Leaderboard

typical word play in the original post. not blaming the OP, but I am blaming his sources for fear mongering. opening 112M acres for logging doesn't mean that 112M acres will be logged. Today, we log anywhere from 2M to 10M acres a year in the US. The directive from President Trump is to increase logging by 25% domestically. That means 500K to 2.5M acres will be logged out of the 112M acres. We are talking about .45% to 2.23% of the 112M acres being logged. We have 823M acres of forest in the US. When you look at the amount of total forest impact, we are talking about to .06% to .30% of the forest being logged annually under this new rule. Is this really a sky is falling moment? NOT EVEN CLOSE. It is more whipped up hysteria from the true enemy of the people, the media.

Some from this year blacktail deer hunting More IMG_20251101_142002.heic IMG_20251101_203359.heic

Chest did not heal…again. Go see surgeon tomorrow. So I have taken myself off of light duty. And I went for a Wolf hunt in Idaho. Went over Gisborne ridge. Lots of fog down low, finally broke out up high. I saw lots of deer and elk. Whitetail and elk on the way out down low. Mule deer up high. No wolves. There was about 4 inches of snow up top in the shade.

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.

Thank you - although I was hoping to fly under the radar for a bit. Quite the big shoes to be following Tirademan's work in finding the old articles and Gigantor's work curating some of them.

Clear water river, Bull lake, Libby dam, Yaak river Great trip thus far!

Happy New Year, Bigfoot family! I hope every one gets a chance to answer their questions about Bigfoot/Sasquatch this year, whether it's with a sighting, physical evidence, or online research. I'm still very much enjoying the adventure, even as I turn 81 today. Cheers!

This thought about tracks and encountering other critters .. I still think the most likely to be dangerous is other humans. There are a lot of good people out there. It only takes one problem person, though sometimes those travel in packs. Watch out around campgrounds and trailheads, they present a predatory person with an ideal opportunity .. people with their guard down, possibly few witnesses, and a ready way to escape / fade into the crowd (traffic). Maintain situational awareness .. ear buds out, cell phones pocketed / put away, hands free, and keys handy. You want to be able to walk to your car, open the door, throw in your pack, climb in, and drive away with no searching for keys etc while you are at your maximum exposure to risk. Probably all will be cool, but it is better to be over prepared than under prepared.

I don't think sasquatchery is dying. SERIOUS, science-based sasquatchery is dying, pop-culture and wootard sasquatchery seems to be taking off .. unfortunately. It's become the equivalent of pink flamingos and lawn gnomes. It is very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff. It has driven most of the serious researchers .. the ones not dead yet .. underground to get away from the "noise." There is nothing this forum can do about it. The world has moved "forward" in a not very appealing direction.

Do you believe chimpanzees really do exist? If yes, did you believe that chimpanzees really existed before 2004? If yes again, that would impossible to believe if fossilized remains are the benchmark by which existence is measured. The first fossilized remains of a chimpanzee was not found until September 2004 by Dr. Nina Jablonski in the Rift Valley of Africa. Let's compare the two "creatures". It's estimated that ~250,000 chimpanzees live in Africa, their average lifespan is about 35 years, and they have been in existence ~5-8 million years. Let's be conservative, use 5 million years, and if these estimates are correct, let's do the math. (5,000,000yrs x 250,000 chimps)/40 yr lifespan= 31,250,000,000 billion chimps. So, ~31 billion chimpanzees have lived in Africa yet not one fossilized remain was found until late 2004. Moreover, we all suspect that sasquatches are far more rare than chimpanzees don't we? Armed with this information, in my opinion, that leaves us with the real question which is, "What clear-thinking person would ever expect fossilized remains of a sasquatch to be found?"

https://abcnews.go.com/International/jane-goodall-famed-primatologist-anthropologist-conservationist-dead-91/story?id=109868347 Back doc brought this to my attention. Rest in peace Jane!🙏🏻

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.

Hey everyone! First time back here in a long while. As someone who used to be a moderator and admin years ago (when HRPuffnstuff was the Chief), it certainly seems much slower on the forums these days, myself included. I don't believe it's from lack of interest, I think it's mostly because as mentioned, there's a ton of other places discussing the same topic. Facebook was a substantial "thing" when I joined the forums in 2016, but it was not even close to being the behemoth it is today. In my opinion the term "bottom feeders" used above is an apt description. There's little moderation, tons of smart aleck trolls, and skeptics and non believers are pretty vicious to anyone claiming anything. It's always been my belief that these forums offered more serious discussion (believer or non), more personal interaction between members, many of whom form friendships that transcend their interactions here. It probably wouldn't hurt if some of the members here made posts in some of the FB groups and pages talking up how great these forums are, and the immense amount of content they contain. It's good to be back. I look forward to catching up with some names I see are still active here, and some newer members I don't know much at all.

The federal forests around me need thinning badly. Fires get worse every year. I welcome this news.

Out again today up the Pack River. Cut deer and moose tracks. Hiked 2 miles into a clear cut. Did a few call sets. Nothing. The clouds rolled in early after noon. Pea soup. On the way out but still on National Forest I come around the corner and what appears to be a Wolf standing on the road. I grab the binos and look at it and it finally turns and it has a harness on.🙄 I never saw the owner. The chick in Montana that shows up to the bar with a skinned Husky was playing in my head.🤣 I got back on the main FS road and continued up river until I hit a mudslide that wiped the road out. A 4 wheeler with tracks had cut a trail out and had made it through. I had to turn around. But it did remind me to stop at the DMV in Idaho and buy my 2026 sticker for my Yamaha Grizzly on tracks. It’s getting to the point that I need to be taking it to reach the good spots. My birthday gift of the Ray Ban smart glasses is working out well. I can just take a picture with a button on the frame instead of digging for my cell phone. And I think the picture quality looks good. What do you guys think?

Looks like 37 members voted. Top 5 1) Latest Bigfoot News 2) Researcher Discussions 3) Researcher Media 4) PGF Discussion 5) Historical Archive Library If you combine 2 and 3? You can see that researchers are truly our most valuable resource on this forum! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Thank you to all of our “boots on the ground” members who share their findings, pictures, audio, etc! I also want to thank Trogluddite for expanding the Historical Archive! 👍

Conditions that preserve fossils are extremely rare. It is commonly agreed by professional and academic biologists that less than 1% of the species which have ever lived have left fossils that we have found. Never mind individuals, we're talking about 99% of all species did not leave fossils for us to discover. Contemplate that. Contemplate the implications. Many of those fossils we do have which were land-based lived in flash flood country, they did not live in forests. Flash floods occur in dry climates with infrequent but catastrophic rainfall and cover dead animals then dry them, maybe for decades, in soil that absorbs the deal animal's moisture when the flood ends. Forests have regular rainfall so that fallen dead things don't dry adequately for preservation and have acidic soils that dissolve bones rather than preserving them. The main exception would be in volcanic ash beds .. we can see that in the John Day / Clarno fossil beds in eastern Oregon for instance. So while we might find recent bigfoot remains, given what we know about where bigfoot reports come from, few are in places that are likely to create fossils to discover later. Edit to add .. so if I were looking for fossils, I'd look in the ash beds near the Cascade volcanoes or in the dry washes on the east slope of the Cascades, maybe east slope of the Rockies. I think most other places in the continental US get too much rainfall for preservation needed to produce fossils. MIB

For anyone interested in this idea of a Bigfoot metapopulation, I go deeper into the subject on Substack this week. I think this idea offers an answer to a few Bigfoot mysteries and debunker arguments. And, it may explain differences in Bigfoot morphology reported in different parts of North America (e.g., PNW vs east Texas region). https://thesocialbigfoot.substack.com/p/bigfoot-are-meta

