Leaderboard

I think it has to do with a variety of factors. 1 - Very low population and possibly even being on the brink of extinction. * Note- cougar number estimates are at about 30,000 in the US ( not including Canada ), has anyone here tried to film a cougar in an active pursuit ? ( I have ) It is difficult, and this with the use of a complete list of known/predictable habits in a simple animal ( something with a small brain comparatively ). 2 - Based on my interactions that they are naturally very shy and intelligent ( near human ). These creatures in most cases want nothing to do with humans in most cases, the instances of calm/curious approach seem to be under the presumption of the people being a non threat ( sleeping, hiking, occupied with XYZ ). 3 - The truth about the number of people in active pursuit. Most people here, Facebook and even on the conference podium are NOT real researchers. The majority of these people are simply Bigfoot enthusiasts who maybe spend 8 days a year out looking for tracks along popular hiking trails or near their favorite lake that looks " squatchy ". This in truth is a hobby or small interest compared to the other throws of life. I would put money down that maybe 5% - 10% of those who claim the title actually put in any serious amount of effort, money and time into research. Not very many needles in the haystack and what few that exist are actively avoiding the very tiny number of people searching.

Yes, I do discount the majority of folks , they are targeting/ focusing on something that is nothing like the Sasquatch. When a deer hunter is out in the wild, he is focused on locating and dispatching deer, not watching for the Loch Ness monster, it is not real in in perception so anything related is likely something else. It takes overt and in your face interaction or sign to gain consideration regarding sign from a well 40+ year hunter/guide. If you want to talk about a biologist or someone under governmental pay then I can easily point to a tough sell where job security faces nobility. I know of several biologists, forest managers and park rangers that have had experiences but they fear the consequences of even open discussion behind their name. John Mionczynski is a great example, he was told to drop the topic or be looking for a new line of work. That being said, I have been offered information from people that have found explainable sign or encounters but these tend to be people that spend an unusual amount of time in the wilderness ( more than 140 days a year ). Many of these people have a very hard time reporting their events and even when they do, they can't fully wrap their head around it enough to decide that Sasquatch could explain the situation. Many times they tell a friend or relative who contacts me and I reach out to them, there is rarely a light-bulb moment where they turn and decide to invest in Sasquatch pursuit. Peter Byrne and Robert W. Morgan are the only examples I can thing of that have done something similar to what you suggest, should they have had the capability and technology we have today then they perhaps would have made ground. Many skills are missing, a deer hunter is following an animal of known behavior the he can study. Deer hunters ( I am also a deer hunter, both rifle and bow ) target transitions looking for thickets/swamps along trails in areas of high caloric volume in the form of agriculture access. Deer are concerned of a very general form of ambush from cougar at a high point and by canines from bedding locations. These are known behaviors that are capitalized upon in the time of the breeding cycle of ungulates. We know basically zip about sasquatch lifestyle but they surely know loads about ours, this is not apples to apples here. Deer are not actively concerned about humans and their intentions, they also do not plan like higher primates. Think of this in chess terms. Sasquatch seem to take human behavior into account ( reports demonstrate ) as I pointed out in my point - 2 about intelligence. In primates you have to consider your body language, general activity, method of entry, method of attraction to not appear as a trap and also collect an extraordinary amount of information to find the proper location at the right time to encounter the species of interest. Look at Jane Goodall if you need an example, she even had her field operations paid for with no real family responsibility or exterior job to part her field time and it took years to just even get close enough to get photos of chimps. To answer your last question - No, not one informed soul with a high degree of focus has been able to put the level of time, resources and commitment on Sasquatch that Jane Goodall did with chimps ( not even on the same playing field as Sasquatch anyway ). I pray often for the day that I should have such a chance.

Here's a few things. The first is most important. Be respectful. You are in their home Talk to them. Tell them why you're there and what you want.

This is not entirely true. Certain groups like the Sierra club have some very deep-pockets donors. Moreover, among them are lawyers .. lawyers who do not have to be paid if they care enough about the issue themselves to donate their personal time. It is why they have been successful stopping logging, having timber sales suspended indefinitely, and generally quite successfully shutting the timber industry down in my region. The notion that the timber industry is unstoppable because of their economic impact is simply false. You have to find a different reason for the environmental groups not getting on board with bigfoot existence as a way to lock up public lands. They do have the means, they do have the money, they do have the public support in areas where it matters. MIB

Your response is just a cop-out, ironic. Conjecture based on nothing as you proposed just above. Hmmm, millions of humans motivated to seek out and harvest out of millions of simple and instinct driven deer available vs virtually no interest ( let alone ability ) with maybe 3000 in total population. Not really a tough question. My example of Jane works just fine, " she had to just show up ". She had the time, resources, commitment and passion to stay out for many months ( years in total ) to just get to a point where she could see more than a vague dark shape through the foliage. Her mother and husband even came out and supported her work from England, LOL. Many discoveries that came with direct intent came from good research and that costs money. My position on existence comes from my experience, my conjecture of collective behavior comes from the consideration of reported behavior and the sources of information provided. I am not creating a top 10 list of reasons why Bigfoot slipped the net, the net has never been cast. You said " based on the failure to produce any verifiable results " so please tell me of the occasions you are aware of where academics ( you know, those guys who historically go out with the intent on collecting results for a living ) have addressed the topic with a well funded/outfitted field study. Right now we have little information and no action, if you can't accept that then you are simply close minded. This issue is a combination effort , the likely rare Sasquatch in it's evolution has taken the route of human avoidance and we also seem to posses the complete inability to actually practice the definition of science itself in regard to this subject. As I have said before, scientific inquiry begins the moment you have a question. I am working on moving the ball but like nearly every single person here, I am one man with limited resources.

There are several threads already. And I've argued the point many times. Sasquatch discovery would make the Spotted Owl fiasco of the early 1980's look like a tea party. Would discovery threaten resource harvesting, tourism, hunting, snowmobiling ATV's all other forms of development and habitat intrusions and use? You betcha! My estimate is between two and three trillion dollars annually in lost revenue. It would be economically devastating. On the other hand, if Sasquatch was announced as NOT exiting, then revenue form the Bigfoot business side would see annual losses in the low billions. This is why no one in any official capacity could ever say 'yes' or 'no' to existence. There would be no financial upside to either- only financial loss. In that regard? We're stuck fast in the middle not knowing which side of the coin has the most power (government controls both) to make sure the status quo remains....the status quo. And that's kind of it in a nutshell.

With all due respect, you're kind of repeating the question. Very basically, a hunter is a hunter. Period. It's the quarry that is different. So the kind of knowledge and research done should reflect that. Deer and Sasquatch are different. The kind of sign they leave is different. Mainly because their body types and capabilities are different. If everyone had the exact specifics of how to grass a Sasquatch, it would have been done long ago. The number of deer are in the seven figure category. Sasquatch is thought to be in the four figure category. But even that low figure wouldn't allow it to evade e-DNA sampling which is why I've been pushing so hard on using the technology. Without going into too much here, though, deer are not a threat to the US economy. Sasquatch discovery on the other hand would have a huge impact on the economy. That said there is a lot more to hunting a Sasquatch then simply hunting a Sasquatch. One has to weigh why such a creature has not been OFFICIALLY and/or SCIENTIFICALLY recognized. My own F&W, even though they stated a null hypothesis, told me in a phone conversation that they are not sure the creature doesn't exist. If that's the case I see no effort on their part to go out and look for one....you know...just in case they do IOf they did then I would guess they might have as much difficulty finding one as we do. Unless of course, some agency has already done that but "for some strange reason" hasn't seen it fit to tell anyone.

So in your opinion there is no difference between a Bigfoot hunter and a deer hunter? What would be the special bigfoot hunting knowledge that those that have gone before and failed so miserable at the goal be?

I'll discount them. First of all, that's where most reports come from.........which are promptly "discounted" by science, the authorities, and the skeptic industry. If anybody is doing any "discounting", it's the folks who should br doing something about the phenomenon. Secondly, there have been quite a few reports of such people shooting and killing sasquatches........then leaving them lay, often because they're afraid of the government, legal, and pompous class previously mentioned. And these folks weren't actually hunting sasquatches at all. An actual sasquatch hunter would have put some thought into what they would do with the film, body, casts, or whatever else that he's trying to acquire.

You've probably seen that you can do both eh? No light attached but the mount is on: R0019461 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr

I generally agree that they are aware of us when we are in their territory and the proof of that is how well they avoid us. However, nearly every encounter I have read about, and my own first one, happened because the BF blundered into me. I had changed direction three times and if it initially had thought it knew what I was doing at all, I confused the situation by changing direction of travel several times. Much of the time in the field when the area was active, I felt like I was being watched. Now and then I would hear a thud back in the woods as they moved to keep me in sight or more likely moved so I would not see them. After getting to know me, one of the BF in my research area, seemed to want to mess with me. Juvenile pranks lead me to believe it was an older juvenile, working in its skills of observation and approach and having fun at the same time. But at the same time it was very good at avoiding letting me see it. In spite of getting close enough to hit me with small rocks, I never saw the rock thrower. I heard it run once before it hit my pack with a small rock. If a teenage bigfoot can pull that off, imagine how good the adults are. I wonder if that activity was actually sanctioned by the adults since I was a known quantity that seemed to not want to do them any harm.

A hoax? Of what? I thought it was a joke, not a hoax.

A soothing voice, along with your body language, is a good thing, but it's the body language that is key. Reading books by dog whisperers, horse whisperers, and Goodall/Fossey would be an excellent elementary education. A bit of American Sign Language training won't hurt, just like time at a zoo practicing. I took a 300 level photography course at the University of Alaska Anchorage on wildlife photography which focused on approaching wold animals. It was the best college course of my life. I have been able to practice what I learned on moose, Dall sheep, desert bighorn sheep, deer, wolves, and both black and brown bears. I've had wild wolves so close I could almost feed them from my hand, much like the wolf in "Dances with Wolves".

One of the camo companies, ASAT, has based their camo color and pattern on nature. If green were the perfect color to blend into the forest, animals would have adapted and you'd see green hair. You don't. What do you see? Light tan , brown, and black. Deer disappear before your eyes. The same with a bengal tiger. The light tan reflects the colors around it while the brown and black patterns confuse the eye and break up the silhouette. Here's the same ASAT suit in different environments. Note how the light tan looks almost green in the turkey pictures.

Can you lay this out a little more clearly for the less informed? The why behind your statements would be awesome.

There could be people out there trying and possibly succeeding at attempting a Goodall type type of interaction. We wouldn't know unless they publicly shared their efforts. Heck, some of the researchers who have dropped off the radar and out of the public eye could be involved with something like that right now....

I pretty much loathe dragging techy shite out into the wilds, incongruous and frustrating with just my digital camera gear. Oddly, my beast, the Canon 1D is the easiest to deal with if big and clunky. A small video cam with all of it's "ability" is a PITA to navigate thru menus...blablah That drone footage though, I'm tempted. Slight decrease in outings around here but I'm still getting out, primarily to an an area with no sighting reports that I've come across, but then again, not many people go there--at least not since the Polynesian Mormons skedaddled back to HI in 1917. There is one from the 70's in the mountains to the East, on the far side of the valley that these here are the Western edge of. I'm just parking along the road and wandering up, no trails, which is nice. Just sharing the view with Ravens, Zone-tailed hawks, Northern Harriers, Prairie Falcons, Bobcat, Coyote and who knows what else...No signs of hairless bi-peds up here. Clambering around the mountains above the Valley of the Skulls: IMG_4574 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr IMG_4571 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr IMG_4689 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr Luring 'em in with some aromatic smoke:) No luck yet.... IMG_4615 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr And from up in the Uintas, lots of Elk and Mule deer sign up here, no Cougar tracks as of yet and no big guy... IMG_4502 by LIght Pirate, on Flickr

My NA friends gave myself and my squatching buddies advice years ago, and success followed. I had a daytime sighting ON the reservation in 2018. I certainly understand how easily dismissed such thing are, but I'm gonna stick with what works for me.

No i haven't had anything weird happen but if I did I would rebuke it. They are flesh and blood. I have been grunted at and it sounded just like a gorilla. It ran past me about 40 feet away. It was brown. The speed is just as fast as any other animal, and yes i believe it's an animal. I have seen a bedding site. I have pictures of prints including a knuckle print. I have also seen a black one that was 8 feet tall from a distance. We went back to measure the height. I don't go looking for them. I now have a home on 20 acres that are mostly wooded and have animals. I haven't seen one here yet but they have made themselves known.

NA will tell you why but it's woo . I communicate with some who grew up on a reservation and he says they are not flesh and blood all the time. He is wrong and the ones who say they are just animals right? So far the ones saying just animals aren't batting 1000 I don't discount anything when searching now , not a thing

I'm under no illusions that I'll be sneaking in on anything that makes the wilds its home so i go about my typically solo "business" as usual. Talking to myself sometimes for the "benefit" of eavesdroppers. Another tool i use frequently to broadcast my presence is a pipe with at least a 50/50 blend of some aromatic tobacco. Don't necessarily like smoking the fragrant stuff, usually vanilla/nutty, but methinks it may have some appeal wafting through the woods. Also identifiable as a specific anomaly---oh THAT guy again...

I believe you have mostly answered your question. I think all of the above are true, and perhaps more...........

I have no problem accepting that this video is a fake, but I am curious about something else... Is Justin Chernipeski really seen as authority on the possible validity of evidence? Anytime anyone shoots down someone else's work or evidence and then immediately begins to beg for money for their own projects just leaves me a bit wary. I have seen a couple of Justin's videos, and unfortunately nothing that I saw made me look at him as an authority on the subject. I am not trying to denigrate the guy, I am just curious as to why he is someone who should be used as a reference on possible hoaxes. Honest question. I must be missing something on this guy.

