Leaderboard

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!🙏🏻

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.

I packed spray for my cook tent in remote hunts. Weight and bulk weren't concerns (I use a off-road rig to get out there), and the thought was that it might work on a young, curious bear, negating the need to kill it. The social jury here in Alaska is that it might work on such bears, but that, too, depends on the bear. One friend has a bee hive on his deck (insanity where he lives up Eagle River valley). Sure enough, he got a bear on his deck, but instead of a thousand pound brown bear, it was a small black bear. He stepped out and shooed it away. In a few minutes it came back. He stepped out with the shotgun and fired a round into the air. It ran off, and in a few minutes it came back. He loaded a bean bag round in it and shot the bear on the fanny. It takes off............and in a half hour, is back. Finally, he puts it down with a slug. He calls the Troopers to report a DLP, and a Trooper shows up, throws it into the back of his pickup, and drives off. Didn't make my friend skin it out or even fill out the DLP report. Would spray have worked better? Dunno. Maybe the bear would have been uncomfortable enough to learn something. Since it was a young, small bear, it might have educated him and saved his life for a decade or so. But, then, maybe not. But my friend had walls between him and the bear and daylight outside, which gave him plenty of safety to decide what to do. A bear in the night while you're wrapped up in a sleeping bag inside a tent? That's a whole different scenario. Like this guy: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=15821 Sorry. AFAIC, that guy wasted too much ammo (ie, >1 round) on warning shots. I'd have shot that sasquatch as sure as sin, then sat with my back against a rock wall until daylight and ready to shoot more of them. There is absolutely, positively no way I'm going out into the wilderness without at least two firearms: a rifle and a sidearm.

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

They hypothesis that we began burying our dead because it attracted predators. So it began as pragmatic and may have evolved into more of a ritual. Homo Naledi at Rising Star Cave just unceremoniously dumped their dead down a chute in the back of the cave. Whereas Neanderthals buried their dead with grave goods, ochre, flowers, etc. Interestingly enough? There are no stone tools associated with Homo Naledi. So I find it odd that they are included in the genus Homo. Which just shows that science has a very gray area defining what is included in our genus and what is not. So Sasquatch may be included in our genus or it may be excluded upon discovery. But I flat reject that they are apart of our species. Based on morphology alone. Great apes are exceptionally smart (excluding humans or Homo Sapiens), so our ancestors like Homo Erectus must of been terrifying. I would not want a pack of them hunting me in the forest with spears. (L-R) Australopithecus Afarensis, Homo Erectus, Homo Naledi

Bigfoot's needs and abilities are always stretched into whatever shape is needed to fit the narrative. <--- This almost always makes the narrative wrong. -Say Bigfoot is sick, suddenly there are more fellow Bigfeet out there bringing him food. -Say we can't find a body, Bigfoot bury their dead -Don't have sightings in decades of looking, Bigfoot has the ability to teleport. When Questions about Bigfoot arise, we need to look at the most likely scenario. Sure, shows like Finding Bigfoot seems to know what Bigfoot's favorite baseball team is, or his favorite color. Not bad considering they have never found Bigfoot let alone studied the actual issue in Queston. Yes, we can imagine various scenarios for Bigfoot. But if bigfoot is old or injured is just more likely to die or get eaten by another predator. Nothing extreme needs to explain it. If the food supply dries up for Bigfoot in one area, like most animals (or people) it would move on to an area where it needs are available. Billy the Kidd (of whomever) robbed banks because, "That is where the money is" Simplicity rules. Simplicity is the marketplace of nature. Brody: Now this guy, he... he keeps swimmin' around in a place where the feeding is good until the food supply is gone, right? Hooper: It's called "territoriality". It's just a theory that I happen to... agree with. It is easy to imagine elaborate scenarios to explain all things Bigfoot. When Bigfoot is not able to meet its needs, it dies. It will live so long as it can. We don't have to imagine much beyond that

We should be able to select more than one category. I visit the tar pit to see what humor Inc has dredged up.

