Forums

The "why don't we find a body?" argument is deeply illogical, I believe, on two accords.   1) I was extremely fortunate to join with a wilderness S&R team for several years.  In that time, I was on several searches that involved one missing human with limiting factors on their mobility (age, under the influence) whose last known point was well defined (e.g., a bar, an abandoned car in the woods, a small regional park).  Even though most of our searches (in downstate New York) don't involve "wilderness," I was on two searches where people weren't recovered until months after they had disappeared despite extensive previous searches.  The remains of a drunk teenager weren't recovered until months after he had disappeared in a search area less than 1 square mile, 75% of which was dense suburbs.  In another case the remains of a man were recovered less than a quarter-mile from the State Park parking lot.  In both cases, terrain and weather (snowfall) hid the body for months.  Prior to my joining the team, they were involved in searches - again, in a relatively limited area - where remains have never been recovered.  It's just not as easy to find what is at best a full human body in the woods.    2) What do wounded animals (including humans) do?  My understanding of wildlife behavior is that wounded animals find the most secluded spot they can and attempt to burrow in.  It took four days to find and rescue a man w/medical issues who had burrowed in (or just gotten weak and couldn't go any further) in a search that was covering less than 2 square miles in a suburban area of lower New York. I see no reason why Bigfoot would react any differently.  Unless one is hit head on by a truck or a train, its going to limp as deep into the woods as it can.     I agree that the lack of a body is a problem, I don't know if it rises to the level of suspicious. 

In addition to predator/omnivore, don't forget scavenger. I'm not talking "roadkill" (although that's surely part of it), but similar to brown bears (whose eating behaviors and food preferences differ from black bears). Among the first spring meals they seek out are winter kills, which are more numerous than most folks think. An example, beyond starved ungulates, are sheep, goats, and deer killed by avalanches. I remember a snow avalanche that killed a small herd of sheep on the Kenai Peninsula that attracted lots of brown bears the following spring.   As a hunter, I read a lot of ADFG Management Reports. They do pay attention and even conduct studies on predator effects on ungulates, and this has grown exponentially as the environmental movement has put political pressure on predator management. But the effect of so few sasquatches is more than minimal compared to humans (hunters, car drivers, trains, poachers, etc), bears, wolves, and lions, so sasquatch predation can easily be swallowed up by the rest of the predators.   https://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/research/wildlife/speciesmanagementreports/pdfs/moose_2015_2025_smrp_gmu_14a.pdf     I'm sure that the dead body/skeleton thing is primarily a thing regarding their rarity. For example, there are an estimated 30K-40K cougars and an estimated 60K-80K wolves in North America. Humans? 380 million in the US and Canada. Of those millions of people in North America, some 630K are reported as missing, although we  know many of them are alive and want to be missing, or are held by others. Compare all that to an estimated 5K sasquatches.   I've found skeletons in the woods. I Initially thought them as human (no skull) and called the Troopers. They turned out to be poached goat or sheep. I've found lots of moose and caribou skeletons or carcasses. Never bear or wolf...............or human.   If someone found a sasquatch skeleton, including the skull, what are they most likely to do? My bet is that they'd either call the local police (thinking they're "human"), or they'd walk away. I doubt they'd call fish and feathers, the FBI, or another agency. And if the local police investigate, what are they likely to do if they come to realize that these remains are...............funny? My bet is that they'd contact................somebody else? 

That is, admittedly, a puzzle.    A couple friends have stumbled over human bodies.  We generally don't leave our dead laying around but .. it does happen.   It may be just a matter of very much lower population but .. it is a thing that causes ye olde "eyebrow of concern" to raise a bit.   It is a question worthy of further consideration.   This may sound like I'm reversing course .. I'm not .. but I think that while we're following the data we have to consider not eliminating possibilities which might not be best-fit from further consideration.   Weight-of-data changes over time, sometimes only a little in ways that don't change the conclusions, other times very substantially requiring a total re-think.   Similarly we should find more signs of feeding on plants / berries than we seem to see in the report data.    Not giant gorilla-type swaths of destruction, but .. something.   Maybe it is too subtle, maybe it's mixed with bear foraging in ways such that we just don't recognize the BF contribution as a separate thing.   So .. I hope you observe that I'm as cautious about completely discarding potential conclusions as I am about prematurely embracing them .. even when the data seems to fit.   So far as calories?   The area I mostly research has a late summer berry crop which more or less coincides with the annual activity peak.   I'm leery of drawing a conclusion about that because the same activity peak occurs the full length of the Cascades yet the berry crop does not match in timing once you are further north or south.    Here, that activity seems to continue until mid October which is about the time the deer drop out of the high country and migrate .. unlike most of the Cascades where blacktails just drop in elevation to mostly stay below snowline, here they do that plus they take off and go another 30-150 miles beyond what's necessary, a more mule deer type pattern.   Anyway, things drop off mid September, about the time ODFW says the deer begin to move down and out, and continue to happen but with decreasing frequency until about mid October when the migration is essentially done.    Sounds like calories?   Seems likely.   But we have to continue to consider "maybe not" and think about what alternatives might also explain the pattern.    There are seemingly through-the-winter reports here in the deer / elk wintering areas.    There are also a few reports in the locations between summer and winter areas.   These seem to represent BF travel corridors.   Low elevation tight against the foot of the mountains.    A few lower passes have reports.   I note that there are similar reports from the foothills of the Rockies.   Hanging by deer herds?  Traveling through?   I don't know.   Probably won't ever live close enough to investigate first hand.   (Apologies for rambling.)   MIB

Very well stated and consistent will credible report data.   I would also add that the young male I witnessed in 2009 was carrying a dead fawn that had been mostly picked over, I truly doubt the situation was anything like Tom Hanks and Wilson. 

Agreed. If it’s primarily an herbivore then winter becomes a very hard sell.   Yes. The coast of the Pacific NW is typically devoid of snow. But most of the northern U.S. and Canada where many reports come from have a real winter. That’s a problem for a primate herbivore IMHO. So unless they all migrate into a tiny area along the ocean, they must eat meat.   But we don't know what we don’t know, but they don’t discover black holes by looking for them. You cannot observe a black hole. But what you can do is observe the effects of a black hole on the stars and planets around it.   If Bigfoot is primarily a predator? Then its effects on ungulate populations that we track MUST be in the data. I really liked the bone study that BTW was doing. Hope all is well with him.