Leaderboard

I am a long time poster and visited for several hours a week and that was at the height of the Finding Bigfoot show so volume of interest is drastically lower today as most other shows are completely faked and fabricated. I personally checked in to see what field research methods, techniques and ideas are being tossed around out in the woods. Couple other points to note. 1 - Forums are dying as human attention spans decrease due to overstimulation by social media. 2 - Video media as a format ( youtube, patreon, tiktok, live streaming ) is eating forums for breakfast, direct commentary and long format video scape covers most of the discussion points and theories. 3 - Field research efforts these days are ultra weak sauce compared to how " the community " use to address the subject, most now sit around and slip into " cant get them on camera, must be paranormal " or they simply do nothing of effort to get out and search for evidence. Bigfoot is a campfire hobby with very little actual pursuit these days. We do have a couple die-hard guys still here but the volume of activity has always been around PGF debate and field research and now post the lockdowns, people are preoccupied and distracted by seahawks games, vacations and what ever other primary hobbies people engage in these days. The vigor and thrill of walking around in the dark and looking for prints is gone for most or waved away by the embrace of weak minded woo " experiences " that are create insulated FaceBook groups for self worship. No red circles required to figure that out if you check in on all these media sites. I now check in like once every other month to see if anything is going on research related and it seems that the spring has dried up and personally, this drives me nuts because we have more tools today than any point in history. This concludes my rant, lol.

A couple of years ago, our group was putting on a conference in north western Wisconsin. We had Dr. Meldrum lined up as the keynote speaker, and I weaseled my way into picking him up from the Minneapolis airport and was to drive him to the venue. I was so excited because I would have him entirely to myself for several hours. I had so many things I wanted to talk about, but alas, Covid hit and the conference was canceled. I never got the opportunity to delve deep into my favorite topic with him. Fast forward to 2023, I got a call 2 weeks ahead of the Minnesota Bigfoot conference asking me if I could be a presenter, as Dr. Meldrum was scheduled to appear, but had the health episode TD-40 mentioned. I said yes, and made sure everyone at the conference knew how much I admired the man and honored him during my presentation. Sad day, all around.

I have. That ain't it. Seems to me it would be useful to move away from Standing's already-demonstrated hoaxes. Find something new to beat each other up over. Hoaxers CAN potentially see / report something real, what he says is not automatically null and void, it is merely that he's dug a hole and whatever he produces has to be of greater verifiability than what a person with a clean reputation has to produce.

One of my best friends lives in the La Grande, OR area and has for many years. He's a former USFS employee and his wife is an emergency room RN. They are prolific outdoorsy people who have spent most of their lives camping, hiking, hunting, horseback riding, and working in the mountains of Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. Super great folks. My friend and his wife have been skeptics of Bigfoot and whenever the subject came up, we would joke and laugh about it. They were both respectful, but just didn't believe. They had spent decades in the woods with no encounters, so couldn't wrap their heads around the concept. That all changed for the wife on Sunday. Her husband and his Navy buddy were with me at my family cabin in Idaho for the weekend, while she stayed in Oregon to take care of their horses. On Sunday, she decided to go on a hike/run in the mountains. What happened and what she saw/experienced is not exactly clear. She messaged me and asked if a firearm was a deterrent to BF. I said it depends. In most cases, a person having one means they are more likely to avoid you, but not in all cases. She then said that something happened and she wasn't sure what, but she is terrified and traumatized, and very confused. I was at work, so couldn't call her, but we messaged back and forth and she left an audio recording explaining why she was being vague about what she saw/heard. This is the location she gave me of the incident: I'll try to share what happened, but it's still unclear. Her husband returned home while we were discussing it and she understandably unloaded everything on him. Hopefully I can get more details after she recovers from the incident. Basically, she was in a pretty remote area doing a hike/jog as she is a fitness fiend and very active. She was wearing brightly colored athletic shorts, and a bright athletic top. She said she suddenly became aware of something large in the nearby trees/brush due to a vocalization that she described as both far away and at the same time, also nearby. She also indicated that there was some brush/trees being disturbed; something large was crashing through the trees. Her first thought was that she had surprised an elk. Whatever it was, it was very large and moved very quickly. Her words... "I think it was an elk crashing and then wolves but everything happened at once and I've been scared before, but never shaking head to toe... I heard grunting/growling but it was a ways away. At first I thought it was an elk, then crashing, then two howls or something. I realized by the second one it wasn't an elk." "I thought it was wolves but knew something wasn't good and I've had cats stalk me and other weird stuff but the fear I felt was weird." She indicated that she got into a stranger's pickup that came along, which she said she would never do unless she was terrified. Then she added this... "The weird part is its all confusing, I just remember crashing, grunting, and 2 howls and total body shaking lol like I don't remember it all which is also weird... all of the noises close and far... the guy that picked me up said I looked not OK." She then left an audio message that went into more detail about the strangeness of the incident due to the emotions she felt and a weird "connection" to whatever was in the woods. She was much more articulate and intelligent sounding in the recording than in the texts. I've known her for 15 years and she is extremely intelligent, rational, calm, and afraid of nothing. Current ER nurse and former rodeo queen who does horseback trips into the wilderness. In the audio file, she describes feeling like whatever was out there knew exactly where she was and what she was thinking. She stated that the sounds she heard were felt in her body, and she felt completely exposed and helpless. She also reiterated that she has had numerous encounters with predators over the years in the woods and has never felt anything as terrifying as this. She also says she may have seen something, but so much of the encounter is "missing" in her mind. Her reaction to anything disturbing in life is to research it. She does a deep dive on a subject until she feels properly educated about it. She was in the middle of this while we were messaging. I told her about infrasound and the effects it has. She said she found references to it and confirmed that's what she felt, but at a deeper and more psychic level. She said she was on the BFRO website and looking for encounters in her area. I encouraged her to make a report. She wanted to be sure it was anonymous. I assured her it was. I showed her pics of the tree I discovered the day before her encounter and she said she had seen the same thing. And she had seen the weird tree stacking and trees shoved into the ground with the roots sticking up. We ended our conversation with her apologizing for not believing me before. She said she believed deep down, but didn't want to acknowledge it because she didn't want to be afraid to run in the woods alone. Now she is. I hope she filed a report and I am planning on going down to visit soon and check out the site. It's great that now I have another friend that also believes, but I feel bad for her and her husband. Her love of the woods and her perception of the wild has been completely changed for the rest of her life.

Hopefully, given some time to process, that change won't be a bad change, just awareness. It was a similar concern .. what's my risk level here? .. that got me into research in the first place some years before I ever heard of BFF. Proving / disproving existence, validating / invalidating the PGF, blah blah blah .. means nothing to me. What matters is living vs dying and from what I've learned, dying is more likely on the highway driving to the trailhead than it is from hairy bipeds in the woods. Good enough. I hope she'll come to a similar conclusion, find peace with sharing the woods, and not be deterred from her regular activities.

Todd Standing =Red Flag.

I agree. I'm thinking the good doctor is truly a "knower" at this point .

I can’t help but imagine him enthusiastically questioning Roger Patterson right now.

I watched it. There is way less “con” going on with the 411 books…. Than trying to convince the Canadian government THIS is a real animal.

Yep. Unless of course one is forgiving the many hoaxes. I believe that is called naive. The Muppets is the most laughable. Of course if one takes the subject serious probably best to move on from any and everything Standing.

I find it interesting to scroll to the bottom of the published report to see who did the investigation. A surprising (to me) number of the recent reports were done by Matt M. himself rather than his investigators. That probably says something though I'm not sure what it is.

Hey Bipedalist, how fortunate that you got to take the course with Jim Halfpenny and Jeff Meldrum. I received the flyer for it, and couldn’t make it— but how I wish I could have. We’ve had dinner with Jim when we were visiting Yellowstone,at an Asian place outside of Gardiner MT. He showed us his museum, which includes lots of track casts including Bigfoot. Anyway, message me if you want to chat about the class.

Totally shocked. Had the honor to eat supper with him in Gardner, Montana one night during a tracking course he presented with Jim Halfpenny. He was such a gracious and humble man. May he rest in peace.

I did a day long Jeep trip over the Freezeout pass in Idaho last week. Dang close to grizzly country on the Montana border. I took a picture of the two guns I brought with me... A Marlin 1894 carbine and a S&W Model 686. Both in .357 Magnum. I did not feel under-gunned at all. I have spent nearly 50 years in the Idaho wilderness camping, fishing, hunting, shooting, exploring, hiking, ATV riding, off-roading, and just plain relaxing and enjoying nature. All of those activities were done while being armed. In all those years, I was threatened with violence, or felt threatened maybe 4-5 times. Twice was by animals/Bigfoot and the others by people. The worst was a few years ago when me and my dog Rowdy camped at a remote spot on Bonami Creek in a pop-up camper, and a pack of wolves came in and surrounded our camp at night. I was blissfully unaware of the threat having downed a couple or a few 7&7s while listening to satellite radio by the fire. Rowdy was a 105lb Lab/Great Dane mix who was afraid of fire and nothing else. He normally stayed away from it and would lay down behind me as I sat near the fire and drank. But that night, he decided to lay very close to the fire and my rifle... The next day, I awoke with the worst hangover I have ever experienced. I thought I had been shot in the head with a .22. I poured out the remaining Seagrams 7. After I drank a bottle of water and downed a few aspirin, I stumbled outside to the camp and observed Rowdy diligently walking the perimeter of camp, sniffing and marking his territory. I got dressed, grabbed my rifle, and headed up the crude trail behind our campsite. Rowdy was busy peeing on everything and sniffing furiously... I followed him about 25yds from camp and suddenly realized why he had acted so strangely the night before by staying close to the fire, and why he was so obsessed the next day with marking his territory. I found a piece of wolf scat that was very fresh and left while the wolf was in motion and moving away from our camp. It had to have been left within the past 8 hours. I began doing a search of the area around our camp and found sign that a pack of wolves had come in the night before and walked around the perimeter of our camp. No wonder Rowdy was acting so strange the night before! The rifle I had was a Marlin 1894 in .45 Colt, with a Surefire weapon light attached, 6 extra rounds in the butt stock pouch, a green dot optic, and smoothed action. Pretty much the perfect weapon to be holding when a pack of wolves comes in.

I've been remiss in not reporting my field trips for the last couple of months, so I'll try to get back into it. I've made a number of outings, but had some problems with making my phone upload photos to the computer and got frustrated with trying to make it work. This evening i made a run up one of our local research areas that had been gated for active logging for almost a year, and took Thomas along for the ride. I'd heard that the gate was now open, since the logging had ended for the season, and we found the gate was indeed open. However, the contractor had obviously just completed cutting drainage cross ditches on the road, and did it very thoroughly! The new trenches were aggressively steep and very frequent, slowing progress to a crawl to avoid suspension damage or noggin bonking on the roof! We only got about 2/3 of the way to the summit before we decided that the effort to reach the top wasn't worth it. Here's a video that Thomas shot on the trip back down: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1WbkQxebhb/

I also did a one day 185-mileJeep trip through some very remote Idaho backcountry. No BF sign, but some beautiful country...

Todd Standing's Bigfoot heads are full blown fakes. They even show progression, with later ones being better than the muppet heads in the beginning. But Todd Standing is in a great area along the BC and Alberta border. Did Jeff Meldrum bump something genuine in that area? Who knows. Its my understanding that his sighting was at night with a NV or FLIR scope. I cannot remember which. Its entirely possible that Standing pulled some shenanigans. But its also possible if you believe the creature to be out there that Meldrum may have had a genuine encounter. Either way it doesn't move the goal posts regardless.

The article bot caught this story from a number of news outlets. https://www.syracuse.com/statefair/2025/08/searching-for-bigfoot-at-the-2025-nys-fair.html It caught my eye when perusing the list of vendors, considering entering our car club next year to raise interest in classic cars of the little British variety. Charles "Snake" Stuart has an exhibit at the state fair featuring a preserved "Bigfoot corpse" behind plexiglass. Includes a paid appearance by William Shatner on an old TV. Charles certainly sounds like my kind of weirdo and I hope to meet him and his clearly fake body of a Bigfoot. (Sorry, Charles.) I haven't visited yet. But I'll certainly report back if I do. The fair runs through to Labor Day, Monday the first of September in Syracuse, NY. If you do attend, grab some local delicacies, salt potatos, speedies, garbage plates, chicken riggies, etc.

Yeah, don't get used to that from me... Healthy skepticism is warranted and needed in this field or else people will be thinking that we'd all buy that bridge in Brooklyn they want to sell us.

I'm a follower of Stefan, but he gives short shrift to the Cerutti mastodon evidence. I appreciate his skeptical nature. I'm not knowledgeable enough to render a decision on the Cerutti mastodon evidence, but lean towards its authenticity.

No, times have changed. Photographic evidence isn't going to cut it.............

I represent that remark!

I was just listening to episode 180 of Bigfoot & Beyond. Can't give you a time mark as I was otherwise engaged, but the guest, Joe Perdue, discusses being an employee of a West Virginia government agency (probably state parks or DEC) and discusses his supervisors' reaction too, and limitations on, Bigfooting on the job. Basically, he could not initiate any Bigfoot discussions and if sightings were reported to him, he could take the reports for his own personal use, but they didn't want them as official records, such as injury reports at the park, bear sightings, etc.

