Leaderboard

Big kitty today

IMG_8383.heic

Pretty similar. Look at the report history for the area. Look not just at locations, but look for patterns in the times of reports. Two things to look for .. first, a series of reports the same years, roughly same time, which might suggest one or more individuals passing through, second, a clustering of reports with roughly the same time of year across a period of years which could suggest a regular travel cycle. Then hit Google Earth to look over the pattern of waterways, hills vs flats, tree cover, anything that might facilitate hidden travel .. or hinder it. See if the county has an online property tax lot map and if so, see how much public land is available, whether there is a large landholder like a timber company that might offer permission to a large area with minimal effort, or whether it is a patchwork of small properties that are going to take a lot of time and repeated efforts to gain access to. Then get out there. First few trips I'd set out audio gear and maybe trail cams watching my vehicle .. hand prints and footprints come from something, yeah? There are no guarantees of success. There are also no guarantees of failure other than failure to try.

I've found that a lot of people just don't want to talk about a sighting or encounter. It scared them to the point they won't go back into the woods. I knew of a guy who was a mountain of a man. You think there's nothing he would be fearful of. He, and another person, had a sighting at night as it watched the two of them. It took a few years before he would even consider hiking much less sasquatching. Nowadays, the stigma that used to be attached to openly discussing it is gone. That's a good thing.

I've never been moved by the tree-structure aspect of sasquatching. Maybe I should but it seems that a determined person, or persons, could erect many of what we see offered as evidence.

SO did we.

Didn't you as a kid with your friends ? We sure did and some were pretty cool

Right, if you think all they are capable of is lean-to's and teepees you have missed their messages that are sometimes difficult to see (sometimes next to impossible). It will test your tracking and observational skills to the nth degree. If you are uber familiar with a section of real estate it can make it much easier. The manipulations that occur between dusk and dawn-- if you are close enough to investigate-- can be very eye opening. Sure I have engaged in fort building before the woodscraft and survival shelters were but a figment, grew up in the age of the early USAF survival manuals from the 50's. My adventures included ground excavations and tree forts mostly.

I did all the time as a kid. I had more forts than I could count. And some where teepee style around a tree like that.🤷‍♂️

or it could just be kids building forts

I tend to think they are calling cards, and sometimes they are calling certain preselected humans at predetermined locations that they (and us) frequent. I have had much experience with these structures at a local level too. There is no reason that they could not serve multiple purposes depending upon what is being crafted. I have seen perseverative patterning and geometry in narrowly confined mountainous drainages in the Blue Ridge.

If you relocated, or are vacationing or visiting a new area, how do decide where to go for sasquatching? The first thing I would do is a quick search of the BFRO sightings in the general area. Then, I would do a very detailed search of the BFF database. It's a valuable resource. Once I had a geographic area in mind, I would focus on the forests in that region. Over the years, I've had a few features that draw me to certain areas more so than others: 1) Focusing on water sources has been my main criteria for an area 2) Carefully studying topo maps looking for very specific terrain features near those water sources 3) Choosing a location that is off trail and not easy to get to. Preferably difficult. If I were in a new area that was always wet, or had an abundance of water access, my approach would focus on terrain features and difficulty of access. Your approach?

It had it all. Whistles, screams, mimicry (elk) Plus locomotion on 2 legs and 4 legs. And back at camp they were throwing pinecones at them. Dunno. They needed some FLIR. And I am convinced that a shotgun isn’t a replacement for a rifle in these situations.

Great story. Probably lots of interaction that people just keep to themselves

March 1st outing My daughter and I had an epic 14 hour road trip through prime research country today, but no creatures or tracks were located in spite of lots of looking for movement or spoor along the way. We started at 8am with breakfast at the Matsqui Cafe, then drove to the start of the Harrison West FSR, where I aired down the tires on the Hummer to handle the washboard, potholes, and debris on the rough gravel logging road. Then a slow cruise to km 31, where we turned N onto the Mystery Valley FSR, which we followed over the pass to the N end of Chehalis Lake. We spent a half hour there chatting with the 2 other people we saw there, then retraced our route to the Harrison West FSR and turned to continue to the head of the 50km long lake. At that point we stopped for lunch, then entered the Lillooet River FSR to follow it for about 80km to pavement at the Duffy Lake Rd. Along the way we made a stop at the almost ghost town of Skookumchuck for some photos of the 120 year old wooden church, just a couple of km downstream of my 1980's placer claim on the river. On reaching pavement again at Duffy Lake RD (Hwy 99), I aired the tires back up, and we continued over the snowy mountain pass to the town of Lytton, gassed up, and followed the Fraser Canyon to Hope, stopped for supper at 8pm, then 2 more hours to home. Chehalis Lake Mystery Valley Lillooet River

Looks good, but 2:00 hrs? Gonna have to try it later. Thanks for posting it!