That notion seems to lack imagination. Chasing down dinner is only one option. Ambush is another .. and doesn't take speed or endurance. Yet another is .. if you're somewhat nocturnal .. to wait for dinner to go to sleep, then sneak up on it. You should, if you want to get at the crux of the thing, think about all of the options, not just the stereotypical and obvious.

You are 100% correct. The NPS knew of his games over 13 years (not 8) in Kaflia Bay and allowed it to continue. So did the air taxi operator, who should have faced charges, AFAIC.

I'll add another layer of complexity to this. If Bigfoot are a real species, they could exist as a meta-population. As a meta-population they live in small, mostly isolated groups distributed over patches of forest areas. These groups are highly mobile, moving among these forest patches (across hundreds of miles) and occasionally running into other groups for breeding. In the case of Bigfoot, they may even exchange information in some way — for example, avoid that forest to the south because deer are sick or the water is bad or the BFRO is there or whatever. This isn't a new theory. I got the idea from a 2006 article on the Indian Gray Wolf, but the concept is frequently employed in ecology. Meta-population view of Bigfoot would explain: Sightings in non-remote places and roadsides Low inbreeding despite living in small groups Sightings in areas that may lack sufficient resources to survive over long periods Bigfoot sometimes reported taking farm animals (as they move between habitats) Overestimation of pop size, as the same animal is witnessed in widely different places near the same time Not seeing a Bigfoot when visiting a place where one or more were recently witnessed A meta-population of Bigfoot will likely be affected by the USDA removing 112 million acres of forests… which is equivalent to 175,000 sq miles, which is more than the size of California. Certainly this would not happen in one place, but it's likely that each forest management area will be reduced significantly enough to affect wildlife cover and food sources. I doubt this would be a thinning out of a forest, because that’s just not cost effective. It’ll be large swaths of biodiverse forest areas, and replanting will either not happen or will lack in plant diversity and become dead spots for wildlife. I’m not a hunter or camper but this is my main concern about this USDA initiative. Maybe someone with forest experience on BFF has a more optimistic assessment and can relieve my anxiety (or link me to a post in that other thread). Oh, and for any conspiracy theorists, perhaps the national forest system was created originally to support a meta-population of Bigfoot. An argument could be made, actually.

If I ever heal up? I think a snow bike would be an amazing research tool. We obviously cannot keep up on foot. But a snow trackway being followed on a snow bike is sure to produce results. You cannot go straight up the mountain like a sled, but you can finesse your way through almost anything. They are dropping into creek bottoms I would never consider with a sled. Throw a drone in a backpack? I don’t think Sasquatch escapes without being seen, filmed, whatever. These things go any where.

I have seen no convincing data to suggest they as a population go all the way to the coast here in the PNW, I do find good data to suggest they come down in elevation. We have had activity in December, January, February, March and April here at various locations in WA. The below video is a fair example ( I personally went to this location a few years ago based on a number of winter reports including this track find, I was able to get in touch with the investigator who was on the scene at the time. ), the tracks came from up above ( small knobs and benches on the slope side at about 2200ft on the high end ) on the west side of Shannon Lake and Baker Lake that are both loaded with miles and miles of thick/marshy timber patches that are tough to hunt and penetrate. They came from the timber uphill and both jumped off a rock ledge over 12 feet up to get down to the edge of that community, they crossed the road and went up onto someone's porch and got into a charcoal grill likely out of desperation looking for food ( fat drippings ? ). I don't remember at the moment where they retreated to but it was generally back into timber up slope. Here is a side angle photo of the terrain and direction the prints came from, everything below the blue line would all be winter habitat under my theory. This would not encompass the entire space they use but rather a section of the loop or cycle they likely run along. The Gold pin in the back end of the photo is separate encounter report from years later in late November. For full context and accuracy I will note that this trackway from what we could gather is legitimate but after the investigation, word got around the community and someone got back in touch and with another trackway soon after and that trackway was clearly hoaxed and fabricated, the prints looked nothing like the original tracks and showed no dexterity of the foot or toes, lacked any of the athleticism and started in stopped at highly questionable places. They seem to hold up in very difficult and hard to access locations and move in changing weather conditions from one low human activity area to another.

