FarArcher

Anyone Care To Guess How Many People Search for Bigfoot?

45 posts in this topic

how many people - enthusiasts, hunters, "researchers", or interested parties per year look for these things - full time, part time, or attend "group" hunts?

 

A while back, I found some 130+ BF organizations alone.  

 

Hundreds?  Thousands?

 

And I wonder about how many hours per year are spent looking for these things?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, FA, lots of websites indeed. As far as how many actually look for them. I will say easily hundreds. But I will also say that out of those hundreds I'll guess that less than fifty are consistently looking. By consistently I men at least once  month- so a minimum of twelve times a year maybe fifty are in the field regularly. Hudreds at a rate of once every three or four months or so and thousands in the summer and fall. This is only counting the ones who target Sasquatch specifically whether they are armed hunters or not. Add in hunters during hunting seasons who have a passing interest and the number may swell to the tens of thousands? Without a survey of these folks though it's only a guess.

 

There may be a couple of dozen just on this Forum who are in the field at least every two months- average. Som are way more; some way less.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

interesting that so many groups are looking and no one is finding. Perhaps, as their habitat sadly continues to disappear we can have some real answers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also depends on where groups are looking. I do think databases can narrow down areas of interest because even knowing a bear has a 100 square mile territory give or take for a home it's better than a thousand square miles. nd my previous guesswork may not amount to a hill of beans if groups or individuals are where Sasquatch is not. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over 99% of reported visual encounters involve people who didn't have an active interest in this subject prior to their encounter. Investigators who go out to establish visual contact tend to be no more successful than the average person who's taking part in a common outdoor activity. Not surprisingly, when it comes to indentifying evidence such as tracks, tree breaks, structures, and other environmental manipulations, people with an active interest in this subject tend to be more successful.

 

The majority of encounters that people have are non-visual and the majority of them are never reported to any organization. A lot of these unreported encounters aren't even correctly identified as being Sasquatch activity, and that's due to the ambiguity of the experiences. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt hundreds of Bigfoot 'enthusiast' groups/communities out there... but I doubt many of them spend meaningful time in the field. Unfortunately I don't think we have that 'millionaire-survivalist-with-nothing-to-do' out there. We can all go as deep as we want into the bush, but we need to be back by Monday morning. 

 

I'd love to see a wealthy outdoorsman spend a solid two months or so out in the remote wilderness and blog about it. 

 

Any takers? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the groups I've looked into (and yes there are a lot of them, too many to study them all), one thing I've noticed (or haven't noticed) is whether or not they're taking notice to time of year for their own experiences. I don't mean just writing down when they were out in the woods, but actually taking notice of when and where they were finding evidence.

 

What I'm trying to get at is, have any of these "field researchers" noticed whether or not sasquatches migrate with time of year? I know in Canada it's much harder to get out and study in the winter, and that there are substantially less people out in the woods between September and April. How many of these groups are doing year round research?

 

If sasquatch is one of the missing links in evolution, it's plausible to suggest they move around with time of year, just like the natives used to. It could explain why so called Hot Spots go cold from time to time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been much discussion and research done on just what you are saying. Oh, and welcome to the Forum. It's why states shouldn't be isolated from each other in researching this subject. Counties on both sides of state borders need to be researched together as a region. The Forum's SSR database I'm pretty sure is moving toward that for that very reason. We need lines on maps for reference to location but that's where the need ends. At the same time Google Earth with a Bigfoot sighting's overlay is good but if there are no delineating lines or county names then it's almost impossible to know what one is looking at and where. It just looks like dots on forests. It could be anywhere.

 

Migrational vs. territorial is often brought up and what's important to that discussion is chronology of months as well as the seasons you speak of. It's an interesting thing to study as you must know due to your mention of it. Location and chronology are good things to couple together and that's where databases can be helpful. Other things like hair color, size, and water/food supply in harsh winters at minimum are other factors too. Lots to get one's head around for sure. And nothing drives that point home like looking at all the variables a database contains. Even moonphase has been studied in depth. So lots to this as you can see. Picking a certain facet of the subject and researching deeper into it might be good to start out?. Almost like specializing in the science field. Good stuff, schwacky :) 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point I've jumped off the migration bandwagon if, by "migration" you mean long distance seasonal travel.   I do think they relocate within their range seasonally but it's a much shorter trip, probably 20-50 miles, not the hundreds I used to surmise.   So .. why the change of heart?   Deeper study of the report data.

 

What I saw was a long, somewhat thin. concentration of reports along a long mountain range.   It seemed to end at a location which has a long history.   Such a migration, mapped in time, should present a traveling wave of sightings ... and it didn't.   Instead the activity "fired off" from one end of the range to another across well over 1000 miles.   That's too far for weather change or other seasonal factors to affect all at once as well because the range runs N-S.   The only thing that makes any sense is an astronomical trigger, something that appears simultaneously at all latitudes.   Further study later also showed that there's a spike of activity at the south end of the area in mid summer, exactly out of phase with the presumed migration.

 

Today I suspect that there are "migrations" up and downhill, changes in elevation to take advantage of resources or avoid weather, but the actual distance traveled is pretty short.   This makes a lot of sense because it would mean that the Cascades where I am could have the same general pattern as the Rockies where it's pretty much too far for even a bigfoot to travel to get out of the snow.

 

Interestingly enough, away from the mountains themselves, the number of sightings stays pretty constant year around whether it's 90 degrees or approaching 10 below suggesting extreme adaptation to variable climate ... so long as food is accessible.

 

For now, I'd say there are "bands", for lack of a better word, which stay in the same general area but move up or down in elevation to follow food. 

 

It doesn't stop there.  Some of the habituators I have worked with say that their local "band" is there most of the year fairly constantly but that at certain times of the year, or sometimes every second or third year, the same small group of traveling 'foots, probably sub adult and young adult males, pass through.  They're often recognizable and predictable in their timing. 

 

I note that that would be a useful behavioral adaptation for a small, spread out population to keep the genes mixing.  

 

I don't think anyone knows for sure, though, that's just my current interpretation of behavior, timing, data, etc.   I changed my mind once before, I may change it again.

 

MIB

 

3

Share this post


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

Of all the groups I've looked into (and yes there are a lot of them, too many to study them all), one thing I've noticed (or haven't noticed) is whether or not they're taking notice to time of year for their own experiences. I don't mean just writing down when they were out in the woods, but actually taking notice of when and where they were finding evidence.

 

What I'm trying to get at is, have any of these "field researchers" noticed whether or not sasquatches migrate with time of year? I know in Canada it's much harder to get out and study in the winter, and that there are substantially less people out in the woods between September and April. How many of these groups are doing year round research?

 

If sasquatch is one of the missing links in evolution, it's plausible to suggest they move around with time of year, just like the natives used to. It could explain why so called Hot Spots go cold from time to time.

Well I can say that I do know when my certain events did take place both time and place. I can tell you that most stick formations that I have found have been found during the summer days. That most of my encounters have been during the fall and I mean action encounters  The spring encounters well they are always different and i never know if they will be there. Since winter encounters are low with frequent prints, makes one wonder what they do. If they do move south for warmth or maybe they like the cold. I find my German Shepard always finding the cold places in my house. So maybe these guys do the same when it gets to hot for them. I just do not see them in one spot for to long. Unless they are interested and are there for what ever reason. I do know that I did feel connected with them some how and still do.

 

I am under impression that they can move long distances under a night with no problem. We have no data if one footprint in Cali belongs to the same footprint ,let's say in Michigan. If we had data on that then this would prove that they do move long distances. Tracks can be just like finger prints and they can say a lot about this creature. This could also prove migration that may be done by them. Who knows ! Just thinking out loud!.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said:

I can tell you that most stick formations that I have found have been found during the summer days. That most of my encounters have been during the fall and I mean action encounters  The spring encounters well they are always different and i never know if they will be there. Since winter encounters are low with frequent prints, makes one wonder what they do. If they do move south for warmth or maybe they like the cold.

 

SB, it would be interesting to know if that general pattern through the seasons is observed by other researchers in the field. It's one thing to notice things and another to see things in a larger time frame like you have described. So thinking out loud then is a good thing right? If I was thinking out loud (which I am now doing LOL) and looking for some reasoning like you are doing?

 

The thing that crops up in my mind is the cycle of procreation (Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I AM highly caffeinated right now ;)) And that just might be stick structures in the Summer to mark territory and display knowledge, high activity in the Fall when vying for mates and dominance, low activity in the winter while hunkering down with pregnant female- especially if other young are present at the same time so that all can reserve energy, and then all over the place in the Spring looking for and gathering early much needed food for the nursing female and whatever else until she can forage herself with the infant(s). Now this is a heap of assumptions but it would be something to onsider that GENERALLY fits an annual pattern as you have described it.

 

There maybe something entirely different going on of course but for a highly caffeinated person like myself it is a cycle that could fit what you have observed. One thing might be that the taller stick structure and the heavier the trees that it's built with may signal to competitive suitors how big and powerful the male is and also may be more attractive to a potential mate who reads the stick structure the same way.. Probably way the mark here but it wouldn't be the first time- probably won't be the last either LOL.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MIB said:

At this point I've jumped off the migration bandwagon if, by "migration" you mean long distance seasonal travel.   I do think they relocate within their range seasonally but it's a much shorter trip, probably 20-50 miles, not the hundreds I used to surmise.   So .. why the change of heart?   Deeper study of the report data.

 

What I saw was a long, somewhat thin. concentration of reports along a long mountain range.   It seemed to end at a location which has a long history.   Such a migration, mapped in time, should present a traveling wave of sightings ... and it didn't.   Instead the activity "fired off" from one end of the range to another across well over 1000 miles.   That's too far for weather change or other seasonal factors to affect all at once as well because the range runs N-S.   The only thing that makes any sense is an astronomical trigger, something that appears simultaneously at all latitudes.   Further study later also showed that there's a spike of activity at the south end of the area in mid summer, exactly out of phase with the presumed migration.

 

Today I suspect that there are "migrations" up and downhill, changes in elevation to take advantage of resources or avoid weather, but the actual distance traveled is pretty short.   This makes a lot of sense because it would mean that the Cascades where I am could have the same general pattern as the Rockies where it's pretty much too far for even a bigfoot to travel to get out of the snow.

 

Interestingly enough, away from the mountains themselves, the number of sightings stays pretty constant year around whether it's 90 degrees or approaching 10 below suggesting extreme adaptation to variable climate ... so long as food is accessible.

 

For now, I'd say there are "bands", for lack of a better word, which stay in the same general area but move up or down in elevation to follow food. 

 

It doesn't stop there.  Some of the habituators I have worked with say that their local "band" is there most of the year fairly constantly but that at certain times of the year, or sometimes every second or third year, the same small group of traveling 'foots, probably sub adult and young adult males, pass through.  They're often recognizable and predictable in their timing. 

 

I note that that would be a useful behavioral adaptation for a small, spread out population to keep the genes mixing.  

 

I don't think anyone knows for sure, though, that's just my current interpretation of behavior, timing, data, etc.   I changed my mind once before, I may change it again.

 

MIB

 

 

 

I agree in full, and I'll go you one just a bit further - it hit me that the side of the mountain we were on had tons of deer - and they were there hunting and watering.  At our feet was a huge valley with a few large valleys offshooting from the big one, and these things were full of deer.

 

On the other side of the mountain - another really huge valley - lots of water and most likely tons of deer.  I got the impression they lived on the steeper side, but came over during the Spring, Summer, and Fall to hunt outside their home valley.  The purpose is to not disturb the game close to their lower elevation crib - enabling them more ready access when everything was snowed in.

 

That's done by many outfield settlers in Alaska.  They'll go afar to hunt during late Spring through the first snows - and not bother the game closer to their cabin - enabling shorter winter hunting distances.

 

So for them to be seen more frequently on ridges - it may be because they're 1.) skylighted easier, and 2.) they're crossing from their "home" area to hunt the other side of a mountain or ridge - "saving" the game on their side for winter hunts.

 

I hold that these things are some primitive man.  Not human - certainly not ape - but a primitive, cave-man-type man.  Smart, clever, and thinking.  

 

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I agree in full, and I'll go you one just a bit further - it hit me that the side of the mountain we were on had tons of deer - and they were there hunting and watering.  At our feet was a huge valley with a few large valleys offshooting from the big one, and these things were full of deer.

 

I see where you're going ... :)

 

Quote

The purpose is to not disturb the game close to their lower elevation crib - enabling them more ready access when everything was snowed in.

 

Yep.  That.  My great grandfather would never let us kill a porcupine or grouse because they were slow and "dumb" enough that a person in an emergency situation could kill one and stay alive ... basically leaving the emergency rations on the table.    We also seldom hunted right at home, we left the pet yard deer alone though occasionally using the does as live decoys to draw in big "stranger" bucks that wandered by once the rut started.   Interestingly enough, as my father has gotten older and less able to roam far distances, he becomes ever more willing to plug a deer on the lawn (legally) ... sort of what we're saying the BF might do as their abilities to hunt afar are taxed by weather, injury, illness, or old age.

 

Y' don't have to think about this too long before you start to realize they're doing exactly what we would, or do, do, when confronted with the same situations, limitations, and opportunities.

 

"Hmmm."  :)

 

Quote

I hold that these things are some primitive man.  Not human - certainly not ape - but a primitive, cave-man-type man.  Smart, clever, and thinking.

 

Yep.  I don't have a right label, but that's the general "flavor."   Something capable of our level of intelligence yet very seldom employing even stone-age level of technology.  (I say seldom, not never, because they seem capable of borrowing at least some of our tools and understanding how to use them at times.)   It's an interesting dichotomy causing some people great heartburn when the binary world view they hold is confronted with something that refuses to fit.

 

MIB

 

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, MIB said:

At this point I've jumped off the migration bandwagon if, by "migration" you mean long distance seasonal travel.   I do think they relocate within their range seasonally but it's a much shorter trip, probably 20-50 miles, not the hundreds I used to surmise.   So .. why the change of heart?   Deeper study of the report data.

 

^^^ Source please.

 

The SSR does show seasonal "migration" by hundreds of miles. However, I agree not as much as conventional wisdom holds. I'd say closer to 150 mile radius max. I also agree that any "migration" is within a specific geographic area (i.e. mountain range, river drainage, canyon system,  etc)

 

I think we're dealing with a territorial nomad type group that forages where the food source is available.

 

WA-SC-Seasons.gif

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites