hiflier

Sasquatch- How Far Does It REALLY Travel

73 posts in this topic

Well in Oregon or Washington the authorities solution to too many deer would be introduce wolves,  mountain lions and grizzly.     That some of those would attack livestock or humans would not be a concern.       There was a band of protesters at the Portland Zoo memorial the other day protesting that Packy the elephant had been put down because of disease.   They wanted him released into the wild.     Don't ask me where or bring up poachers in Africa.   

Quote

 

 

Edited by SWWASAS
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the deer population control I heard about for NJ was on the absurd side. Contraceptives for deer! Predators roaming populated areas isn't a very popular solution. Hunting is probably most effective but that doesn't go over well in neighborhoods either. 

 

Bigfoot doesn't exist so that's probably the best solution. ;)  Anyone know what stick structure trail signs would direct them in that direction? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SWWASAS -

 

Thanks for laying that out.   Yeah, a mix of red flags and things I think are absolutely legit in very close proximity.  

 

MIB

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2017 at 4:44 PM, MIB said:

If you want the answers to this, they are available via some of the habituators.  

MIB

I'm glad you qualified that ... perhaps its unfair, but some of the people who have written books claiming to be habituators have given the group a bad name. 

 

I agree that there are inherent problems in trying to figure out movement patterns from just using the reports, but I think that there is some value in it. (I know that's self-serving.)  For example, even with all the reports, you can find groups of encounters defined by area and time that just present themselves, without manipulation of the data to make them appear.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sixty years ago deer were so scarce in the Arkansas portion of the Ouachita Mountains the 20 or so members of our deer camp were lucky to even see one all week. The original wild turkeys were nearly extinct. Bear also. Bigfoot were very, very seldom mentioned, much less seen or heard. Feral hogs had been killed out by the local residents.

Now, thanks to restocking programs, deer, bear and turkey are numerous. Feral hogs have literally invaded the area, and done sickening damage to the ground nesting game birds' and nightjar's populations.

When the game returned, Bigfoot did also. It is not at all unusual to listen at various places at about "dark thirty" and hear the males calling from different locations. It was at about this time that a few red wolves returned, and the coyotes, roadrunners and armadillos moved in from Texas. It was very rare to see those species in central Arkansas up until the early 50's.

Some of the male Bigfoot may have moved away from the Ouachitas to find a mate, but if they did, they must have brought her back to live in Mom and Dad's "basement". :wub:

 

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought and it seems most everyone disagrees but I think they mate for life so travel is only based on food sources , weather and pressure from humans.

 

I think they have a very intimate social structure .

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to agree as well. Of course I'm quite open to being proven wrong. :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most reports that are relevant (in other words, reports of multiple individuals, mixed genders, etc) are pretty rare but seem fairly consistently in favor of established pairings.   That doesn't necessarily mean monogamy in any particular direction.   The best model we have is the behavior of stone age or pre stone age humans.   Look back to the records of explorers making first contact with tribal people .. what did they find, what did they record?    And yet, not all of those were the same ... how much difference seems driven by latitude ... weather?

 

MIB

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe the numbers are smaller than many people think.  You cannot go by the number of sightings if the foraging range is similar to a mountain lion.  In my area there is almost continuous forest from northern MN east to Michigan.  Someone may report one on a Monday in MN and someone else two weeks later in the UP of Michigan.  It could be the same one. 

 

Descriptions of color and size would not be a good indicator in identifying the same Sasquatch.  Sightings at different times of the day in different lighting would give completely different accounts, especially if the size is an estimate.  i.e. a nighttime sighting in the headlights may appear white and the same one might appear more gray when there is still some daylight left.

 

If they are traveling for food, they would not need to leave MN or WI as the deer and small animal populations are abundant all year round.  There are over a million deer in MN and I suspect even more in WI.  So does that leave weather or mating?  If northern Sasquatch travel to warmer climates in the winter months, do the southern Sasquatch travel north to the cooler climates with forests, lakes and swamps that offer a large variety of food choices.  This might explain why there are occasional sightings in states where there is very little tree coverage as they are just passing through. 

 

I have also sorted John Green's database looking for similarities, but I suspect it's like taking testimony from witnesses to a crime.  Everyone sees or remembers details that make it seem like there were multiple crimes instead of one.  I do agree that rather than roam the entire US, they have regions that they travel within and may occasionally go out of the region to seek new homes due to forest fires or a reduced food supply.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my preliminary research on county-level Bigfoot population distribution, I've seen what I interpret to be "Bigfoot inhabited" counties and multi-county regions, some close together, some far apart.

 

These suggest to me that there are "home ranges" that Bigfoot inhabit, separated by areas where they don't live and don't travel, or travel very infrequently.

 

I don't believe my data agrees with the idea of a continually nomadic Bigfoot whose range is practically all of North America.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been discussions involving Sasquatch following seasonal ungulate movement. But if the Sasquatch has a range that isn't large then ungulate seasonal movement may be all that is needed to survive a winter. In other words Sasquatch historically may be wintering in areas that they know ungulates pass through in their annual migrations. Those migrations for the most part might be archetypical enough to ingrain a history of where Sasquatch choose to hole up in winter. Bears know about the fat rich moths of the high west in August so I see no difference with Sasquatch vs. ungulates. It could be just a winter thing.

 

Other vegetarian food sources in the remaining three seasons would be their own determining factor in any movement. Such sources of too are subject to how Nature and the activities of Humans fluctuate. Drought and wildfire would be only two of several things that alter food supply which in turn may alter where sightings occur and even mating. It would be interest to see if Sasquatch, like bears become more of a nuisance when water becomes more scarce and areas of normal vegetative food sources become smaller, wetlands dry up, and vernal pools only fill for a short time. In fact severe drought may be the one major forcing for where Sasquatch ends up in a given season or year. 

 

  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answering the question by not answering the question.  

 

Taking 85 reports which occurred in Maine and the environs of Canada immediately adjacent thereto (i.e., those parts of Canada South/East of the St. Lawrence Seaway) that include information about the season, 21 occurred from December through February.  

 

9 occurred from March through May, although none actually occurred in March. 

 

32 occurred from June through August. 

 

The remaining 23 occurred from September through November.  

 

That would seem to suggest a seasonal pattern where Bigfoot enter the area in the summer, remain through the fall, and start leaving in the winter, with perhaps a straggler or two who hangs in there through the spring until vegetation comes back.  

 

As an aside, once again I'm amazed at how these hoaxes, misinterpretations, and false stories are carefully lined up by the controlling conspiracy in the sky to create what looks like behavior one would expect from a living breathing creature. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

42 minutes ago, Trogluddite said:

As an aside, once again I'm amazed at how these hoaxes, misinterpretations, and false stories are carefully lined up by the controlling conspiracy in the sky to create what looks like behavior one would expect from a living breathing creature. 

 

I have to say that was very neatly put and pretty much nails the issue WRT a couple of hundred years with a high level of descriptive and behavioral consistencies. It's one of the chief reasons I'm here and thanks for the numbers breakdown when looking for seasonal patterns. It helps a lot when looking for possible corroborating evidence of travel in the hundreds of miles range.

Edited by hiflier
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trog's numbers for Maine etc there would be mirrored out west too for sure in general, the seasonal stuff I mean although maybe the Fall numbers would gain a little more on the Summer is ones.

 

But in general they're the same.

 

Key for me then, with a bigger western dataset, is to focus on the winter reports and any geographical patterns in those.

 

We shouldn't forget however that to get a report we need a two way collision, a Sasquatch and a human, and we know that human outisde activity decreases more so in the winter months.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially this winter.       Hard to find a day where it has not been raining.       I like winter field work because the bushes etc do not have leaves.     Have a better view of things close to the ground.    Also I think snow pushes deer and BF down to lower levels in the winter.     But this year only been out a couple of times in the winter because of rain or low snow levels.  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites