Leaderboard

Wow! Didn’t know where to post this, but what an amazing piece of artwork. Hope y’all enjoy watching it being built.. 9-Foot Metal Sasquatch Sculpture Cheers!

As mentioned, it's mostly conjecture...but if I had to form a reasonable hypothesis... Nomadic , to take advantage of seasonal food sources / habitat and avoid detection by leaving concentrated sign behind. Not frequenting an area would make it harder to find , imo. omnivorous to increase feeding opportunities. probably not near as densely populated as some would have us believe...unless in a fairly remote , rugged wilderness area with little to no human interference. Smart & stealthy enough to sneak around us ... usually. I'd be more skeptical of much of the evidence and stories offered up than whether or not it could exist.

I completely agree with you.

Natfoot I was not going to respond to ya but have decided to. I am going on assumption and as well as others who have responded to me when I have reported about this smell. I have never smelt this smell before in these areas and it is such a weird smell that it is hard to explain. You can just tell a difference in this smell and the area where this smell came from is very thick. Not something where you can just walk right into it since it is so thick. It is very spike like in that area and not some thing that I would not even want to crawl into. All I can say is that the smell did make me feel at ease. So yes I felt as though that it could been a place like where a baby might be. I can say that I have hunted close to this area and did have large trees fallen or maybe even pushed over where when there was no wind at the time of the incident. Scare tactics.

If they are really that big, there has to be a paranormal thing going on here. BF is hard enough to believe in as is...makes it even harder if they're 9ft +.

7-1/2 feet is big but it's not an adult male. Either the females are considerably smaller (Patty, at 7'6"), or that'd be a mid-teen with some growing left to do. The one I saw in '76 provided a good yardstick for measurement. Using Patty's proportions, it was somewhere between 10.5 and 12 feet. That's a pretty good match for the line of 24-1/2 inch tracks that were 6-1/2 feet heel to heel that I found only 3/4ths of a mile away 2 years earlier. It seems vanishingly unlikely that I saw the biggest bigfoot that ever lived. More likely, I just got lucky enough to see a typical sample of a real adult, not one of the teens people mistake for adults. MIB

In order to attain the sizes observed protein would have to be a part of their diet. If they exist they have been a part of the ecosystem and habitats they live in for 10's of thousands of years. They didn't just show up and displace some other large mammal, they have lived among them. As far as population densities. Considering that they have been witnessed all over North America they would have to have viable populations not only in localized areas like the PNW but elsewhere as well. I have tried to get forensic science to look at this evidence. But other than verbal interest I haven't had any takers. So all I have to work with is my own comparative research.

Great questions James. I've been a wildlife biologist for 30 years. The one thing that can be stated with a very high degree of confidence is that nature takes perverse pleasure in making fools of human understanding. With that in mind, every species archetype requires a specific number of individuals for a healthy population. The more complex the organism, the greater number of individuals are needed to avoid species collapse at the genetic level. The smaller the gene pool, the harder long-term survival becomes. There are a large number of factors that have to be considered when calculating the minimum viable population for a species. In humans, the MVP can be as low as 15 individuals or as high as 4000 individuals depending on the variables used, conditions considered and potential morbidity and fecundity rates. We simply don't have enough information regarding bigfoot to make any realistic guesses as to whether the species is growing, stable or in collapse. What they eat will depend on what they are and that hasn't been answered yet. There is a lot of anecdotal information that indicates it's a largish mammal. Popular conjecture is that it is a primate. A strict vegetarian mammal requires a long gut to break down the plant materials consumed. In primates, this normally results in a pot belly physique. Lowland Gorillas are a good example. As protein intake increases, the body shape changes and gets slimmer in the middle. Most reports indicate bigfoot has a high protein diet based on general body description. Another indication of a high protein diet is intelligence. Bigfoot is reported to be very intelligent. If true, then protein is likely present in their diet. There are a number of primate studies that conclude that primates with diets containing 20-50% protein exhibit higher intelligence than strict vegetarian primates. Lowland Gorillas vs. Chimpanzees. You also have to consider brain size. Elephants are fairly intelligent for being herbivores, but their brains are 11-13 pounds compared to humans that have 3 pound brains. However, these musings are all guesses based on what "should" happen. It's inductive reasoning and suffers a few ad ignorantiam fallacies, but fun to consider. That brings us to how much a bigfoot eats. That depends on diet, metabolism, activity, and standard environmental conditions. That requires subjects for study and they seem to be difficult to locate reliably. Until someone figures out how to observe bigfoot for days at a time without them knowing, speculation will be the only information you will find. The same goes for where they sleep. It might be in caves, ground nests, up in trees, in abandoned mines, abandoned structures, or gullies. There is no consensus on this subject, but bigfoot seems to be as opportunistic about its sleeping arrangements. It if is as intelligent as the pundits believe, then it will take whatever the most advantageous accommodations are at the time.

Me thinks you have little understanding of habitats, densities, and large omnivores that can be masters of adapting. For example, north of the Arctic Circle in Alaska, there is @ 1 brown bear per 300 sq. mi. On Kodiak Island, there are 210 bears in the same area. So how do those bears above th3e Arctic Circle survive?

Will next years census poll have an off topic side bar "Grill & Gripe" to keep these cookers happy?