I would suggest a home range model with a nomadic cycle of following resources completely every 2 to 3 weeks ( obviously deviating enough down from lasting snow ) along box-canyons and or benches that follow streams and smaller river pathways. This area would be chosen based on the ability to remain hidden, thermoregulation and browsing/hunting along the way. My data indicates constant movement cycle within a territory, they seem to hang in an area for not much longer than 3 or 4 days ( there have been certain months in certain areas that are exception ) and they basically travel for a day to another resource area along a known routine and hang out for a few days and so on, eventually they follow this general path all the way back around to the starting line and repeat but constantly flexing the path ( within 1 or 2 miles of bandwidth outside of direction of intended travel ) according to need or human activity. This model prevents patterning by prey and humans, prevents over browsing and resource devastation, explains the indifference and frequency of road crossing reports and provides a schedule that allows for gauging future resources to avoid scarcity periods. I plan on doing a thread thoroughly explaining it all in-depth in the near future.

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.

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

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.

Todd Standing =Red Flag.

After reading through this thread, it strikes me that if sasquatch were "but a mere wood ape" and the government knew of it, as seems to be the concensus, it would have been acknowledged long ago. There would be no big deal if there was a large American forest gorilla species. Which then compels one to reason there must be considerably more to it. The foot morphology certainly seems to point to a far more human creature, as does the bipedal walking, and apparently opposable thumbs. And then there's its apparent cognitive abilities, as seen in their knack for stealth and existing on the periphery of our towns and cities. Then there's the evidence of language development, another indicator of a higher sentience. And that's not even touching on the elements of woo... But in light of the silence, its difficult to presume just how the feds view these creatures, but I'd hazard the guess that they know a good deal more about them than most of us do.....

I originally found the mask used in Sasquatch Ontario's 'The Face of Nef' photo, but now it looks like the exact same mask and photo were reused in a separate encounter. Sasquatch Ontario, ran by Mike Paterson, released two YouTube videos consecutively in May of 2023 claiming to show photos of an alleged Sasquatch named 'Nef'. • Video #1: 'Sasquatch Selfie', published May 6, 2023, featured a photo 'Nef' took of himself. The video explains that Mike was sitting at a table with Dwayne and showing him some images, when he noticed that one of them was actually a partial face shot of 'Nef' (photo #1). He also specified that this picture was taken on April 1, 2023. • Video #2: 'The Face of Nef', published May 27, 2023, featured a photo Dwayne took of 'Nef'. The video explains that Dwayne stepped outside, heard laughter, and photographed two photos of 'Nef' blindly (photo #2). He specified that these pictures were taken on December 27, 2019 and were sat on for a while. The videos 'Sasquatch Selfie' and 'The Face of Nef' are described by Mike as two entirely separate incidents. However, upon comparing the images in these two videos, I believe: • Both photos use the same mask, and • They may actually be the exact same photo, just cropped or resized. The biggest things that I've noticed are: • The two light reflection dots in the eyes are in the exact same spots. • The nose shape and angle are identical. • The eyes, brow ridge, and facial tilt match perfectly. • There’s no variation between the two images. Both photos share the exact same features, right down to the angle the face is at. There's virtually no difference. I've provided a comparison of the two photos (photo #3) as well as a gif comparison (photo #4) so you can see for yourselves. You may notice that the eye reflections are slightly larger in the 'Sasquatch Selfie' photo. I believe this is due to 'The Face of Nef' photo being cropped, as bright pixels like light reflections can appear bigger and blurrier when you resize a photo. Some might argue that similar lighting or facial features are to be expected, as it's alleged to be the same subject featured in both photos. However, that doesn’t explain the identical eye reflections, exact nose angle, and exact matching of the facial structure, which wouldn’t occur naturally across two separate incidents. Given the similarities, if 'The Face of Nef' photos are proven to be hoaxed, then by association, the 'Sasquatch Selfie' photo may be as well. If you have any questions, please let me know.

I submitted a paper to RHI last November, but it's still in peer review. In the meantime, here is a YouTube video of my presentation at the Kiamichi Mountains Bigfoot Conference in May: The first few slides, omitted here, were about DNA and the microphone was not on and so were not recorded. Nothing new in them that you probably don't already know.

Agree. Agree BUT .. Agree BUT !!!! ... I think the quality and detail of information on the non-forum platforms is somewhat lacking. Or maybe you could say the signal to noise ratio is lower. So while forums may be perceived as old fogey stuff they're still where to go for better quality. The others are fine if you're primarily there for entertainment but if you are trying to do research .. nah.

I was a pretty prolific member for a while. I still check in semi-regularly, but don’t feel the desire to post much anymore. For me, it’s the overwhelming negativity on a topic that is supposed to be enjoyable. The overall Bigfoot community is growing larger every day, but it’s also becoming more fragmented every day as well. Even this thread, which is about why is the forum dying, is filled with complaints about pretty much everything under the Sasquatch sun. TV shows, YouTube, rehashed topics, etc. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes, but there is a constant complaining that permeates the Bigfoot community that often turns into outright hostility when what are relatively minor differences arise. People who believe or have an interest in Bigfoot should have a great deal in common, but instead those minor differences of opinion cause a lot of discord. Don’t like Mountain Monsters or Expedition Bigfoot? Don’t watch it. However, shows like that plant a seed of interest in a new generation, insuring that there is a fresh crop of enthusiasts who will hopefully carry on the search. TV executives don’t really make shows geared towards real life Bigfoot researchers. Maybe just be glad that the subject has enough mainstream acceptance to make its way onto television in any form? Tired of a topic that (for you) has been beaten to death? Scroll past it. Are you a flesh and blood proponent irritated by the Woo? Are you a Woo supporter who hates the Apers? Well, at the end of the day you both have more on common with one another than you would have with a skeptic. Not to mention that we are dealing with almost zero proven facts about the phenomenon, so you both have a good chance at being somewhat correct. A lot of the members here want a more active forum, with more active participants. You can’t have that with multiple filters put into place. Anyway, I would like to see the forum become more active again. But, to do that you need new members who stick around. They need to enjoy the place to do that. Maybe start there?

I just looked back at all of the posts I made this year. There are nearly zero posts in any actual bigfoot discussion. I do read most of the threads, but rarely react. It may seem as though I've lost interest, but I haven't. I just don't participate in the discussions. About 90% of my posts are about BFRO or John Green incidents. 9% are stupid memes in the tar pit, and maybe 1 % are a reply to any actual discussion. My thing here is the SSR. I have a bunch of BFRO reports to classify, but I have very little time in Spring and Summer, so they remain unclassified. It's a Winter project for me... I did just share some new audio though. I recorded some interesting sounds in Oklahoma. As far as Noobs go... I find that it's best to wait it out when a new member comes along that really tries to engage in discussion. Too often they showed up just to be a disruptor.

One of the things about many noobs that frustrates me is they don't do their research before posting, they throw stuff up that has been rehashed countless times as if it has to be new and startling to others merely because it is new and startling to them. There's a significant component of narcissism and entitlement there. I'm old, tired, and short-fused when it comes to that level of disrespect .. and it may be that a lot of long established members are in the same boat choosing to disengage rather than react to it.

I tried guys, even had researcher of the year contests with $3000 prizes, advertised on google, reprinted research papers with permission, etc and it kinda of worked. But new members wouldn't stick around, they showed up for the buzz and then leave. I agree that the problem is a lack of new discoveries. Even hoaxes would get the forum busy, remember Biscardi?

I have been watching forums die a slow death for years. I.e. The old jet boating forum Mean chicken is gone. Along with it all of its extensive knowledge. The younger crowd doesn’t do forums for some reason. They stick with social media. And then cry about censorship, etc. I just don’t get it. I find forums like these much easier to navigate and interact with.

Despite our differences of opinion, this certainly feels like a place I will be for a long time. Thanks for making it feel welcoming!

Sure. It used to be if you saw a bigfoot sticker on a car, you could pretty well bet it was either another researcher or someone with deep interest, maybe personal experience. Today bigfoot is the equivalent of a pink flamingo on someone's lawn. There is no stopping cultural absurdity. Stuff is not in your control or mine. All we can do is manage ourselves.

I like this video, it's presented without drama and essentially a recitation of facts and opinion using historic artifacts, frescos, paintings, documents, to demonstrate that the wild man existed in the past, and has always existed, was accepted the same way lions and bears were. Good video.

That is an huge revelation to me as well. They were all, surely, tough as nails to begin with.. just as surely as the trip to the mine and cabin were hard work, the work in the mine was even harder work. The walk to the water was tough and at night? Tough as nails or not, forget it. Whatever happened there, they weren't going anywhere in the dark either way.

From a pure story telling perspective? I like Bob Gymlan. His real name is Bryan Gagne, stage name of Bob Gymlan. The illustrations are what does it for me. Compelling stories well told. Not strictly BF related, of course, but entertaining nonetheless. Some of the others will just relay any zany story that some troll or prankster sends in, zero vetting, which turns me off immediately to the rest of their content. Other than that, there's a hundred small channels with no subscribers who go out and film in the woods, same or not they put time in. Western New York Bigfoot is an example. Just a guy going into the woods.

My view is there are not many of these things out there ( less in your area, maybe 3 from border to Newport ) and I am convinced they come down right to a place they find " tolerable " and skirt along river corridors just above normal human access or use. The cycle they likely follow in the colder climates must be large and in thick timber so the ice plate deposits from melt and refreezing cover a lot of their recognizable prints and destroy details that give it away. I believe Grassman58 on youtube has found a few suggestive trackways over the years. Being close to edge habitat for deer, elk and remote valleys with running waterways would be priority. My only guess would be they reduce activity massively, perhaps have some caches and operate at on deficit until snow breaks up. I would not be surprised to find out one day they can reduce their metabolic rate in the colder months, some form of torpor but not true hibernation. I have heard some far north native tribes are reported to have this ability to a degree. I could see them taking advantage of shafts and shallow cave systems but I want to know why we don't find preserved tracks in the cave floor if that is the case. There are a variety of snow trackways from nearby your area and they tend to occur around periods of bad weather, one I remember was about a guy found a set of prints that crossed his property near the Priest River area and they led up hill to a mangled deer completely disemboweled and meat pulled from the body, he noted bloody butt marks, hand prints and knee prints in the snow around the carcass. This was back around 2008 or something, the tracks went up hill into timber through some nasty thick regrowth and the guys could not follow as the snow was bucketing down and night was falling. I met the guy and heard his story first hand at the Klondike Tavern in Laclede, WA just before he moved to Alaska ( Thorn Bay ). I heard a similar story about someone finding snow prints up Dry Canyon Rd in 2014, tracks crossed the road and went up hill toward the north to south ledge above the river, I tried to get in touch with the witness but he was native and did not want people to think he was crazy so he would not get in touch with me. I also got a report of a snow trackway behind Freeman Lake in February of 2017, guys brother told me a little about it but said that he would not talk to anyone as he was a totally recluse. The other factor is that people out in these more harsh environments and remote properties are generally tight lipped and don't like to share. They know stuff and you don't and they want to keep it that way. To just touch on the coast for a second, I have loads of data here that seems to indicate they are still moving through their core habitats and visit throughout the year, as noted in another thread. They seem to drop below the holding snowline and hang out in wet thick crap on the edge of big timbered slopes that border a variety of habitat types and resources, they then cycle through a kind of loop along preferred paths over the course of a couple weeks and return to the starting point. Outside of the coastal states, your guess is as good as mine honestly but we still get the occasional snow trackway in the dead of winter so my question would be, how is it happening if they go coastal? This where I am with the question and that is what I have come across in my 4 years investigating the Selkirk area and it did not add up to much. I 100% agree, if you can solve the winter strategy in snow holding areas then you can really move the ball forward.

A narrative that is not factually true is often made up for entertainment purposes.

Interested in mysteries, monsters and cryptids. I saw the PGF in the local cinema in 1967. In recent years studied the available research progress. Wrote it off as fantasy. Then with more available evidence and having family members say they have observed the creatures. I am open to the creatures existence or at the least extinct creatures. Some Footprints seem to be unexplainable as fraud. The Patterson film subject appears virtually impossible to be a mime in a suit.

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

Interest in many things comes in waves, ebbs and flows. Is it possible your time of joining the forum coincided with one of the peaks? I know this to be true of my own. Thinking of a parallel .. no athlete runs 4 minute miles 7 days a week. It is true of our interest here. I think the period we are in now with less interest, less bright shiny things to draw our attention, is more representative of bigfootery over the long haul. There is also a change of medium when it comes to information exchange. There are TONS of small bigfoot groups on facebook. Lot of people trying to monetize their interest which I think distracts from the larger communities like this one. There is not much to do but get out there and do your own thing in the woods.

The BFRO refers to this as the "Northwest 911 Call" and says the recording is available on Ron Morehead's bigfoot recordings CD. (https://www.bfro.net/avevid/sierrasounds/911.asp) On Morehead's website the description of the recording is confusing at best. The site says, "On Track 10, Ron placed an emergency 911 call that is completely unrelated to the story but nevertheless it provides the listener with a live eyewitness account of an actual sighting." ... which sounds like Ron heard the story and then faked a 911 call to dramatize it?? This is news to me. If I'm reading this right, that voice we hear on the 911 call is Ron Morehead pretending to be the witness he and Peter Byrne interviewed. It's a sketchy thing to do, in my opinion. Judge for yourself: https://ronmorehead.com/about-bigfoot-recordings/ Someone please correct me if this is inaccurate. Gotta say, though, the 911 caller sounds similar to Morehead.

I hear what is likely a Hairy or Downy Woodpecker foraging. Light pecks at tree bark to uncover insects.

We argue and fuss, but thank you all for making the BFF a fun vibrant place to hang out! Happy Easter to all! 🐰🐇🐣

After days of heavy rain, we finally got a nice sunny weekend, so my son Steve and I headed out for the high country. I wanted to go to a waterfall that I'd never seen before, about 4 hours from home. We set off at 11am after fueling up the Hummer and drove about 2 hours up the Fraser Canyon to Boston Bar, where we turned off Hwy 1 onto the Nahatlatch River FSR, and continued for another40 km to Grizzly Falls. The road had been severely washed out in our 2021 "atmospheric river" floods and landslides, but has since been made passable, though still a bit sketchy in places. Along the way we passed through a very large stretch of the valley that was burned out 2 years ago, but eventually got past that into the forest again, with nice views of the Nahatlatch River and lake, finally reaching the falls we were seeking. The sight and the sound made the bouncing on the potholed road worth while, and we had lunch in the cool windblown spray from the cascade. We saw no large animals along the 80 km run up and down the logging road, but did see some grouse and a beautiful red tailed hawk in flight right beside us for about 30 seconds.

The noise level, the lights, and using a walkie-talkie with a loud volume level are all ridiculous, in my opinion. I wish they spent a few minutes magnifying the dark object walking away which they want us to believe is a saquatch. I'd also like to see the magnified image played in super-slow motion. If the video has the goods, wouldn't it seem they would announce it to the world? In the alternative, if the video is even a maybe, I am surprised they didn't spend more time with it. When I'm in the woods, I use a 4Seven Quark mini flashlight in the 3-lumen mode. Just enough to barely see things you need to get your hands on. It keeps the light so low it wouldn't likely be detected at a distance. Why not use whispers rather than normal talk volume?