Well it certainly doesn’t bode well for the person in Illinois claiming a family of Sasquatch live on his 50 acre wood lot all year long. But I don’t think they are that populous. And also that their activities probably fall through the cracks and are attributed to something else. Lastly? If they are as smart as say an Orangutan? Orangutans pick locks, know sign language and can paddle a boat. Surely Sasquatch could be rather cunning. And they probably know that sustained contact with humans is unhealthy. So they stay nocturnal, take only what they need and keep moving.

This is what bothers me. First, FWIW, I made a chart for my own edification comparing biological facts about common animals. As I got all of this information off the web, I am certain that it is highly accurate & not subject to question. Somewhere, I found an estimate that Cro-Magnon, Neaderthals, and paleo-Indians required 4,800 calories per day and moose required 9,700 calories per day. The data I found for other large animals is just in poundage - 10-20 pounds of food per day for elk, 30 pounds per day for grizzly bears, 35 pounds for black bears(?), and 30-45 pounds for gorillas. What bothers me is that if Bigfoot is an omnivore, and if Bigfoot is as populous in the eastern US as some believe, why aren't they eating farmers out of house and home? Deer do it, groundhogs do it, foxes and coyotes prey on chickens, and such ... why wouldn't a bigfoot settle down near a nice big corn or potato or squash field and simply strip mine it for a day or two, then move on. That problem occurs with other biological animals, why doesn't it occur with Bigfoot?

The mountains and inland plateaus of BC get heavy accumulations of snow, but the coastal valleys only get a few snow days a year, usually followed by enough rain to melt it away quickly. Most sightings in BC, Wa. and Ak. occur in those coastal valleys. The only Sasquatch trackway I ever found was in late spring snow, crossing a pass over a ridge between two river valleys. I believe they stay below the snowline as much as possible, just as the majority of big game does.

My take on this is that they use very similar resources as black bears do, and we have thousands of those here in BC. The only real difference from bears' needs is having to forage in winter, which bears avoid by hibernating. Sasquatch is supposed to be pretty intelligent, so presumably plans ahead by stockpiling food for the winter needs, such as nuts and tubers, which store well.

I think that is a part of the picture, maybe all of it depending on locale. My own area is very seasonal .. main time, late summer, with a couple data points in mid July which could be outliers or could represent a second, smaller, pass-through. Behavior is pretty different up there when it is "busy" and I suspect there is something "special" going on. That area spends winter under 5-10 feet of snow with nothing to eat but snow and tree bark. They are elsewhere. A friend works on a ranch at the bottom of a deep valley in the other direction. Off and on snow but nothing seasonal .. and no downhill for food to migrate way towards. He says they have low level activity year around with occasional flurries of greater activity. His explanation is that there is a very small permanent population (seemingly akin to what you describe) which act as a "rear guard" making sure that that spot is safe for the traveling groups to temporarily occupy as they pass through. I've followed up on a number of reports there and out maybe 10 miles in each way. I can't say that the explanation is right or wrong but I can say it certainly seems to fit the observations.

I have not read all the posts up to this point but I think it is difficult to calculate pounds of material because the caloric density per gram can vary greatly. We also can't measure metabolic rate with Sasquatches necessarily as what you eat at what time can change the rate itself. In mammals the metabolic rate is effected by sun exposure, temperature, stress and sleep. Sasquatches do not seem to be pot-bellied ( fermentation gut adapted ) and seem to consume a lot of direct protein when compared to gorillas. I would say that they focus on nutrient dense food heavily in the fall and again in the spring, sources heavily would lean toward insects, small critters, nuts, tubers, salmon, ungulates, fruits, lichens, mushrooms and softer plant leaf material. Just a side note, I am very convinced that omegas are likely the most important need to the Sasquatch, big brains demand them and this would explain the continued historic references in native cultures that sasquatch can become fairly confrontational in situations such as pulling salmon nets and invading smoke houses. I have also noted that Sasquatch reports do often happen on a regular basis close to large tracts of masting nut trees. I suspect they target certain foods at certain times and try to conserve energy, the few long trackways on record seem to indicate very focused directional travel as if they have a point B in mind. If I had to guess with what little I know from reading, behavior and looking for feeding sites I would say someplace between 7500 to 1000 calories split between 30% fat, 30% carbs, and 40% protein averaged across the year cycle. That is my 2 cents and again I don't have a whole lot of confidence yet in my view here but it is where I am at, critics are welcome. It would be interesting to see what the metabolic consumption of the Chinese snub nosed monkey is throughout the year as a comparison as they have a wide range diet and endure some fairly cold conditions following the snowline.

Back to the original question. NorthWind and I once investigated a sighting location at a lake camp. A (presumably) old sasquatch with a limp was seen dumpster diving numerous times. I'd guess scavenging, eating roadkill and pets kept outside would be much easier than taking a human. I would bet they have an idea, that if one of us goes missing, multitudes more will show up searching, which bodes ill for them. And, yes, I do think they are that intelligent.

Here's one time:

Well, then, the answer is clearly NO, and that has absolutely nothing to do whith critters. I'm proof of that. My many brushes with death were primarily the elements, not aggressive animals. Partners in the field can save your life.............but they can also shoot you accidentally, which happened to me as well. In fact, my trips into the Bush went primarily solo in the early 2000's because my partners became too dangerous, needy, or just plain intolerable, and I felt safer without them............until I damned near killed myself a few times. It's just dangerous out there, and sasquatches are the very least of my worries (except Alaska has no snakes, so I don't worry about them at all, and I'm very thankful).

I'm reducing travel, even to Anchorage, to only-if-necessary. Last winter, just hours after arriving in Vegas, I was in a situation where I had my hand on my weapon and was ready to shoot. The thugs drove away. Another very strange and suspicious character loitered nearby during and after this confrontation. Later, miles away in a rural area and right after bedding down in the motorhome, "somebody" started jiggling the door knob (turned out to be a cow licking the door knob). In both cases, I can't imagine feeling better about the situations with the equivalent of a bean bag round. Times are tense. I kinda' like it here. I think I'll just stay home until Mrs. Huntster forces the issue.

Those are a lot of questions to unpack. Any wild animal that is desperately trying to survive old age or serious injury would likely be dangerous to humans as without weapons we are the most helpless critters in the forest/jungle. (Except for pandas, of course. Seriously, google panda videos and ask yourself how these animals actually survive in the wild....) In going through old newspapers, I've run across several articles where tigers, elephants, bears, and wolves were said to hunt/injure humans out of "hate." As Silverback and Huntster state, yes, a wild animal (Bigfoot) is likely to act like other wild animals. As to the questions about whether certain national parks are dangerous and what specific cases involve, there is no end of information in threads such as the missing 411 thread at As to what kind of firearm (not necessarily a pistol) to carry in the backwoods, several members of the Forums who have extensive backwoods experience have offered opinions at this thread. Between the two threads, that's over 50 pages of discussion on most of the substance asked about. As to the "should people go out and do dumb things?" question, No. They shouldn't. But that didn't stop some guy from camping out with grizzlies because "they were used to him" or a New Jersey hiker from going up in the Adirondacks in shorts and a t-shirt without adequate food, warm clothing, and other survival stuff, and they both died even without help from Bigfoot.

I grew up spending 2 weeks every summer in that area. There was a small lake we could walk to, about 15 minutes away. I've never in my life had the creeped out being watched feeling that I had at that lake, and it happened many times there. I also saw a black mass running up stream as we drove past a creek and it was running up stream as fast as we were driving, but I was 11 or 12 years old and just chalked it up to being a bear. Not so sure now. There is massive open country up there. Thanks for sharing.

Academics like @hvhart or @Darby Orcutt might have a reference. Henner Fahrenbach?

I recall another story, again I think from Peter Byrne (therefore, in a book, not a researchable internet source) where a sasquatch was hanging out near a camp for disabled kids somewhere in south-central BC. Eventually, a camp administrator, counselor, or employee (I can't remember which) sat still by a campfire one night as the sasquatch approached to within a few feet. The guy wasn't even armed. I have no doubt whatsoever that these creatures could respond well to body language, especially the females.

Yeah, I could be quite satisfied with close up, intimate video and documented narrative from a researcher like Goodall or Fossey who lived with a family of sasquatches, but yeah, humanity can't stop there. Better to just leave them alone, just like my Daddy said so long ago.............

Dr. Meldrum's obituary: https://www.wilksfuneralhomes.com/obituaries/don-meldrum

Absolutely. So called "mainstream" science and DOTGOV are never going to recognize or protect them until a PUBLICIZED actual body that is open to be studied by multiple primatologists, anatomists, forensic anthropologists, taxonomists, etc without interference from ANY government agency. Had I not seen one, I would be convinced by the extant evidence, that a living bipedal relict hominin was present in North America. 1. The P-G Film / Freeman Film 2. The footprint evidence 3. Credible eyewitness reports 4. Meldrum, Krantz, Steenburg, Dahinden, Bindernagel collectively and ALL their work 5. The collective Native American and First Nations cultural agreement that they have been a fact throughout their cultural memory Those are just the top five...but what I KNOW, and what I SAW, and what has convinced ME means absolutely diddly squat to 99.9999999999999999% of other people and what I believe, think, or have become convinced of shouldn't mean squat, and honestly I don't care because I am not personally trying to convince anyone else. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't like it to be proven to the mainstream in order for them to be officially and protected as a REALLY FREAKIN COOL North American Megafauna. I don't care if they are proven to be a great ape, a hominin, an adapted gorilla, or whatever. But to get there...we need honest, open, collegial, and courteous dialog. If you get to know me, you will learn I am absolutely the MOST non politically correct human being on the planet...but...I am "diplomatic" when it is appropriate. I always ask "Why?" or "What led you to that conclusion?" so I can gain insight to whether someone thinks, feels, believes, or is convinced about X Y Z. It's the cop turned lawyer in me. too many people conflate what they THINK with what they actually FEEL when they say "Well, I think...." they actually mean "Well, I feel..." so we need precision in our language and discussions amongst ourselves and a lack of Renee Dahinden emotion when evaluating evidence. Like I have said before. I am here to learn and discuss. Thanks for having me.

Todd Standing's latest photgraphic evidence.

Les Stroud has posted on his Kickstarter page for supporters of his new Bigfoot show, the following. "Hearts have been broken throughout the Sasquatch community with the loss of our dear friend Jeff Meldrum. I have the unfortunate, honour of having conducted the last ever interview with him and it was by chance, a compelling long form discussion on all things Sasquatch and so I will remain honoured to include it in our film. He went places he rarely goes with the direction of the chat. You will also get it from me in its full version as a separate interview. Jeff was a legend and a gentleman and a very generous and giving individual. He was a titan in the research world of relic hominids." So there's hope to see the man one more time in this pending feature. Les is fortunate for that opportunity and sounds like he's grateful and wants to do it justice.

I got out for a solo run on Sunday afternoon to the Bear Creek watershed on the east side of Harrison Lake. The weather was mild and broken clouds, until I reached the summit of the east ridge of the valley, when the wind picked up and brought in cold showers. Of course, I didn't take any pictures on the way up, so all I captured was cloudy views of the lake, 4600' below. The only signs of wildlife were some deer tracks, bear scat, a few squirrels, and 1 skunk, but it was refreshing to get out in the mountains after a few weeks in town.

Howdy all, digging the cooler weather.....here is several weeks of interesting impressions, the last one is another of the odd large tracks that I find, Dogman?.

You've completely missed the point. I'm not trying to be a jerk here but I'm flabbergasted by your extraordinary cranial density! Let me spell this out in smaller words. This is not about what one sick / injured bigfoot does. Best evidence is there is never just one, there's always a group. What I'm trying to draw your attention to, what you seem hell bent on overlooking, is that it is not about what the sick / injured individual does, it is about what the group .. call it family, clan, tribe, whatever .. does to take care of the sick, old, or injured individual. Think about burial. How many dead people dig the graves they're buried in? Any? Or do the survivors bury the dead? Why would bigfoot be any different? It is not about what the sick or old do to feed themselves, it is about the group providing sustenance to those who can't feed themselves. And so on and so on. Please go back and re-read what I said with the understanding that I'm not talking about what the incapacitated, elderly, sick, etc individual does but rather what the group does to provide care for that individual. Bears don't do that. Deer don't do that. Elephants apparently SLIGHTLY do that. Most critters will prey on their own weak. Humans .. including, we think, prehistoric ones .. absolutely do and did. Maybe that, more than technology, is what makes us human instead of just animals.

I take most fantastic old stories with a major grain of salt. Many of these legends were published in a small newspaper first, in order to sell more papers.

Might want to pin this one for a bit.

Modern Homo sapien cannibalism is a well studied phenomenon, even if those studies are often ignored and played down because it's such a taboo topic. And example would be cannibalism among Japanese soldiers in the Pacific Theater of WWII. The point here is that in modern cases of cannibalism, many feature spiritual motivations where the eater is trying to consume the spirit or power of the meal. The modern cases involving starvation tend to be situations like the one in your posted photo of the crashed airplane in South America or shipwrecked people floating for weeks at sea. We don't see communities doing this because we now have communications and social assistance programs, but that really has a relatively short, weak history. Even Alaska, a U.S. state for the past 65 years, has a history within living memory of community starvation and disease. While I believe sasquatches are a human species, I have a difficult time accepting that they've become spiritual or religious. Homo sapien bodies are meat. But I do believe that they understand that killing people bring more people looking for the missing. This is likely because it's a long pattern with indigenous men. I don't think sasquatches hunt men for that very reason.

In my old age, brittle and not so supple anymore, it's become a ever-more-difficult chore!

With the discovery Homo floresiensis twenty years ago, the logical connection to Orang Pendak is intriguing. Sightings continue to occur. If verification of Pendak were confirmed, it's difficult to imagine the ensuing uproar and pandemonium in the scientific community. Such a discovery could spur funding for further research into a possible N American great ape candidate.

My response to the OP is based on 40+ years of wandering the Idaho woods, hunting, and carrying various firearms in the military and law enforcement. I am also a competitive shooter with plenty of trophies, own more guns than most local police departments, and regularly carry in the woods while doing Bigfoot research. My most often carried defensive arm is a Sig Sauer P365 9mm subcompact that holds 12 rounds. I am very accurate with it and it goes with me nearly every trip into town. When I am hiking in the mountains, then I am carrying a 10mm pistol. I have several of them, but most often I have my Springfield Armory XDM Elite OSP 10mm 3.8"... When in the woods, rarely do I also have a long gun if just hiking due to the extra weight. But, if camping or in an area where I suspect larger predators, then I will bring along my woods carbine. It's a Henry Black rifle in .45 Colt loaded with 300gr hard cast bullets going 1300 fps. It will take care of any critter I may come across. As to the subject of defending against Bigfoot... Physically, I think both of my woods carry firearms are adequate in terms of penetrating an 800+lb mammal enough to stop a threat. But... I think the majority of encounters have such a strong psychological component to them that makes the stopping power of whatever firearm the witness is holding pretty much irrelevant. I had a good friend of mine text me a few weeks ago and jokingly ask me what firearm would be adequate against a BF. She then asked if a firearm would even be an effective deterrent against a BF. And then she admitted she had just had a terrifying encounter while out jogging in the Oregon woods with a BF and was scared to go back into the woods. She spoke of the infrasound and mind-reading experience she had that made her think that even is she had a firearm, she wouldn't have been able to use it. Accordingly, I don't carry a firearm as a defense against Bigfoot, but as a tool to use for survival and possible defense against predators.