I checked my files and you are correct. I am not sure how I switched up the players in the Matilda proceedings. I don't follow Todd Standing but I believe that he and his make-up artist wife have a production company. Anyone can make a creature these days. There is a company in South Africa that makes camo for trail cameras that are used to catch poachers ( Camohyde ). They do like a 'life cast' of various tree species and they are good. I checked prices on materials locally to determine if I could do tree bark castings of PNW trees cheaper. No way. The materials / techniques that are available will impress. The cosplay groups have many options. Take a look; https://www.smooth-on.com/ They have goops, but no hair / fur. Know before you pull the trigger. Image is of Camohyde, from South Africa.

I've always found that the number of reports coming from an area is more contingent on the number of investigators than the actual number of reports. In other words, if no one is there to investigate, sightings go unreported. If an investigator is found for that area, a bunch of reports surface. I wish there was something like I-Naturalist where people could report without going through a middleman. I fully realize the flaws, it's just a pie in the sky dream...

Great videos PNWexplorer and BC witness. The views are magnificant and the approaches to the area amazing. It underscores how fortunate you both are to be sasquatching in the wilderness areas you go. Kindly keep up the great work you're doing.

Oh my how tragic. I recall David Paulides stating that on a bigfoot cruise that Jeff had serious heatlh episode and had to be life flighted away.

RIP, Dr. Meldrum. You'll ever be an icon to the bigfoot enthusiast community.

"Patty" comes as close as you're going to get. What I've said before is that Patty was not identical to either of the two I've seen, rather, assuming her to be a middle-aged female, she is biologically correct to match the much larger male I saw in 1976 and to match the late juvenile/early adolescent I saw in 2013. If you see something that's appearance is not similar-ish to Patty, not exact, but biologically appropriate, you're not looking at a real bigfoot. And, as I've said before, I saw those before I saw the PGF, first long before, second roughly the same time. Other examples would be the Blue Mountain footage though I didn't think the heads were quite so forward-jutting as that film shows, but a pregnant female .. which those were IMHO .. might carry her body differently. MIB

This was posted on Facebook in the North Idaho Life FB page by some lady that lives about 30 miles from me. I know that photo wasn't taken in this area, and not recently since it is far too green with too many deciduous trees. Her comment on the photo is "Barely caught the fireball in the sky". No reference to the BF in the photo. Obviously she is trolling or whatever. But I was just curious to know if anyone here is familiar with the backstory of the picture.

The salmon fishing in Oregon has maintained a good level on some Rivers like the Rogue River where they have an Oregon Hatchery up by Shady Cove. I live on the Coquille River in southern Oregon, and the salmon fishing is still holding up but they closed it down early. All we can do is the best we can since we don't know how many bigfoots are out there and we don't know if they are starving due to the lack of salmon. My guess is the Bigfoot are doing okay because there are plenty of deer here in Oregon and I've heard that when they begin to get really hungry they'll take out cows. This may be a way to gauge how hungry the bigfoots are getting. I took some of the latest Bigfoot Research Organizations data showing Bigfoot action in Oregon, and there are recent reports which is a good sign. My guess is the bigfoots are remaining healthy as long as the forest service keeps up its present sustained yield logging quota. Now some of the forest service roads are being gated off so if they ever start studying Bigfoot, they can use this method to keep up Bigfoot numbers and to keep people out of their habitats. With sustained yield logging which means as Forest are cut down the clear-cut areas are replanted so there are always trees that are growing and the mature ones get cut down. In the clear cut areas there's a number of various foods that Bigfoot easily survives on such as huckleberry, deer and Elk. I also believe and sometime it will be proven that if an area becomes void of food such as rivers that have reduced salmon populations then the Bigfoots are mobile enough and they move into different areas where food is more plentiful. Now an example of this is the Rogue River that has a lot of boat traffic during all seasons of the year, and I believe the Bigfoot avoid this area. They can move over a mountain ranges, and there will be less people and some of the rivers there have fish hatcheries. The salmon population can remain stable providing the state of Oregon secures its funds to keep the fish hatcheries viable. February 2025, Jackson County (Class B) - LAST FRIDAY: BIgfoot knocks heard in mountains 28 miles NE of Medford August 2023, Clackamas County (Class B) - Backpackers on east flank of Mt Hood hear volleys of loud knocks between 12am and 3am August 2023, Clackamas County (Class B) - Solo female backpacker reports sasquatch vocals and knocks at 3am at Timothy Lake, 18mi S of Mt. Hood

Sorry. I hadn’t refreshed the page to see that you had already responded

I think we have discussed the Dennis Martin case enough in this thread. Go back and reread the OP and go from there. 👍

I tried to be clear on this but maybe I wasn't clear enough - it is entirely reasonable and expected for Bill Martin to de everything he possibly could to find his son and to get as many people and organisations as possible involved in helping him do that, in particular the FBI given their resources and their investigative powers and expertise involved, just as he did. I have a son of about the same age and would certainly do everything I could think of in those circumstances. Doug Martin (not the brother, the friend who was playing with Dennis just prior to his disappearance) said that his family had gone back some 3 years later and bumped into the grandfather Clyde, who said that he had been walking those trails every weekend for those years just because he couldn't give up. I suspect I would be the same. The pain must be unimaginable, made all the worse for not knowing. That's what makes distorting the facts to generate conspiracy in order to in turn profiteer off that pain and the almost certain death of a small boy all the worse. You seem to be still stuck in the false narrative of M411. The FBI didn't 'dismiss' the report. They met with Harold Key and Park officials on site to follow up. They accepted the Rangers' assessment that the scream was too far away to be relevant given the timeline. Harold Key, as far as I can find in newspaper reports and the NPS and FBI files, never called the man he saw 'mangy', 'hairy', 'dishevelled', 'unkempt' or anything else of that nature, just 'a man'. And no one was seen 'packing something through the woods'. This came out in Paulides' account some 50 years later. As I mentioned in my previous post, and as above, clearly Bill Martin was doing everything he could to get the FBI involved as was his right and duty. It's therefore all the more striking that he wasn't shouting from the rooftops to the FBI, the governor he wrote to and the newspapers about this man, if he was indeed carrying something. The only logical explanation is that Harold Key never actually said that that's what he saw. As much as Bill Martin (indeed anyone in that situation) might want to believe that their child was kidnapped so as to hold on to the hope that he might still be alive, and as much as he might wish to persuade the FBI that this was the kidnapper, the actual facts were that: Harold Key reported hearing a scream and seeing a man. This was most likely at the same time as Dennis went missing, possibly up to 60 minutes before, and no later than 60 minutes after. This was 90 minutes (fast hike, not carrying a struggling child) away. There's nothing odd about concluding that it wasn't relevant or credible evidence of any kidnapping of Dennis. In fact, by placing this man a minimum 90 minutes away within a max 60 mins of disappearance, it actually constitutes an alibi! I didn't say that the man was 'mangy' (see above for my thoughts on that) or that he was necessarily operating a still or picking ginseng. I offered those as examples given Harold Key's initial thought and the fact that there was an admitted illegal ginseng harvester in the area some years later, so that could be plausible. What I said was that he was probably up to no good, which was based on his making his way away from the Keys asap. it could be something else as I said, and it doesn't necessarily have to be illegal either. But it does seem that he didn't want to be approached. The one thing I do know beyond all reasonable doubt that he wasn't kidnapping Dennis Martin. If the Park Service believed there were unscrupulous bad actors in the Park, I'm quite sure they wouldn't immediately jump to 'I know this guy brews moonshine/picks ginseng, so with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, I'm going to assume he's also a child abductor'. I'm also pretty sure that the FBI wouldn't go along with it, assume authority and open up an investigation despite the fact that the timeline makes it impossible for this man to be involved anyway. I'm not sure what exactly you mean by 'feral people'. I'm assuming the 'more animal than man', cannibalistic, never touched by civilisation, type rumoured without verifiable evidence to live in the smoky mountains. But the video you posted doesn't show that kind of person - the first home shown belonged to a Mr Patterson who was Sheriff of the County, and a Mr Rust, a Warden, with a picture shown of him and his perfectly clean and well dressed children. A far cry from 'feral'. The Kari Swenson and Claude Dallas cases you previously mentioned dealt with people who wanted to live off grid in isolation but certainly not 'feral'. If dealing with the off grid isolation type person, why jump straight to the conclusion that they are child abductors and send the Green Berets after them without any evidence of wrongdoing? Note that as previously stated the Key testimony came over a month after the Green Berets had been deployed so it can't be that they were deployed because of that testimony, it would have to be a practically instant conclusion that it was abduction from within the Park. If dealing with the 'feral humans' why conduct a Green Beret take out mission in the middle of the most public, best attended SAR mission ever? The picture you give of a draconian Park Service that would certainly know of a single moonshining operation and who would never allow it to stand, also doesn't really tally for me with the idea of 'who and the heck knows what is inside that park' and the existence of people (whether feral or off grid types) who the park would instantly suspect in a child disappearance but who would also be either unknown or tolerated within the park. I'd also again make the point that if the NPS/FBI/Military had such a strong and instant belief that there were people living within the Park snatching children, they wouldn't be likely to send boy scout out looking for them. Not to mention the point I made about someone out of the thousands that took part in the SAR surely coming across some evidence of a dwelling for such Park dwellers if it existed. The Green Beret presence has been explained - nearby on training, able to continue the same type of training as would be necessary whilst also assisting in the search for a missing child in a case that caught the public attention, and at the request of the NPS. I know they don't get involved in SAR routinely, but how often would they be training for similar terrain in Vietnam, at the same time and next to an SAR mission that required exactly the skills they had and were training? On the flip side, if sending the Green Berets in is what the military does when it suspects foul play, does it follow that no other case could be considered as involving foul play given that the Green Berets weren't sent in? As I said, it's impossible to completely rule out kidnapping given that we don't know for certain what happened. But the obvious, probable answer is getting turned around, and some natural (weather or animal based) death befalling him. One of the SAR volunteers actually fell off a bridge and broke his arm and might well have been done for were he not surrounded by other SAR individuals, so the idea that it wouldn't be likely for a small boy in the dark, pouring rain and high winds doesn't stack. The case just doesn't need unfounded conspiracy heaped upon unfounded conspiracy to explain (unless of course there are books to sell).

Sorry it's taken a while to reply. Been busy and haven't had the time to properly research and set out my thoughts. I'm also sorry that this is going to be quite long. I wasn't aware that firefighters were involved in SAR missions, but clearly, in that light, you're right that that experience certainly counts. My issue with the Dennis Martin case is that much of what seems unusual only seems so if your information comes from David Paulides either directly (from the books/movies/videos) or indirectly (as the narrative that most people relay seems to incorporate his 'take' so that 'reporting' on websites seem to also incorporate them). If you look at actual newspaper reports, NPS reports and FBI Files and documents from the time, everything seems less unusual. Harold Key and his testimony is a perfect example. According to Paulides Dennis went missing at 3:30pm and that 'the same day sometime between 4:30 and 5:30pm' Harold Key heard a scream. This is important because Bill Martin and a Park Ranger supposedly hiked the 7-9 mile trail from Spence Field to the area Harold Key identified, taking 90 minutes to do so. The problem - Dennis went missing at 4:30pm (NPS chronology and the Incident report, as well as most contemporaneous newspaper reports confirm this) and Harold Key said he heard the scream 'it must have been around 4:30 in the afternoon. I know that it couldn't have been earlier than 3:30 or later than about 5:30' - Knoxville News Sentinel 7.21.1969. 'Key said that the scream 'a trouble scream' was heard about '4 or 4:30 in the afternoon' - Kingsport Times 7.22.1969 So the scream happened around the same time Dennis went missing, was just as, if not more likely to have happened before than after he went missing, and even taking the absolute latest time of 5:30pm would only leave and hour for someone to hike and carry Dennis a trail that had taken his father 90 minutes - his father, of course, would have been hiking as quickly as possible to prove a point, given his (fully understandable) desperation to get the FBI involved. Without changing the time of the disappearance (whether purposefully to suggest foul play, or a result of the shoddiest investigation/reporting of a fundamental fact possible, who can say?), the whole Harold Key testimony becomes irrelevant, exactly as the Rangers and FBI assessed. Remember also that Harold Key came forth on the July 20/21 1969. Green Beret help was requested June 15, and they had left by June 26. The Green Beret deployment couldn't be a result of Key's testimony because he wouldn't go on to tell anyone for well over a month after they were deployed and at a time when they'd left almost 4 weeks earlier. The idea of a man running and carrying something on his shoulder also seems to come from Paulides and Paulides only. He says that he interviewed Bill Martin (although Mrs Martin told Michael Bouchard later, after Bill Martin's death, that she had no recollection of any such interview) and that 'Mr Martin stated that the Keys had thought they saw a dark figured man running along a ridgeline carrying something on his shoulder.' So David Paulides says that Bill Martin said that Harold Key said there was a guy running with something on his shoulder. Only none of that appears in the NPS or FBI reports or crucially the newspaper reports. That means that Harold Key decided to come forward to try to help and either left out the most crucial part when talking to the press, or the press decided against publishing the most intriguing part of the story. Seems unlikely in the extreme. In addition to that, Bill Martin, who it seems to me from reviewing the FBI files and various newspapers, was of course desperate to get the FBI involved, didn't bother to mention to the newspapers, NPS or FBI that there was this evidence that would point toward a kidnapping and therefore probably get the FBI involved, exactly what he wanted? I don't buy it. There was a taped interview (see page 35 FBI documents) where Bill Martin 'speculated foul play ...but furnished no basis for this inference'. There's a letter in the NPS files (pg69) from Bill Martin to a Mr Hartsog complaining of not being informed of Mr Key's story before the press and before Mr Key showed the FBI and NPS where he was on that day. In it he states that he has spoken to Mr Key 'long distance several times. He complains that some descriptions of foliage and terrain, as reported by the newspaper, was incorrect. He did not complain that none of the NPS, FBI or newspapers made any mention of a person 'carrying something on his shoulder', which is again exactly the type of information that would likely have got him exactly what he was so desperate for. And those are his own written words. My take is that the man Harold Key saw was probably up to no good - moonshining as Harold Key thought, illegal ginseng harvesting like the later man who found bones, or something else. But it seems certain that it had nothing to do with Dennis Martin. That obviously doesn't mean that it's impossible that an off the gird mountain man didn't take Dennis because obviously nobody knows for certain. But it still seems infinitely more likely that a 6 year old got turned around in the forest, got lost and in the pouring rain and wind succumbed to hypothermia o, was attacked by an animal or fell down a crevice or into a stream. By all accounts 56 square miles had been searched by 6.23.1969. That equates to a circle with a radius of 4.22 miles. In 9 days. Meaning that the search assumed (or at least was not able to expand beyond) a possible distance of less than half a mile a day. As mentioned in a previous post, a conservative estimate of movement of 1mph would give a search area of over 450 square miles before the search had even really begun. Regarding the possibility of abduction by mountain men and Green Berets being deployed because of the threat, a few thoughts struck me while researching and thinking about this. If the Green Berets were deployed because of any such threat, it would require collusion between anyone at the NPS who had contributed to or seen the NPS chronology (so that it was faked), the FBI and anyone within it who knew about the threat of such mountain men and the military, including all those involved in deploying or searching with the Green Berets, with not one single person speaking out in over 50 years. Possible? Maybe. Probable? Would the authorities, knowing of the threat, allowed civilian volunteers to search the very areas that these mountain men were thought to predate on? In particular, if the authorities thought that a mountain man took a small child, would they allow the boy scouts to search remote places in the vicinity? Would the authorities send in the Green Berets to 'take out' a threat in an area that was being actively searched by hundreds if not thousands of people who might see or hear them doing exactly that? If they did suspect a Kari Swenson type situation, why hide it (in the official records that wouldn't be available to the public, not 'why wouldn't they announce it to the press at the time?')? My (very basic) look at that case doesn't suggest that they hid that case . If they turned out to be right they'd be heroes for finding the boy or giving the family closure (they could obviously come up with a 'they pulled their guns first' type story if necessary to cover for eliminating them if they found Dennis). If they thought so, but turned out wrong, who would care that they were extra precautious? If there are mountain men out there, off the grid, why would the authorities assume that they were murderous child snatchers? And wouldn't the search by thousands have found their dwellings? To me, although as I say, it isn't entirely impossible that Dennis was taken, any scenario other than him getting lost and falling foul to weather or animals, means making leaps in logic that aren't supported by any factual basis. It means saying 'everyone, the FBI, NPS, newspapers and military, is lying to you to persuade you that the very probably happened, whereas what actually happened was the very unlikely, for which I have no real proof'. Anyway, that's my 2 cents/pence, an eye opener for me only in the sense that I don't feel I have to look much further into the M411, given that the case that is often held as the flag bearer for the theory falls apart as soon as you start checking things for yourself.

