SK (6)       YT (3)

SSR Progress 020417.jpg

Edited by Redbone
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redbone, I tip my hat to you; you've put in a lot of work. When looking at the look at the southern states on the Google map, notice how sparse Mississippi is compared to the states all around it.  

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites