Leaderboard

Ok so you're not talking four data points but now just two data points in the same month, same year, that's even less of a pattern/trend. You can find two data points with the same as what you're saying dozens of times in Sasquatch databases. For your two data points same month and year i raise you in WA alone Skamania County March 1969 x 2 reports, Snohomish County in July/August 1974 x 3 reports, Whatcom County October 1975 x 2 reports, Pierce County November/December 1979 x 3 reports, Grays Harbor County April/May/June 1982 x 4 reports etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.. It's just two data points unfortunately, it's nothing. If you want to look at something real, i refer you to the Colorado graphic on the previous page and i'll give you a challenge too. Tell me where "The Triangle" is ? Check the dates out, check out what was going on in Colorado at that time, check out direction of travel ( it's real in this and you should see it), check out route of travel and finally and crucially, the triangle when located, if correct, should lead you to a remarkable reason why "The Triangle" is what it is and is where it is. This IMO is the best and most fruitful piece of research and "finding" so far since we started. I'll give you a week, or do you want two ?

"To me, it's sort of like swimming in life's stream and following the currents that pull at you the hardest." I love it. What a great way to describe the experience of following your intuition. About dogs: I agree 1,000% with mesabe about dogs! Down to the last detail. I would only add this: Because your BF people know you so well, Maggie, they are going to have respect for your animals (and they haven't bothered them so far, so that's a SUPER good sign). I have a BF friend who does not like dogs, but when I've been out in the woods with a human friend and this person's dogs, the BF hasn't done anything to the dogs. (But I've heard that the BF has no qualms about killing coyotes who are causing him and his cohort problems.) As mesabe points out, this is partly a personality thing; this particular BF I'm talking about is a very honorable individual. I also have a female BF friend, and she LOVES dogs. She HAS a dog. So you just never know. But the truth is, most BF who show any interest at all in us want to "do right" by us. As mesabe says, they have to learn to live with our dogs, if that's who we have around us, and the good news is, if they like us, they're usually more than willing to do that. And you're right, having a dog that stays close to you is key! The BF, again, as mesabe said, could get fussed if the dogs are off-leash and run after them. (The human friend I mentioned above has a recording of a BF vocalizing in what sounded like an alarmed way when the friend's off-leash dogs ran up on the BF. Many of them are afraid of our dogs! So it's best to make sure the dogs are close to you at all times. Then, there's no reason for the BF to get fussed and possibly feel they have to take a defensive action that could hurt the dog.) If you are concerned that your BF might not be good with your dogs, for whatever reason, I would recommend talking to them directly about it. (I know, what a surprise, that I would say that!) I would just go out in the backyard one day and say to the woods, "I have been thinking about you and my dogs, and I'm hoping you're okay with them. My dogs are very precious to me. Please don't harm them. And I will do all I can to make sure that they don't interfere with your lives." The puppy might be a great excuse to do this. You could introduce her to them, and say this when you do. That's all you really need to do. But I really appreciate your attitude ("I figure if we were in danger, all bets are off, and we might as well all die -- or live -- together"). Totally agree! Really, it's hard to live any other way. This life is tough. Having a great attitude (which you do), however, helps -- not only to deal with whatever difficult things happen, but to limit the number of difficult things that DO happen (imo).

Y'all have good Holiday times with your families. Maggie I have given the BF vs dog issue a lot of thought over time. I think how it all goes depends on 3 things, your own attitude, the dog's, and the particular BF you encounter. I have heard or read the stories both good and bad. Unfortunately horribly bad about dogs with BF. In general, they say if you need the dog for peace of mind on the trail, keep it on a leash and in control, at all times. Otherwise it is better to leave them home. Especially irreplaceable dogs that might likely mix it up in an aggressive encounter. I think at the home is another story, they are your guardians, and alarm systems, and the BF will have to learn to live with them, and the bad stories are fewer in the home environment. Especially well controlled dogs like yours. We used to take ours dogs on hikes in the woods (pyrenees and Rotts) and sometimes they would get ahead, exploring etc. but if we sensed something close, or had other evidence of something close by, they would heel real close to our legs, front and back, and never leave our side. They never did become whiny We never knew if the change was due to bears being around, or what. Obviously something they smelled, and not on a regular basis.

A couple of quick, random, and wholly undocumented thoughts (which also have probably been pointed out numerous times)... We had a deer carcass in the woods behind our house - nice 6-point that must have gotten hit by a car, then not so quietly croaked or was finished off there. This was about two Thursdays ago. In one week, it was picked down to the bones. Right now, it's a pretty big rib cage, but not much else to see and if you didn't know it was there, you'd probably walk right past it. Just imagine the difficulty of finding a body in more remote, more difficult terrain. And to help with that imagination - based on a few threads here, I joined our local S&R team, which just did a drill to find a missing hiker this past weekend. "Rescue Randy" (or Rhonda, he/she is pretty gender neutral) would stand out like a sore thumb in the woods - until you shift him just over the edge of a small rockpile and near some trees. This was very difficult to do in a small area w/the other "lost hiker" giving some gentle clues so we didn't spend the whole day out there. Last, there is the problem of finding the Bigfoot needle in the home range haystack. My 53-page opus from now 2 years ago is in the Vermont sightings thread should anyone care to download it. But looking at the home range of some encounters which could have been made by a single/small group of bigfoot, you get Ole Slippery Skin - 900 square miles over at least 8 years. A generic bigfoot seen near Whitehall - 35 square miles over 3 years So if you absolutely knew that a Bigfoot died in its home area, there's still a lot of ground to cover to find a body. I agree with SWWASAS - the best hope is a fresh kill after a natural calamity. I mean, if a bigfoot dies in the mountains and gets covered by drifted snow (to preserve the body), how long can it stay hidden?