Finally getting out there a bit more, still having vision issues but what the heck! Found a few impressions, the last one is interesting, they repaved our dead end road the other day, and saw this print, the asphalt was still not quite dry, looks like the heel slid a bit, and looks like a track with toes, who would walk on this barefoot at night, plus it was really cold?

to be clear, I believe BiGFo0T is real. As in its a real animal and the government is covering up their existence for reasons that are unknown. But I’ve consumed so much cryptid content in the past 8 years or so that it’s become very obvious to me that most of it is made up now by people who make their livings doing this stuff. All the known names on are into the bigfooT lore for the money. Bob gymlan puts out interesting videos here and there but he is it. missing 411 ran it’s course. I’m not sure what Paulides is up to these days. The On The Trail of BigfooT documentaries are interesting. The On The Trail of BiGfooT Land of the missing was a good one. The documentary is about the aggressive nature of the Alaskan variety that actually seeks out humans to eat. These kindof behavior is extremely unusual for Sasquatch although the ape Canyon incident and the siege at Hanobia are incidents of aggressive Sasquatch encounters. if you haven’t I’d recommend checking out on the trail of bigfooT land of the kissing on Amazon prime. Even the director admits most of these stories could be explained by a more mundane cause but he remains open to the stories of the agressive Sasquatch in Alaska. but other than the few gems in the field the field most of the media surrounding Sasquatch is made up fantasy nonsense. It started off with Sasquatch but now there is dogman, pale crawlers, and other cryptids like little people and other nefarious things. It seems to me people figured out how to make the field of Sasquatch research and lore a lucrative industry.

I always thought this video was legit.

^^^^ our government would 1- need to know they exist for certain not merely suspect they could and 2- have a highly motivating reason to hide and deny their existence. <~~~. I can’t think what that would be. I can brainstorm extreme scenarios where this might be but just feel this is unlikely. These reasons need to be pretty implausible to make a government conspiracy plausible. Still I can’t say anything is 100%.

Yep, seems to me I might have done such in a few decades back, but ThinkerThunker does a good job of it in my opinion. I wonder if ThinkerThinker is a long time member of the forum, incognito?

Several of our own members have been expounding on body proportion comparisons on this forum for years, so this isn't new.

Me thinks more data would be useful in the graphing, otherwise interesting comparisons.

You got one now, dancin’ the Turkey Hoedown!

Longtime lurker, former administrator of the original BFF, and thought I'd look in through the windows and see what is happening in the BF world.

I get the same mileage with a Dodge Cummins on 40s and about 14000 lbs. My son has a baby Duramax ZR2 and it gets 28 mpg. But it needs deleted still. DEF screws up all the time.

Got back from the Arizona trip last week. Nothing to report as far as cryptid sightings. The new hybrid Jeep was a huge disappointment as far as fuel economy. Yes, it's lifted with big tires, a winch, roof rack, and other off-road accessories. But so is my 2021 V8 Tundra. Unbelievably, the 4cyl hybrid Jeep got worse gas mileage than the V8 Tundra. I averaged around 14.2 mpg after calculating for larger tires and less miles shown. The Tundra will do around 14.5 mpg on similar road trips. The Jeep also had a few electronic glitches on the trip, but I was never stranded. No mechanical issues. It did perform superbly off-road and I was able to explore areas that I could never reach in the Tundra.

Initial Hypothesis Large, unexplained bipedal trackways have been found in diverse environments and substrates across the world. These tracks exhibit physical characteristics that distinguish them from those of known animals, including humans, bears, and other quadrupedal species. The hypothesis to be evaluated is as follows: The presence of persistent, anatomically structured, and biomechanically consistent bipedal trackways suggests that an unknown track-making agent is responsible for their formation. This discussion will focus strictly on the physical evidence of trackways without assuming the identity of the track-maker. The goal is to assess what the tracks reveal through lines of evidence thinking and cumulative argumentation rather than to make premature conclusions. Understanding Tracks, Trackways, and Casts Before examining the evidence, it is necessary to differentiate between the terms tracks, trackways, and casts, as these are often confused or used interchangeably. 1. Tracks A single footprint or impression left by a foot (or foot-like structure) in a given medium (mud, snow, sand, etc.). Tracks can be analyzed based on their depth, length, width, shape, pressure distribution, and other anatomical details. Important aspects include: Toe arrangements (e.g., five toes, claw marks, splaying). Heel-to-toe proportion (e.g., arch presence or lack thereof). Signs of foot flexibility (e.g., midfoot pressure ridges). 2. Trackways A series of consecutive tracks that reveal gait patterns, stride length, and movement characteristics. Bipedal trackways differ significantly from quadrupedal trackways, as they exhibit: Even weight distribution over two feet instead of four. Stride and step length consistency indicating controlled locomotion. Lack of forelimb impressions, distinguishing them from bear or large quadruped movements. A trackway provides more information than an isolated track because it offers a record of motion, which can be analyzed for biomechanics and locomotor differences. 3. Casts Plaster or resin replicas of tracks used to preserve their fine details. Essential for study, as tracks in soft substrates deteriorate quickly. Can capture minute features such as: Dermal ridges (skin details, similar to fingerprints). Toe movement (indicating whether the foot was rigid or flexible). Compression effects (revealing weight and gait characteristics). Lines of Evidence: What Do the Tracks Tell Us? To evaluate the bipedal track evidence, we must systematically examine multiple lines of evidence, following the principles of common-sense reasoning and cumulative argumentation. 1. Distribution and Environmental Factors Tracks have been recorded across diverse environments and geographical locations, including: Temperate forests (North America, Europe). Rainforests (Southeast Asia, Pacific Northwest). Snow-covered landscapes (Himalayas, Siberia, Canada). Riverbanks, mossy ground, and muddy areas, where track preservation is more likely. Key Observation: The widespread occurrence suggests a recurring, global phenomenon rather than isolated anomalies. What This Implies: If all tracks were hoaxes, they would not consistently appear in remote, difficult-to-access locations where human presence is rare. If all were misidentifications, then why do they repeatedly exhibit distinct bipedal characteristics not seen in known wildlife? 2. Physical Characteristics of the Tracks Tracks consistently show the following anatomical traits: Bipedal Structure Two-footed trackways with clear left/right foot differentiation. No forelimb impressions (as seen in bears or large mammals). Toe Arrangement Five toes, similar to primates and humans, rather than clawed impressions seen in bears or canines. Some show splayed toes, which occur naturally in barefoot walking on soft ground. Size and Proportion Many tracks are far larger than human feet, sometimes exceeding 15 to 20 inches in length. The width and proportions do not match oversized human shoe prints. Arch and Foot Structure Some tracks lack an arch, suggesting a flat-footed step and a compliant gait (seen in non-human primates). Others have midfoot flexibility—a bending motion not found in rigid-soled footwear. Depth and Pressure Distribution Tracks show deep impressions, consistent with heavier-than-human weights. Some leave behind pressure ridges, indicating a flexible, weight-shifting footpad rather than a rigid sole. Key Observation: These features are not consistent with bear tracks, human tracks, or known hoax attempts. What This Implies: The tracks suggest a biological foot, not an artificial imprint. Weight estimations based on depth suggest something much heavier than a human. 3. Trackway Patterns and Locomotion Analysis of trackways reveals: Step lengths exceeding human proportions, suggesting a larger leg structure. Parallel foot placement, rather than the slight outward angle of human walking. Stride and step consistency, ruling out erratic animal gaits. Key Observation: The locomotion resembles a controlled, heavy biped rather than a hoaxer's erratic spacing. What This Implies: Artificially planted tracks would not reproduce this biomechanical consistency over long distances. Competing Hypotheses: Evaluating Alternatives 1. Hoax Hypothesis Some tracks have been confirmed hoaxes. However, many others exhibit fine anatomical details (toe movement, dermal ridges, pressure ridges) that are extremely difficult to fake. Large-scale hoaxing across decades and continents is implausible. 2. Misidentification Hypothesis Bear tracks overlapping can create a foot-like impression. However, bears leave distinct claw marks, and their forelimbs must also appear in a true trackway. Deformed human footprints can appear unusual, but they would not produce consistent trackways. 3. Unknown Biped Hypothesis An unidentified bipedal track-making agent exists. This is the simplest explanation consistent with the evidence. Cumulative Argument and Conclusion Bipedal trackways exist in multiple locations and substrates worldwide. They exhibit anatomically and biomechanically consistent characteristics. Their size, step length, and pressure depth indicate a large, heavy, non-human biped. Alternative explanations (hoaxes, bears, misidentifications) fail to account for all the evidence. Thus, the most reasonable conclusion is that these tracks point to an unidentified bipedal species. This analysis is not based on speculation but on a structured reasoning approach using lines of evidence and cumulative argumentation. The presence of large, unexplained bipedal trackways remains an open question that warrants serious investigation.

any notable success? sounds like a good strategy. One location I have had multiple "happenings" at is remote and a real bitch to get to. The other is an easy drive in and requires no further walking.

I hope not. She did find Chimp DNA back east confirmed by a California lab. She also has discovered a new species of primate in Madagascar. She is legit. Nothing against Bobo, but it beats watching him wear a dress to entice a Bigfoot….🤢

the autism analogy is lazy, ignorant and makes us look like **** fools. Noel is a charlatan. Stop anthropomorphizing these beings. It's ridiculous.