Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/16/2018 in all areas

  1. I am sure that there is a lethal sized weapon that could take one down, or a correctly placed shot. Who has the nerve and the luck to be that person? Well if we ever do harvest one that will only prove that they are real, not how or why they exist. We already know what they eat, but we can only guess at what has allowed them to remain undiscovered, or at least unofficial. The resistance to revealing such a creature is another guess, so if the government knows about them, which mostly I think they do, they choose not to tell the general public. That might be why the creature does exist, it would not be good for every yahoo to be out to bag one. The some-days are many when it comes to understanding any of this, but at least we have interest. Thanks to the late John Green and Dr. Bindernagel for their efforts, as well as Grover Krantz. One might think that such a burden on a person does take it's toll. I cannot imagine being in such a respected place and bearing that burden, one never satisfied in many lifetimes.
    1 point
  2. Bear often do not leave blood trails or minimal blood trails when shot by a gun. They have a layer of fat that seals holes well. Like a rubber self sealing gas tank. And they have thick long fur that absorbs alot of blood as well. I hit a bear once with a buck blaster broadhead that opened upon impact to almost a 3 inch cutting diameter. 6 razor blades in all. A blind man could have followed the blood trail. It looked like somebody was up there with a push broom and a 5 gallon can of red paint. No hydro shock with blades..... You bleed out quickly. Thats how it kills. The whole idea with dangerous game like bear is to dispatch them quickly. Break both front shoulders or the spine. The animal is literally knocked over. Dropped. You should not be trying to track a blood trail. Nothing more deadly than a wounded dangerous animal, that can hunt you back. Different concepts of killing.
    1 point
  3. I disagree. I have lots of miles on horse or mule back in the woods. Game acts totally different to me than if I was on foot.... I think that if Bob and Roger were on foot, assuming the film is authentic. There would be no film at all to view. No need for feral horses, a quadraped hooved animal sound alike at a distance. Elk, deer, moose.
    1 point
  4. I think camo is very effective. People just use it wrong. They stop by McDonalds and eat a cheeseburger on the way out and drop ketchup on it. They walk ridgelines, make noise and talk. They wash their camo with detergent that uses brightners in it. They move around alot on two legs and dont lay quiet. Humans smell like Bigmacs, coffee, exhaust fumes, dogs, cats, shampoo and laundry detergent. They do not cover their faces or hands. They do not use cover and concealment. But its all the camo’s fault right? There are other problems such as road systems = man. Most people do not get far off of road systems. People suprise Bigfoot all the time. If we didnt? We would never have reports or the PGF to point to. Animals of the forest have a greater awareness than most humans. Most. Our senses are bombarded daily by neon signs, car horns, trains, jets, TVs, Iphones....a million distractions all competing for our attention. Humans cope by shutting most distractions out and only focus on the ones that matter to us. In the woods its different. You can be a sponge and soak it all in. Its a never ending game of seeking food while avoiding being eaten. What made the pine squirrel angry? What flushed the quail? The whitetail deer? A human can use the senses of other animals as well as our own.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...