Leaderboard

Not to belabor a point, nor derail a thread, but I feel like I need to correct information presented in this thread. I just spent the last few hours pouring over the logging history of Oklahoma and the Ouachita National Forest. According to the facts that I found, of the original 13 million acres of forested lands in Oklahoma (as recorded in 1804), 8 million acres remained in forest cover by the time the National Forest preserve was established in 1908. Commercial logging in OK began in 1880, but didn't enter many areas until 1898. In fact, the Indian Territories (including Area X) are described in 1898 as "vast unharvested timberlands." Logging in those areas didn't start until 1907. By 1908, the Forest Preserve that would become the Ouachita National Forest was established and protecting lands from over harvest. I further found that only certain trees were ever harvested (mainly pine), leaving plenty of unmerchantable trees standing. This is hardly the view that every single tree in OK was cut down and no habitat was available in the 1800s to the 1900s.

Staff announcement: The direction of discussion on this particular thread is putting it at risk of becoming derailed. This thread was started specifically to discuss the field research of the NAWAC. If you want to debate the existence of this creature or its potential historical interaction with Native Americans - or lack thereof- there are a multitude of other threads for you to do that on. It won't be done here.

There are large animals that once ranged over large portions of the continent. I can think of the Bison and the Grizzly Bear as two of them. Of course they were hunted to extinction over much of their range, so that doesn't apply to Bigfoot. 100,000,000 Bison killed by humans, Grizzly Bear which ranged all the way to Mexico? Killed by humans. Bigfoot ranges from Maine to Arizona, PEI to Alaska, and south to Florida, Texas and Mexico, but no loggers, hunters, or trappers ever got a bead on one.