• Announcements

    • masterbarber

      T shirt fund drive   07/17/2018

      norseman has designed a t shirt and started a fund drive on custom ink. He is going to split the proceeds between the BFF and Project Grendel.  "We all owe this website a tremendous debt of gratitude. Our community and history would not exist without it. As far as the Project Grendel proceeds, I would like to see it go towards the purchase of a thermal scope."
      -norseman     https://www.customink.com/fundraising/sasquatch-hunter
norseman

Bigfoot winter time survival

128 posts in this topic

32 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

I just do not think we have enough sighting data to learn much more than we have from number crunching.   

That's of course from there being few hikers, campers, etc out in the cold.

0

Share this post


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

When my research area was very active,  the river bottoms had a lot of elk presence in the summer.    The trails looked like an elk freeway covered with footprints.     As logging increased, the elk left, then eventually the BF did.    Coincidence?   Possiblly!     It just occurred to me,  reading MIB's post,     it got me thinking about cycles.        What if BF may be intelligent enough to understand resource management?  Indigenous peoples in Polar regions of Siberia seem to do that with caribou herds.   The caribou are not really domesticated but the humans stay near the caribou herds,   manage their harvesting, fully understanding that if they take too many,  the resource population will collapse.   Could that partially explain the disappearance of the BF in my research area?      The elk were not all killed but simply moved elsewhere as the area was logged off.  Could it be that BF tribes attach themselves to herds, harvest as necessary, and move when the herds do,    like the indigenous peoples in Siberia?     Extrapolating, if BF have near human intelligence,   it is not inconceivable that they could actually herd the animals away from encroaching human activity.    That opens the possibility that sometime in the future BF could move the herds back into the area when conditions are better for the elk and more cover is available for BF.         All pure supposition but I do not remember anyone throwing that theory on the table to be looked at.  

 

http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/harvest/2016/elk_general.html

 

Over 63K hunters enter the woods each fall to hunt elk. If Sasquatch "herders" are truly managing the herds? Why is there no conflict between us and them? Elk hunters should be at ground zero for Sasquatch lairs while hunting in amongst Elk herds.

 

I'm not convinced at all that Sasquatch eats any more red meat than a Grizzly bear and maybe less. Which is less than 20 percent of the over all diet. Remembering my caloric intake thread, Sasquatch eating almost exclusively red meat like a Neanderthal would make biologists sit up and take notice in a hurry.

 

I estimated that a 800 lbs Sasquatch would need roughly 14 lbs of red meat per day if their diet was 50 percent meat.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The altitude data for April is a gem.  

 

Seems to me that if anything at all about bigfoot lends itself to investigation by drone, it would be winter trackways.  

 

Could also be useful to monitor ungulate yards by drone during the winter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's tough in evergreen forests........they still provide cover in winter.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that there are not enough sightings and they are decreasing...

 

Washington 2000 - 2017. This year looking to have the least of all. Something is up and it ain't good.

 

wa-2000-2017.png

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What better way to manage one's footprints than by following a heard of ungulates. Boots are one thing that would stand out among say, elk prints. But bare feet with toes? Maybe not so much. And since elk can have a range of around 600 square miles there's a lot of incentive for BF to relocate with them such as to the valleys in winter and the more mountainous grasslands in summer. Elk use water to escape from insects as well. It would also seem that Sasquatch wouldn't have to follow them around as much when seasonal pickings like berries are easier to forage.

 

@ gigantor- looking at the graph (Washington? Cascades? Oregon?) it seems to show a gradual overall decline in sightings. After each spike there looks to be more generally depressed incident numbers during the following years. I've mentioned this before but there should be a way for the SSR, or some kind of way, to get wildfire events into the picture.   

Edited by hiflier
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire should be a major factor.    Acreage burned was high but not record, however, I don't think I've seen so much of the prime bigfoot real estate closed to public entry because of fire as we had this year and, while I've seen smoke as thick, I've never seen smoke so thick blanket so much of the region for so long.    It was relentless.   I drove from near Eugene to south of Medford one day, a 3 hour drive at 70, and the visibility never exceeded a half mile.   At one point, at freeway speed, visibility was about 8 seconds travel time.   This continued on down into northern California at times.

 

I don't really know how Washington fared.

 

MIB

Edited by MIB
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anything is up for the number of sightings in WA personally. We all know that reports don't necessarily come in same week/month/year even in the modern age, for whatever reason inc our public databases sources holding up the release of reports actually going out in to the public domain (big factor that is cough cough).

I gurantee (sp?) anyone that when G runs that same number set this time next year it would look healthier, and the following year even healthier etc.

I don't see any issue with the WA numbers and would even go as far to say that they're healthy given the reasons i mentioned above.

Now NorCal/Southern OR over the last 20 years is different, NorCal/Southern OR i think when running those same numbers, IS an issue..

I'm on a proxy and i can't add images to the thread unfortunately, but here's a link to the NorCal/Southern Oregon issue inclusive if visual graph showing the dramatic drop off as of maybe October's numbers that wouldn't have changed much in the last 6 or so weeks if anything...

Edit : I'd gladly email the graph to someone if they wanted to add it here for clarity's sake.

https://www.facebook.com/squatchermetrics/photos/a.513228225399012.1073741838.487563514632150/1456353117753180/?type=3&theater

#Pattyville #PGF50Years #Sasquatch - Over the last 20 years in Pattyville and the NorCal Counties of Del Norte, Humboldt, Siskiyou, Trinity and Oregon's Curry, Jackson and Josephine Counties, we've seen 77 Reports.

One glaring standout is the major drop off of reports over the last 10 years, with just 13% of all Reports from the last 20 years coming in that time period.

Edited by BobbyO
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to consider the human social aspect to the prevalence of reports.  

 

A single, high profile event such as the Patterson Video (with the lag associated by the delay in its distribution) leads to the inclination to report what one considers a relatively unique experience.

 

But saturate the public consciousness with all things bigfoot and fewer people may report their encounters, simply because they may not view them to be as unique, though still rare.

 

Ironic that nine seasons of Finding Bigfoot may well have had an inhibiting effect on the frequency of reports made to the BFRO.

Edited by JDL
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gigantor said:

I agree that there are not enough sightings and they are decreasing...

 

Washington 2000 - 2017. This year looking to have the least of all. Something is up and it ain't good.

 

wa-2000-2017.png

 

That’s because it takes time for people to report them. If you check again in a few years you’ll notice the same trend pushed forward.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

I've mentioned this before but there should be a way for the SSR, or some kind of way, to get wildfire events into the picture.   

 

 

There is from satellite data freely available. https://fsapps.nwcg.gov/googleearth.php

 

Trouble is, the files are only for the last 24 hours. They have an archive going back to 2011, but you gotta download each day individually. Doable.

 

fires.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the oft-repeated notion that statistical analysis won't resolve this question, but I believe that it puts one "explanation" to rest.  If you theorize that this is an elaborate hoax, with proponents making up reports to keep interest going and to fill their websites, then you have to believe that, from the beginning the hoaxers had a coherent theory of a biological entity and seeded their reports out among, or coordinated reports between different groups in order to come up with a mass of data points that created the snapshots we're now getting.  

 

I don't know how reliant the SSR is on specific databases (e.g., John Green and BFRO), but mine has at least 10 different sources.  So these ten unrelated entities either: a) coordinated their reports since about 1960, or b: lucked into creating a set of data that indicates that Bigfoot eases into the Canadian northeast and Maine in the spring, is out and about moving around through the summer and fall, and then leaves in the winter.

 

While other factors could still be in play, the "explanation" of widespread creation of false reports seems to be eliminated. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hypothetically speaking", regarding numbers in some areas ...

 

Depending on where a report comes from, it may go to a national group vs a more local group.   I'm not aware of any group publishing reports with no review at all even if it is cursory at best, so there's a question of how much labor the group has available which can delay publication.   Then, each group has standards for pre-publication investigation varying from pretty rigorous to nothing at all, and within each group, each investigator may add their own filters of what's ready to publish.

 

If a group has no investigator active in an area for a time, then reports for that area will appear to dry up when, in fact, they're still coming in, they're just not being published.   Also, depending on how they distribute reports within the organization, a particular investigator may see a pattern than they think requires a more detailed followup which could delay publication for all reports s/he is looking into.

 

Anyone expecting uniform / consistent 1) bigfoot behavior, 2) witness behavior, and 3) investigation is living in a fantasy world.   Biological things are not average, at best they live within one standard deviation of average.  

 

MIB

Edited by MIB
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say we are easy 10 too Trog, possibly more..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

Good to hear Bobby. I haven't checked the SSR in awhile, so was not certain.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.