I’d have to say that for me a body on a slab is necessary to consider somebody “knowing”. Photos, anecdotal evidence, thermals etc may be enough for belief. But a belief, however strongly held is not “knowing”. Knowing, to me includes a level of certainty that can only come with a body and its examination. If the gov’t or some part of it doesn’t have a body, then I don’t think it reasonable to expect anyone of any authority to stick their neck out further than the scientific community is willing to, and to actually acknowledge a BF. Anything short of a body can be explained with the possibility of misidentification, guy in a suit etc. and could lead to massive embarrassment for the gov’t if shown to be such. Of course, the opportunity to dismiss in that way probably suits the gov’t and its employees fine in the CYA or cover up scenarios you guys mentioned

Because they're anal and, by nature, insecure. If there is something going on in their area of authority, they want to (1) know what is going on, and (2) control it. That's just who and what they are. All true. Sasquatches really aren't much trouble for anybody, on post or not. You get the occasional person getting freaked out, but that's about it. They're the perfect creature to ignore. You're correct. I bolded the civilian part because it's important. I know you're an Army guy (career?). I was a Public Works (DEH, DFE. etc) guy, exterior. The Natural Resources Officer is a civilian guy (at least on Ft. Richardson). The civilians are the continuity, and the Command bring the agenda. I suspect that when the first report of a Sasquatch on Ft. Lewis that got to the Post Commander (not the Commanding General), "a re-write" was immediately ordered because he WAS NOT going to be "the guy" to bring this up to the major command........and this is just how it has gone forward. "People in government" know" but "government" (as a total organization) doesn't.......because they don't want to. (That said, yes, the Commanding General most likely got briefed behind closed doors by the Post Commander...........because that's how those guys roll..........)

