Leaderboard

Well, having been gone from the forums for a while, I took some time over the last hour or so, and read much of this thread. I've got a few points to make, that may or may not have been glossed over. 1) There's alot of talk about trackways not being observed in the winter, and how if they were moving around, "it'd be easy to spot some sign of them". That's ridiculous ! Let me ask you a question... Of all the members here, how many or what percentage of us go traipsing around far off the beaten path in Winter? I take walks regularly where I'm at in upstate NY, and while I'm no woodsman, I consider myself fairly knowledgeable after doing so for most of my now 45 years. I could walk out the door now, head out across a large field that's right next to the house, and regardless of whether i walked up the left, center, or right of the field, there's a nearly certain chance I'd miss any tracks (bigfoot or otherwise), if they weren't within 40 or so yards from where i was walking. You could walk through any wooded area and miss trackways. Unless you and/or a group of people where criss crossing back and forth, or walking a spread out line, you could easily miss what you didnt see. It's not like your going to find them driving down the highway, or even on dirt back roads. 2) I dont have a theory on how they survive in Winter months. Winters are tough, especially as other have mentioned in regions where all the vegetation and trees are dormant, and there is typically snow pack for the entire winter (5-6 months). Here in NY Ive seen winters where wary country deer (not the tamer suburban variety) came right up to our yard and ate the tops off Arbor Vitae trees because it was green, and wasnt tree twigs. Cold, windy, and some winters several feet of snow on the ground thats present for most of the winter. It takes hardy creatures to survive these winters, and sadly many times deer and other critters dont make it. They starve or freeze to death because they cant keep their calorie count high enough. So in order to be surviving during northern winters especially, its for certain that some form of shelter and an abundant food supply would be necessary. 3) As far as trackways go, the first experience I ever had with anything possibly bigfoot related, was again here in upstate NY, and no further than five or six miles from where I sit at this moment looking out a window at the woods and fields. My entire lengthy report was at one point in the premium members section, although I have no idea if it survived the server upgrade or my account being disabled and eventually terminated due to my disappearance from the forums. Long story short- in the dead of Winter, my brother and I found a trackway one morning that to us as children appeared to be as if a large person had walked barefoot down the trail during the night. On a 135+ acre piece of land, bordered on 3 sides by thousands of acres of state forest land. My brother, myself, and my uncle, who was a deputy sheriff at the time, followed that track way for nearly a mile. Through several large fields, over a stone wall, and eventually leading up to a dark pine forest, into which none of the three of us wished to continue pursuit. There is so much wilderness out there, whether its Alaska, or somewhere in the lower 48, and the vast majority of it sees very little human activity, even in the summer months. To say that not understanding how, or where these creatures survive during Winter months, is reason to question their existence, is being somewhat short sighted, and based on the assumption that like most things, we know better than nature or the rugged creatures that inhabit it. We do not. -A-

I guess your right FA, I'll start believing everything I read online. If that were the case your surely not the first 1% of the 1% I've met online, but I'm sure I should not believe them but only you......

Are Fararchers experiences an actual known fact or his story? I'm not questioning what he says but at the same time they are no more facts to me than Bigfoot itself. Perhaps for you his story is fact, I don't know I reckon.

With all due respect Yuchi, all thing concerning Bigfoot are speculation and conjecture. Sure, there are some that claim to have certain "solid" information but until we have a proven and documented species it falls under speculation and conjecture in my book.

If your small Recon team that was hunted by divisions, lived off the land and drug your whole family into that mission, and stayed hidden? I would be impressed. And on top of that? Each team member wasn't 180 lbs but 800 lbs? I'd be even more impressed. And lastly? We are not talking about evading hunter killer teams for one week long mission. Nor or we talking about evading them for a year long tour....nor two or three years. No we are talking about them evading us for tens of thousands of years..... Thats VERY hard. And Intelligence doesn't account for that anymore than Ishi's tribe being wiped out. Gigantor is right, they must be very low in number and scratching at a living. And in some very remote places as you alluded too. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

Ever thought that you might living or be looking where there simply aren't any BF? A lone gun man successfully hides from police? So what your saying per your article is that you agree with me? Bigfeet must disperse into the landscape in ones and twos to successfully hide from humans? The article appears to state that a human having grown up in our modern urban environment could successfully elude LE. Imagine what a BF can do having grown up in a woodland/wild environment with woodcraft skills we can't even begin to fathom.

Except where I live it's all evergreens, so cover doesn't change. But if large groups of Bigfeet are hunting during winter? Where are the tracks? One set of snow tracks in my lifetime. If they are here and hunting to eat during winter? I should have cut way more tracks than that. Do you know how many snowmobile miles I have in my lifetime trying to cut cougar tracks. A bunch.

If they have an area they populate - a remote area, with shelter, or a series of nearby shelters, a nearby source of water, and are able to feed - and conduct the bulk of their activities at night, why, in the Wide, Wide World of Sports would they engage in a constant migration? That makes no sense. The hunters of the family, or hunters combining of nearby families overnight can range far and wide - and from what I saw - they can cover many miles on any given night. Easily. You cover four feet or so every step - you can cover some ground. You have good night vision - you can really hunt. If their eyes are twice as large as ours - that automatically enables them to gather twice the ambient light. But here's a kicker - rod cells - the ones that provide night vision to many nocturnal species through special DNA architecture - turn the rod cell nuclei into little light-collecting lenses, with millions of them in the eye. Due to architecture, there are light scattering (in all directions) nuclei, which acts to share with other nuclei, and then there are the nuclei that focus light in one direction, meaning light can travel farther back into the eye to be perceived. Now if you have this - unlike us - your night vision is most excellent - enabling those delegated to hunt and gather - to hunt and gather. So no, they don't have to take the kids with them everywhere they go. Momma keeps the kids, grandpa can take it easy and maybe just conduct sentry duty, while the adult males do the hunting and gathering. The recon analogy - and I know it went right over your head - applied to what I keep saying - it's EASY TO HIDE FROM HUMANS. Easy. Oh. And you missed the principle of the Hobbitt. The dwarfism wasn't due to them occupying an island - it was due to limited land, food, freedom of movement, and other elements necessary for sustenance. The same thing applies to a continent - with varying land terrains. If, as you suggested, they are barely able to feed themselves (like the Hobbitts), they wouldn't be so large. You want to apply one principle to one group, but not apply the identical, same principle to another group. You want selective use of universal principles - and it doesn't work that way. If a large species lacks sufficient food to thrive and thrive well - it will (per Darwin) get smaller so that the critter becomes more efficient and can better use limited food supplies. But we're not seeing that with BF. You like to take a position, and consider the aspects that may support your pre-determined position. I saw a primitive form of man - and they aren't like the intentionally humanized forms you see in the Smithsonian. You seek an ape. Big difference. And I'd agree - if it were a dumb ape, we'd have a number of them on hand by now. If it were a big dumb ape, we wouldn't hear about their "language." If it were a big dumb ape, they wouldn't be so cleverly elusive. If it were a big dumb ape, they'd be more limited to a certain local ecology. But a primitive man wouldn't have those restrictions.

Let's try this on for size. A large troupe of Bigfeet reside in the Appalachia Mtns. They have a small home range akin to a Whitetail deer. And they constantly hide their tracks, scat and forage sign. And if a human comes around? The whole troupe buries themselves in leaves. And "caloric intake" is no biggie.....they can just skip a few meals. Go to the zoo and help out with the Gorilla exhibit for a few days if you feel the above scenario is plausible. A 400 lbs Gorilla eats 10% of its body weight per DAY. And what about winter???? Either they are collecting another 10% per DAY to cache away for lean times? Or they are migrating to warmer weather! For the sake of argument let's say a ONE adult Bigfoot weighs 800 lbs. He will consume 80 lbs of veg per day and collect another 80 lbs per day to store for winter. So that's 160 lbs of flora per day per animal missing from this localized habitat. And this supposedly goes on 365 days per year. The habitat must look like a bomb went off.....like a feed lot. A blind biologist tracking tree shrews would sit up and take notice. The Ranger way of not walking single file on soft ground says it all. Just in macro. In order for this species to survive? It has to disperse big time....minimizing its impact on the habitat. Its not conjecture it's MATH.

That depends on what you want out of it. Most conferences' "vibe" reflects the organizer somewhat. Many organizers have a set of people they respect that they often invite to speak. Most conferences have web sites. Look to see who the organizer is and who the speakers will be. Find what fits. I don't really expect much "bigfoot" out of going to a bigfoot conference, most of the information can be picked up online ... like right here. To me the main value is the people I've met, faces I've put with names, connections made. So, for me, "more local is more better". For me, Oregon, Washington, and Northern California are "prime" and everwhere else is somewhat off topic. In particular, the past few years there have been some very good conferences around Kennewick/Richland/Pasco ("Tri Cities") in Washington as well as out on the Olympic Peninsula. MIB

Contrasting the FarArcher and Norseman exchanges: One is based upon actual field experiences and the results thereof. The other is predicated upon speculation and conjecture sans any actual field experience much less forensic evidence to back it up. Now, you be the judge.