There are lots of reports and recordings of sounds of great volume from some unknown creature with similarity over time and across places. Many times witnesses have reported hearing anomalous vocalizations. I look at the evidence. Introduction: The Principles of Common Sense Reasoning and Abduction Scientific and rational inquiry rely on multiple forms of reasoning, including deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning. Of these, abduction, first articulated systematically by Charles Sanders Peirce, is the method of inferring to the best explanation based on available evidence. It is not about certainty, but rather plausibility, allowing for tentative conclusions based on patterns of consistency and the absence of disconfirming evidence. The Key Elements of Abductive Reasoning in Investigating Sasquatch Vocalizations Collecting and examining evidence for plausibility – Looking at available data and determining its reliability. Considering multiple "lines" or "threads" of evidence – Not relying on a single data point but seeing how different forms of evidence interrelate. Building a plausible hypothesis based on the evidence – Identifying the most reasonable explanation given the cumulative data. Examining competing hypotheses – Considering alternative explanations and determining if they better explain the data. Assessing where and how evidence supports a hypothesis – Identifying points of consistency that reinforce the working theory. Assessing where and how evidence contradicts a hypothesis – Seeking disconfirming data that may require modifying or rejecting a hypothesis. Resolving contradictions – Not just deductive contradictions, but inconsistencies in the coherence of competing explanations. Detecting formal and informal problems in reasoning – Identifying logical fallacies used in arguments both for and against the hypothesis. Following the lines of evidence to plausible, tentative conclusions – Recognizing that strong conclusions require multiple converging lines of support. These principles, though abstract, find direct application in real-world cases, including the study of unidentified vocalizations attributed to Sasquatch. Applying Abductive Reasoning: The Case of Sasquatch Vocalizations For decades, vocalizations attributed to Sasquatch have been recorded and reported. With the advent of cell phones and small digital recorders, the frequency and quality of recorded vocalizations have increased. Witnesses consistently describe the sounds as: Immense in volume, often shaking their bodies. Different from known animal calls. Occurring in remote areas, sometimes without human presence. Occasionally accompanied by other sounds, such as footsteps, tree knocks, or breaking branches. The question becomes: What best explains these sounds? There are three competing hypotheses: Fraudulent/Hoax Hypothesis – All reports and recordings are fabrications. Known Animal Hypothesis – The sounds come from a species already identified. Unknown Creature Hypothesis – The sounds originate from an unidentified biological source, possibly a large primate. Each hypothesis must be tested against the available evidence to determine which one provides the most reasonable and coherent explanation. 1. The Structure of the Cumulative Argument A cumulative argument is based on multiple, independent lines of evidence, which together strengthen the case for a given hypothesis. Unlike deductive arguments, which require absolute proof, cumulative arguments gain credibility through consistency, coherence, and absence of disconfirming evidence. The foundational premise is simple: Recordings of Sasquatch vocalizations exist. They are independently attested. They have undergone analysis showing unique, unexplained patterns. From this baseline, multiple independent lines of evidence add support. 1.1. Sonogram Analysis: Consistency Across Time and Distance Thinker Thunker, a researcher, compared recordings 2,300 miles apart and 50 years apart. The sonographic features are identical and do not match known human or animal vocal patterns. If genuine, this suggests a geographically widespread, persistent sound source. 1.2. Linguistic Evidence: "Samurai Chatter" R. Scott Nelson, a cryptologic linguist, studied Sasquatch vocalizations (notably Ron Moorhead’s Sierra Sounds). His analysis indicates: Some recordings exhibit linguistic properties, including syntax and morphology. The patterns are structured and non-random, unlike typical animal calls. These patterns suggest a potential unknown form of communication. If valid, this places Sasquatch vocalizations among a handful of species (humans, dolphins, some apes) capable of complex vocal exchange. 