Leaderboard

Bottom one for me, zero reason to think they are having issues and i don't believe habitat is a major issue overall with Canada/Alaska being what it is. In other areas of the States especially, maybe so, but overall no real issues. Just because there are no Sasquatches in area y does't mean they're not thriving in area z, which doesn't mean they didn't have to leave area x, which doesn't mean that area w isn't now becoming prime habitat for them.

Here's a picture of a blacktail in my front woods yesterday morning. I used my cellphone just for the heck of it. Which is not my go to camera when out in the woods. The deer looks quite a ways away but it was less than 35 steps from me (100') and easily visible. There were 6 others with it but you couldn't tell by that picture. I even zoomed in, which really wasn't an improvement since it was digital and not optical. I guess the point here is that if you can return to the spot it isn't that hard to investigate the area instead of the guessing games we seem to like to go through. I realize a game cam is a totally different story. But if we are there taking pictures and get something questionable it isn't that hard to return to areas we frequent and do a little investigation. Take a snapshot with you so you know just where to look. If you must video don't pan the camera. If you want a different angle move and hold it steady again. Nowadays 4K is great but not if we are constantly moving. Stills are better from an investigation standpoint.

I agree with Norse, said it all.

I voted number 3, and could vote 2 for many areas. They are super rare, more rare than our known endangered species such as griz, lynx, wolverine. If they were not? I would cut more sign.

I'm curious to see what members think about the status of BF as a species. Please do explain why you voted the way you did.

My experience is with the rainforest PNW. I can't say or be knowledgeable about other parts of the country. The sign that they are in an area is easily overlooked or attributed to other animals. But when I can go into a specific area and find tracks, see feeding behavior and hear or record audio over the course of a year; go to another area miles removed and find the same evidence, it's not even logical to assume it's the same individual or group of individuals. As if they would go to the exact same place I chose to go. From track sizes and feeding evidence it also evidences different individuals. And when I get the same kind of confirmation a state or province removed from those areas from other researchers, that speaks to me of a viable population, at least in the PNW. As far as protection of the species. We don't know enough to even give them the requirements they may need. But off hand I would say to provide movement corridors, available water and manage the possible food species be it plant or animal. Don't be too hard on logging either. Weyerhaeuser ties up huge tracts of land, most of which is accessible by permit only in much of the PNW. There again, if it's helping the food species it probably helping bigfoot.

You'd think so, davedoe, but that recent sighting took place in the week between our 2 biggest snow storms, and it was seen standing on a North facing slope, about 40 yards off the road, in deep timber, watching the witnesses, just standing and swaying, before fading back out of sight. The snow had mostly melted under the heavy tree canopy, and a trackway was found in the forest duff, and at least one track was cast. Steenburg's interview states that size and spacing of the tracks is convincing, but the needles and moss under the canopy didn't show much detail of the foot, other than general shape.

Voted, Should survive if habitat remains, but would think it's shrinking a bit. BUT! That's of corse if they even exist at all. Would like to know one way or the other, not going to lose sleep if they don't, but really feel it would be so fantastic if they do.