But why would we (the Army) care? If reports are made by family members who were in in areas approved for recreational use, has there been any harm or threat of harm? If not, no military interest. Even if it were a known animal (bear), the Base Commander would only care if the animal was a threat to the community (foraging in populated areas or areas approved for recreational use) or a threat to military operations (destroying vehicles, outbuildings, interfering with training, etc.). Any number of known animals (deer, bunny rabbits, bear, elk if in that area) are probably killed by being in the wrong impact area during aerial gunnery (Lewis is a joint base w/the Air Force base next door now, + the helicopter brigade), artillery practice, tank gunnery, and crew served weapons (mortars, heavy machine guns, etc.) ranges. As to rifle ranges, the concern would likely start and stop with the question of whether people, whether military or civilian, were downrange. If a 'Squatch ambled across the M-16 range, they'd likely hold fire just because no one wants to take the chance that some clown is running around out there in a rented gorilla suit. When one gets to even a medium level of responsibility/authority in the military, one develops a good CYA gene. So if one were reviewing or approving a Report of Investigation concerning the destruction of a B-hut (plywood hut used to house Soldiers out in remote training areas) by blunt force, even if very large footprints were present in the mud, it would be written up as an apparent "act of nature" or vandalism by persons or persons unknown. No need to go out on a limb and opine on the possibility that a local 'Squatch didn't like the new temporary camp blocking access to a fishing point or something similar. All of that being said, it doesn't negate your statement that the Army (most likely the long-term civilian support staff) "knows" that it was a Bigfoot and not a bear, but that report is never get past the relevant commander's desk and is immediately going back for a re-write.

Bears are a lot smarter than folks think. But their bully attitudes and unsatiable appetite overwhelms their intelligence.

Fifty years of lawyers have changed everything. Now police reports are like classified information. I had some firearms stolen in California a few years ago, and after recovering yet another gun, one police department is refusing to give me the police report on the recovery incident......and this after paying for the report. They say that I "have to be a victim" in order to get the report.........as if getting my firearms stolen doesn't make me a "victim".

Bigfoot The topic of this thread is: what do you think of the US Forest Service's view on Sasquatch? The Forest Service's own opinion as of this year is as follows: "The US Forest Service's official stance on Bigfoot is that it's a creature of folklore and urban legend, though they have engaged in some playful acknowledgements of the creature." 1/4 of a billion acres is managed by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management and what is their main duty? Their duty is to insure that we have a "sustained yield" of lumber trees. What's that? If it takes a Douglas Fir trees 30 years to grow to a profitable crop then cut 1/30th of your land per year and replant each year. The Forest Service's job is to sustain wildlife. Could we have the Forest Service managers more out of touch with the reality of Sasquatch when Sasquatch reports pour in from all parts of the country along with mysterious disappearances of hikers. This is the topic so please refrain from derailing it or simply start your own topic. What is your viewpoint? If the Forest Service admitted that they know all about Sasquatch, would this close down most logging? Does sustained yield logging harm or help Sasquatch? Could the Forest bring in revenue for creating bigfoot parks and selling true life proven Bigfoot books written by their wildlife biologist. The national forest lands that are composed of 245 million acres of land mostly dedicated to commercial forest, grazing, grazing and wildlife preservation. As Norseman stated most of the lumber mills in his area have closed and the same here in Coos Bay, Oregon. Maybe someone can start a new topic on this dilemma. Forest Service incognito posters reply at will. Norseman can you please deal with chronic topic derailers?

In 1971, Stan Peters, the host of a British Columbia radio station show called Between Ourselves, interviewed Roger Patterson and discussed the P-G- film. The Sasquatch Archives, by Todd Prescott, once again provides this invaluable historic material. A transcript of the show is attached. Transcript 1971 Patterson Peters Interview.docx

I think we have at least one, maybe more, members that have been left in the lurch on BF research teams due to the lack of pre-planning and strategic implementation of a purported detailed plan. So yah, this is serious in your face, risk your life stuff, not ready for TV necessarily at least not in the Expedition Bigfoot sense of the word.

I don't deal with browns like a few of you guys do it's just blacks . I've probably had at least 100 encounters with them over the years that includes on my property . I never had to use spray because they they always just run off . Just one time I had an aggressive one on my property and it was the only time I feared it was going to attack my dogs . i grabbed the spray because I kept a can at the back door because honestly I don't want to kill it if I don't have to . After a bluff charge it finally took off with my dogs barking it at it but I was armed with my pistol just in case . Most times just me waving a broom and saying get out of here works