1.3. Reports of Multiple Communicating Entities Witnesses frequently report hearing multiple creatures interacting vocally. Recordings capture call-and-response exchanges. If these sounds are communicative, they indicate intentional vocal production. 1.4. The Sounds Do Not Match Any Known Animal Comparative studies against wolves, foxes, elk, bears, and primates have found no match. Some vocalizations include frequency ranges, duration, and volume beyond known species. If the sounds do not match an existing animal, then what is producing them? 1.5. The Volume and Physical Impact of the Sounds Witnesses consistently describe immense volume. Some sounds reportedly vibrate the human body, suggesting a massive lung capacity. This is physically beyond human capability, making hoaxing improbable. 1.6. Consistency Across Reports and Recordings Patterns of vocalization are consistent across: Time (decades apart) Geography (widespread locations) Witnesses (independent observers) This suggests the same biological source rather than random anomalies. 2. Evaluating the Competing Hypotheses 2.1. Fraudulent/Hoax Hypothesis Some hoaxes exist, but dismissing all vocalizations as hoaxes requires: A massive, long-term, coordinated deception. The ability to fake sonograms across decades. The ability to mimic structured linguistic elements. This stretches plausibility past reason. 2.2. Known Animal Hypothesis No known species consistently matches the recordings. No biologist has identified a definitive source. The sounds persist despite extensive wildlife research. If a known animal produced these calls, we should have identified it by now. 2.3. Unknown Creature Hypothesis The hypothesis that an unidentified primate is responsible is not inherently implausible. Uncharted regions exist, and new species continue to be discovered. This hypothesis best accounts for the data without introducing contradictions. 3. Examining Skeptical Counterarguments and Logical Fallacies 3.1. "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence" The claim that all Sasquatch vocalizations are hoaxes is also extraordinary and requires proof. The recordings exist and are available for analysis. This argument shifts the burden of proof unfairly. 3.2. "Witnesses Are Unreliable" Human perception is fallible, but: Independent, consistent reports across time and geography indicate a real phenomenon. Dismissing all witness testimony is a sweeping generalization fallacy. 3.3. "Hoaxes Explain Everything" This assumes hoaxes without evidence. It fails to explain: Sonographic consistency. Linguistic structure. Immense vocal volume. 3.4. "It’s Just Another Animal" This fails to identify a species matching the sounds. If the sounds belonged to a known species, biologists should have recognized them by now. 4. Conclusions: The Need for Further Investigation The cumulative argument shows that: Skeptical dismissals often rely on flawed reasoning. The hoax hypothesis lacks credibility. The unknown species hypothesis best accounts for the data. Without direct counter-evidence, outright rejection of the Sasquatch vocalization hypothesis is unscientific. The most reasonable position is continued investigation based on the best available evidence. Videos 1 - Thinker Thunker: Ron Morehead's Legendary “Sierra Sounds Bigfoot Recordings” Has Finally Met Its Match Analysis of sonographic similarities between recordings 2,300 miles apart and 40 years apart, suggesting a persistent, widespread biological source. Watch on YouTube 2 - Sasquatch Sierra Sounds by Ron Morehead & Al Berry (HD) The original 1970s recordings from the Sierra Nevada mountains, regarded as some of the most compelling Sasquatch vocalizations ever captured. Watch on YouTube 3 - Bigfoot Language: Radical Translation of the Berry-Morehead Tapes - Scott Nelson A cryptologic linguist’s analysis of the Sierra Sounds, concluding that the vocalizations exhibit linguistic properties consistent with structured communication. Watch on YouTube 4 - The Best Bigfoot Sounds Recorded in Washington State | Salish Sasquatch A compilation of nearly 50 years of Sasquatch vocal recordings from Washington State, featuring some of the most compelling audio evidence to date. Watch on YouTube These videos provide direct audio evidence supporting the cumulative argument regarding Sasquatch vocalizations, analyzed through sonograms, linguistic structure, and geographic distribution.