Sad news.

You answered your own question. You’re stuck in some feedback loop. We had a home run video in 1967. >You admit it didn’t help one bit concerning science. >But now you think another one will magically change that. This line of reasoning is folly. That’s my statement. If this belief gives you a warm feeling. Great. I very much enjoy watching Bigfoot videos. Some I find very compelling. But I don’t know if I spent more time debating scofftics than you did or what? But I have no illusions about what it’s gonna take to move the needle. And video isn’t it.

Survivorman or whomever search for Sasquatch. We need to keep in mind they may actually FIND Sasquatch. This leads to another Q. Once something is out in the public domain it becomes nearly FREE as social media exist to help it spread like wildfire. When it isn't free it is still near impossible for the owner of the legal rights to get the Geni back in the bottle. (hello 1990s/2000s Napster) If Les or someone actually got a Home Run video of Bigfoot what should be the next step. Sell it as a TV special? Release it on the internet? Could you really cash in? It would seem cashing in would require some way to limit access or control the images. Say Les had a modern PGF event. The video is top notch. The trackway is fully documented. That would have a value beyond just the historic value. In 1967 America we know Roger Patterson only had a few venues to sell or cash in on Bigfoot. To see it the public had to buy it. To see it one TV you had no VCR to record it. Les may look for Bigfoot. What if he finds Bigfoot? Then what?

Death by Snu Snu

Oh, I can assure you that I (personally) am NOT going to have a "Sasquatches in the Mist" experience. My time in the mist for any reason is coming to a close. Yeah, that appears likely. So I'll just leave it alone. Heck, I can't even get Mrs. Huntster to go down to the PNW in winter anymore, and I'm certainly not going down there in summer, so I'll probably never even see one from the safety and comfort of a car. I remember a story from (I believe) Peter Byrne about a woman who lived in a house in a wooded area who had a pregnant sasquatch hanging around. She'd see it from the window on occasion. Then she saw it once with the baby, and didn't see it again. No pics makes it somewhat suspicious, but she might have had my attitude. This story was interesting. I wonder what this sasquatch wanted? http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=15821

Well, I disagree that leaving one's wife because of a difference of opinion on some topic is a good idea; that type of advice should be sought from an accredited specialist in Australia. I agree that it would be useful to let others know the general nature of the scam that caught you so that others can benefit from your mistake. My two cents otherwise: 1) Every day there's some rash person who wakes up and thinks that they're going to be the one to solve the Bigfoot/Yowie question in one week where others have failed doing so over decades. I know; I see that idiot in the mirror every morning. Pull back from the emotional attachment some. 2) The best advice is from Cliff Barackman (whose podcast Bigfoot 'n Beyond includes some episodes focused on the Yowie). Go in the woods with family and friends and enjoy yourself. If you don't see a Bigfoot/Yowie, you've still had a good day. If you do, that's just the cherry on top of the sundae.

Mental illness is off the charts these days. Covid caused a lot of folks to just break, mentally. Before, everyone in a small town knew who the town crazy person was. Now, they have access to the internet so the whole world knows who the crazy person is. Pretty sure the OP is well known to his neighbors as the crazy person.

I have 4 peach trees in my side yard that yield 100s of peaches. This year the peaches simply vanished a couple of weeks before they would have ripened. My daughter saw a 7 1/2 ft red in the same orchard a few winters ago. I never connected the dots because they were really not close to being ripe. Tal - Thanks for the reports. I love your BFRO followups.