No, you still don't get it. Bigfoot does tote its family with it every day. So your Recon story is the bad analogy. Because you don't jump into combat with a two year old strapped to your back. And half your team is your parents and grandparents. And just for your information? The hobbit suffered from Island dwarfism. (Flores)

There are essentially no caves in my area. It's a function of geology. We have basically 4 geological "families" converging here. 1) Old upper mantle ... one area is somewhat unusual in that it is exposed upper mantle. Peridotite and dunnite. No known caves. 2) Southern Oregon Cascades volcanos - appears to have an underlying shield with very old lava, but no lava tubes. The high peaks are primarily andesite, pushed up from below as broken boulders, not flowing lava. No known caves. 3) Coastal terrane - rubble pile formed as the pacific plate subducts under the North American plate. The light stuff lying on top of the plate scrapes off. This is mostly sea floor mud plus sometimes an island or reef that formed offshore. It's almost all sedimentary rock which does not form caves. There are two places known for caves. There's a small area with limestone at Oregon Caves where Matt Johnson had his sighting. The caves are not responsible other than for drawing vast numbers of tourists of which "Dr J" was one. There's a lot more bigfoot activity on the back side of the mountain where there is no limestone. That mountain is essentially contiguous with the Bluff Creek / Willow Creek area via Red Buttes Wilderness .... THAT is why there are bigfoots, NOT because of the caves. The other location is near Snow Camp Mountain. That is a little less known. However, it is a vertical shaft. Spelunkers going in have to be lowered on a winch line. Not bigfoot-friendly. We have a few mine shafts but most are either blocked by steel grates for public safety, have been dozed over, .. or are still in use. Most of the gold mining here was placer mining, not hard rock mining, and there are no shafts from that. MIB

I think the best explanation is that they've gone extinct or are nearly so. But just to leave no stone unturned, I have looked into the cave idea and think it's a plausible one. I find it curious that there is a blackout on cave location info by most states. I challenge anyone (go to it hiflier) to come up with a source of cave locations for WV for example, or any other state. There are known caves everywhere, but none documented except for the tourist attractions and the caving clubs have been muzzled in order to not reveal cave locations. I've spent many hours researching for this info and have found none. Knowing cave locations would make it easy to place trail cams near the entrance and get a conclusive result. I'm ready and willing to do so, but can't find them. The reason given is to protect bats. I'm not sold on that one yet.

Both of those replies added together raise the bar in a mildly disconcerting way for anyone going after these guys. But together they also remain in an accessible reality for consideration. Playing the curiosity card becomes almost a requirement then. Seems the best tactical approach for many reasons including one's safety if that is even a possibility. At least for cutting down on the ambush threat it would be helpful

It's an enigma wrapped in a riddle. Its easy to think of a Sasquatch as some sort of bush ninja, obviously they have to be. But there must be other factors at play. Babies cry, they play, they don't pay attention. Men lose their minds when swooning a mate. Women must be looked after during late stages of pregnancy and child birth. The old are senile and slow and in pain. The sick must be looked after, they cannot be moved. They cough and moan and die....... They cannot always be bringing their A game.....no way.

When I look at the people involved in the Skookum cast and compare what I know about their specific interests and qualifications, then weigh that against the lack of comparable qualifications on the part of people doing the criticizing (and even scoffing) and the outright foolishness many of the "opponent" counter-explanations, for the time being, I will stick with it being as-claimed, a bigfoot lay. (Randy - I think your interpretation as a possible prank adds an interesting twist, certainly within the realm of possibility and more than adequate to nullify most criticisms.) At this point, given the lack of relevant qualifications among the people doing the scoffing, about the only thing that would change my mind on this is if Thom Powell, Rick Noll, and Derek Randles all came forward to say they made a mistake, explain their mistake, and offer a better counter explanation. MIB

The storing of food is possible and moving closer to our population centers is too, or we wouldn't have the urban (suburban) bigfoot phenomenon. As for deer in this part of the country they don't herd up and they don't move far. Elk do move but not very close to human habitations unless they are already in that area. All the upper river valleys are pretty much snow free and mostly uninhabited. So without major shifts in population, food is available and in mostly snow free country. Most of the GPNF is closed to public access in many areas in the winter. And human winter use it mostly limited to groomed roads and trails. That leaves a lot of higher elevations untouched. Something else I have noticed recently is they are setting aside wintering and calving areas where admittance is also limited. So who knows what goes on behind closed gates with limited access in the winter. As for decreases in animal populations there are many factors invovled. Bigfoot may occasionally cause a temporary decrease. But many other factors are involved in ungulate population dynamics with human activity usually being the major driving force. I have personally seen the elk population decrease in the areas where we hunt. But one factor may be the reason and that is no more clearcuts in the GPNF since the mid 90's. The comment I made about bigfoot existing in their habitat for millenia suggests that they don't overfeed in any one given area constantly or they would be extinct for lack of food. Continuously devastating the food supply is not a viable option for survival. Any time something like that does happen we usually take action to rectify the problem. So again not a viable strategy for survival.

For myself, at the time of the event we booked it out of the area as it scared the heck out of us. Just after the situation, say the next day I was still in awe of what I believe I experienced, but being only a kid I think that is expected. It never changed my day to day life however, the event happened not far from my house and probably the next day I was back out there exploring and playing as I was the day before. Since that day I have always been curious about BF and looking for the next encounter.