Not that I think that it backs up the legitimacy of this video, but a lot people would just film it and then run without trying to provoke what they believed to be an 8 ft tall creature that they encountered alone in the woods.

Its not a problem for me nor should it be for anyone, its just a fact.

It is correct from the standpoint of a casual hiker, I wasn't referring to hunters. That said, human stealth in the forest has definite limits, you I guarantee you are not as sneaky as you want to think you are.

I have read the paper and its not worth the paper its printed on, its just a sciency sounding story, but it is well written and they have always done a great job of documenting the failures to prove anything they claim is happening. There's no doubt in my mind a bird either flew into the trap or it was on the ground and a bird picked it up. If they do implement this in the future, just put a game cam on the trap and they will save themselves a ton of time or make a great stride in moving the ball forward.

Oh my you've exposed me I was sent by JREF high command to topple BFF, its really my own fault for using our secret password "sciency", the antithesis of our founding principles. Which leads to the real question here......how do you know the password? LOL I hope you can appreciate my attempt at humor! If it helps Norse I've been following this subject matter for way longer than most and its based on my own personal experiences which includes every type of encounter/experience other than a point blank face to face encounter. As I've stated in my intro I'm a skeptic, obviously I've been satisfied with my own explanations for these experiences. I'd love for Bigfoot to be discovered. But hey back to the subject at hand Area X, what do you find compelling about the "data" and procedures?

I haven't either nor am I suggesting that, a bird most likely flew into the trap, the device got tangled up on the bird and it flew around with it until it fell off. Pretty obvious in the photos below how that could happen. But you make a great point on why and how the experiment was flawed from the very start about the burr, It was set up to fail from the very beginning by the very thing every researcher of any type or subject matter has to be aware of confirmation biases. As a long time lurker I'm quite aware of how beat that horse is on this website and I only bring it up as it relates to the experiment and what was trying to be accomplished. The experiment was way to specific to the assumed target that all other possibilities could be ignored, its not a bad concept for tracking known targets but is an utter failure when it comes to this subject. I get it put it nine feet up, something that's most likely going to stick only to fur, small and lightweight, Bigfoot will never notice that! Opps you put it right in the flight line of numerous large birds, that's why the game cam should have been on the trap. But hey its a great effort and great story!

You aren't going to sneak up on anything out there. If you pay attention you'll notice the songbirds give you away, they signal to others you're coming, then the squirrels and like chime in, anything within a quarter mile knows you're there pretty quick and thats just the "dumb animals", that said.... Vocals and woodknocks in my opinion work against you, when they do it, they are doing it back and forth with each other to alert others YOU are there and similar, so staying quiet just makes more sense. Besides, I have never had any problem hearing a typical conversing set of hikers way off so with "them" attuned to their surroundings as they are going to hear you to, but the whole kocking/calling/whooping thing is just stupid.

This is not correct. You must not be a hunter, or if you are, not a very good one. I frequently move through the woods with critters entirely oblivious to my presence. You don't do that by stumbling along at a regular walking speed, you learn to move at the pace of the woods, be one with it, in it, not an intruder passing through it. My best example of this was at the end of high school when I took one term off to hunt. I suspected the presence of a buck on a particular ridge so I put a sneak on it. I came up behind that deer without it detecting me. It was oblivious right up to the instant I poked it in the ribs with my rifle barrel, then it jumped straight up and tried to flee in 3 directions at the same time. If I can, others can, and it's a pretty good bet sasquatch can. At the same time, it's an equally good bet since I can do it to others, it can be done to me, and probably to sasquatch, with enough patience and opportunities. But you can't do it as a bumbling idiot in the woods, you have to become part of it, not an invader through it. MIB

Without giving your research area away, what general area are you going to? We are talking about regular animal bigfoots. We have discussed the other kind surrounded with woo on the paranormal side of the forum. Seems like if we humans can't figure out an animal or find it, then it must be the woo reason. There are forum members who live near bigfoots and have become familiar with them. Sassyfooty is one of them.

I do appreciate your response, but there would be very little difference in hunting a deer/ bigfoot . Your Jane Goodall comparison doesn't work, all she had to do is show up, first you have to prove Bigfoot exists the money will follow no doubt. You got the cart before the horse, a species is never going to be declared to exists on reports. Your conjecture about behavior is just a logical conclusion based on the failure to produce any verifiable results. How to move the ball forward, all I can tell you is do something different folks, but declaring bigfoot the ninja of the forest won't work.

Have claimed to run into Bigfoot, which I guess is really the problem it never gets beyond a unsupportable claim at this point.

Absolutely I'm repeating the question LOL for obvious reasons the answers are kinda fuzzy and don't really address the question but I do appreciate your attempts. A threat to the US economy now you've lost me but maybe start a thread on that one, Id quite enjoy that!