Leaderboard

If you're married, it won't work. Wives, children, and grandchildren (and parents, if they're still alive) will eat up your time more ravenously than your employer ever did. Trust me on that one......

Finally found them! Took me long enough. It was just a matter of figuring out the correct key words to use in the search engine.......or perhaps Google and/orbthe state allowing them to be found. I've used Alaska's anadromous fish atlas for decades to determine fishing locations. California's maps will help zero in on seasonal sasquatch (and bear) habitat during anadromous fish runs. For example, this map shows that coho salmon only run up Bluff Creek as far as Fish Creek, and apparently spawn in Bluff Creek itself and not its tributaries: https://map.dfg.ca.gov/bios/?al=ds326 There are also chinook salmon and steelhead ti check. The central index page is https://www.calfish.org/ProgramsData/Species/AnadromousFishDistribution.aspx

Anyone interested in the area interested? https://jobs.battelle.org/ShowJob/Id/1880650/Temporary-Field-Technician-NEON-Project-D16-Washington/

http://squatchable.com/article.asp?id=584&fbclid=IwAR1_4fS7tGJIV1UsZci5wpF0hpKiTkfVYR_dQSsjy4x3B83j4EMFN82QyzQ Pretty darn creepy!! Quoted from the article: Some deer hunters had set up a trail camera a few weeks ago and discovered something strange triggered the snapshot. In front of the camera, you can clearly see the deer, but what's behind it is even more sinister. Some have attributed its glowing eyes and its feature to Bigfoot. Some even say it reminds them of a shape shifter. "This trail cal pic was captured buy a member of our team in Michigan. Needless to say, he’s been carrying a firearm since. What are you thoughts on what this could be," wrote Marco. What do you think?

For anyone who is interested I have now posted two articals that were made in response to this insanity back in 2009 and again in 2011. On my blog site (www.ThomasSteenburg.com) Look for the posts titled "Here We Go Again" as well as "Here We Go Again part two" . Thomas Steenburg

The Patterson/Gimlin event is so strong for many reasons. First, there were two eyewitnesses. Secondly, there was a very good movie film footage shot. Thirdly, there were numerous castable prints left in soft soil, which had the added benefit of having the bottom of the creatures foot shown clearly in the film footage. Finally, numerous people visited the site as soon as three days later and recorded evidence themselves of the footprints and site. One of those witnesses was an employee of the United States Forest Service, Lyle Laverty. His job as a timber cruiser put him in a position to be a point man in seeing sasquatch evidence. Sure enough, I have found reference to him finding other evidence independent to the PG event: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/laverty.htm I have found reference to Laverty being interviewed by at least four other bigfoot researchers, but I cannot find the texts of those interviews. Mr. Laverty's involvement appears to be quite private despite his interesting position at the time of the PG event and era in northwest California from 1955-1972. Did he approach his superiors about his experiences? Was he told to keep his mouth shut? Did he pursue evidence on his own, anyway? There is evidence that he collaborated with Dahinden, at least with regard to the PG filming event. Was he quiet about it all for fear of his job security and supervisor's orders? If anyone has access to interviews of Laverty, I would love a PM. I would love to read them. I find him to be the most interesting character in the entire saga.

But it's this stuff that's the interesting part, and this runs pretty consistent through the entire Klamath Watershed, consistent enough anyway for me to spend a lot of time on it. This screen shot is from the Lower Klamath Zone, our data.

As I recall the description of the nesting are given in presentations by the Olympic Project, it is on a hillside overlooking an active Steelhead stream. If not Steelhead then Salmon. They envisioned BF nesting there during the run and harvesting the fish. . Steelhead and Salmon runs are very seasonal and limited to a few weeks. BF could bed down at night or stash juveniles in the nests during the day while the adults harvest fish. The seasonality of certain food items in certain areas has to be the primary driving force behind movements of any hunter gatherer like BF. We have lots of evidence BF is a hunter gatherer but none that they are into food cultivation. Of course I have to admit that BF seems to have ties to herds of elk. While unlikely, it is not impossible, that BF may have associations with elk in the way that Siberian First Peoples have with reindeer and American plains Indians had with buffalo. Both followed the herds and harvested for their subsistence. Does BF follow the elk herd migrations? If BF is a hunter gatherer, rather than try to determine their behavior from abstract witness reports, perhaps we need to look to human hunter gathering behaviors and try to determine similar patterns in BF behavior. There has to be many similarities with a sentient bipedal hunter gatherer. .

As I understand the location description of these nests they are places where humans would not ordinarily go into. In dense thickets of brush with limited entry. No wonder that they are rarely found. Even at that there are indications that they are only temporarily occupied on a seasonal basis. Most likely theory would be fishing, hunting or gathering. Determine the reason for that temporary occupation and one should be able to extrapolate to find others in other areas. The methodology would likely involve examining scat found in the area of nests for diet, determine when that diet is plentiful, and look in that and other areas for nests when those food sources are plentiful. At times science is a slow and tedious process.

I'm doing a project for them on PNW Watershed and am maybe 40 or so pages in so far. I'm finding extraordinary a high % of reports in very close proximity to stream/creek/river headwaters, why that is i have no idea. Doing the Klamath basin first but i boo-booed there as we don't have much current activity in that area and may switch focus up to them and Puget Sound where there is lots of current activity, and that may yield genuine results on more nests hopefully. It's incredibly time consuming but i feel, beneficial if done right..