Opinions on Sasquatches and Game cams

[DarkEyes]

What are people’s thoughts about the allegations that Sasquatches “avoid” or are “deterred” by game cameras? I’m not 100% sure on what to think, I know there are little “photos” of them from game cams. Not sure if it’s just not having luck and capturing a photo of them or if they are able to detect or see the IR light. What do you think? What are your experiences?

[Backdoc]

I don’t think Bigfoot would have any clue about trail cams.   Why would it?
 

if Bigfoot exists the reason they are not captured on trail cams is because they could be assumed extinct or near extinct.  
 

 

 

[norseman]

2 hours ago, DarkEyes said:

What are people’s thoughts about the allegations that Sasquatches “avoid” or are “deterred” by game cameras? I’m not 100% sure on what to think, I know there are little “photos” of them from game cams. Not sure if it’s just not having luck and capturing a photo of them or if they are able to detect or see the IR light. What do you think? What are your experiences?

Bigfoot and other anomalous animals are caught on game cameras. And they get the same reception as any other Bigfoot photos or videos. Ridicule.

 

We were just recently arguing over the Jacobs photo. Here a couple off the top of my head.

 

If Bigfoot is something more than an animal? And is very aware of its surroundings? It could elude people and their toys fairly easily, but not always, no one is perfect. Also if they are exceedingly rare? There may not be any Bigfoot to take a picture of.

 

But sometimes something strange is detected and discounted.

 

 

 

[Catmandoo]

The emissions of trail cameras have been rehashed many times. Use the search function and or Google 'trail cameras can be seen and heard'. Enjoy the reading, it will take time.

[wiiawiwb]

Yes, a lot of discussions out there about this.  There are trailcam pictures/videos out there--one such photo is from Vermont (I believe) and purportedly shows a sasquatch with a baby on its back.

[Twist]

9 hours ago, Backdoc said:

I don’t think Bigfoot would have any clue about trail cams.   Why would it?
 

if Bigfoot exists the reason they are not captured on trail cams is because they could be assumed extinct or near extinct.  
 

 

 

I would agree on both points.

 

Why would it avoid trail cams if it’s ok coming up to people’s houses to slap walls, steal meat out of freezers, or invade camps while people sleep?    If we are to take all stories at face value then it’s not afraid of man or man made objects.  Note, I do not take stories at face value.   
 

I’d venture it’s due to extremely low population.    Needle in the Ol’ haystack.   

[Huntster]

10 hours ago, Backdoc said:

I don’t think Bigfoot would have any clue about trail cams.........

 

I disagree profoundly. At the very least sasquatches would react to game cams just like all other large mammals, and that would span the spectrum. I've got moose pics of them at bear bait sites (itself an example of extreme curiosity) with their noses at the lens. Bears regularly inspect my cams. Squirrels do it. Birds do it. I've got cam pics of people holding travel cups up to the lower part if their face to disguise their identity while examining my cam.

 

On the other hand, I've got cam pics at my bait sites of every species of local fauna you can imagine (including a wolverine) just doing their thing ignoring the camera.

 

1 hour ago, Twist said:

.........Why would it avoid trail cams if it’s ok coming up to people’s houses to slap walls, steal meat out of freezers, or invade camps while people sleep?    If we are to take all stories at face value then it’s not afraid of man or man made objects.........

 

Agreed.

 

Quote

.........I’d venture it’s due to extremely low population.    Needle in the Ol’ haystack.   

 

There it is. This explains other all other aspects of the phenomenon, too.

[Backdoc]

 

 

OK let's talk Bigfoot and cams.   Some are saying Bigfoot knows about trail cams.  They make a further leap Bigfoot understands what they are and that is why they are avoiding them.   

 

What animal knows and understands what a trail cam is.   What other animal would then -with that understanding - say, "I don't want my picture taken"    If I took trail cams out to the jungle a monkey might destroy a camera out of curiosity but not because it is trying to avoid detection.  More often than not, I would bet if I put some trail cams out there in the jungle, I could easily get monkeys on camera or Gorillas in the mist.    No issues and no problem.

 

 

I don't believe cams emit some kind of noise (but maybe they do) Even if they did, is this really repelling an animal or ape?  If it did or even didn't is an ape so conscious that it understands it must avoid the camera.  I am sorry but that sounds crazy to me.  I can only see- out of curiosity- the animal might go up to the camera and break due to messing with it.  But the messing with it was based on curiosity not by trying to destroy some evidence.     But even then, I have to think data up until the time could still be retrieved in many cases.  Is there a rash of insurance claims out there for destroyed trail cams?   Is there an epidemic of trail cams being destroyed in mass?    

 

It is not uncommon someone might pull over on the road and take a bathroom break in the woods (or whatever) and end up on some camera.  That's to be expected the more civilized the area.  The edge of a parking lot at a bank is more likely to catch someone doing whatever activity.  It is less likely and less of an expectation out in the deep woods.   

 

 

Naturally a trial cam might catch someone out in the woods doing some normal activity or even some embarrassing activity.   

 

 

We come to Bigfoot.  We can agree Bigfoot is not more aware of a trial camera and what it is any more than two people making out in the woods.  Yet, on occasion those humans trying to be sneaky are caught in the act.  

 

What is more likely:  Bigfoot knows not only cameras are there but knows it consciously needs to avoid them?  OR There are so few Bigfoot you could put 1,000 Cams in an area, and you still won't see Bigfoot.   

 

Yes, I know the smell of humans touching an item might be a tell for Bigfoot.  But this assumes a long history of Bigfoot sightings where Bigfoot avoids things humans make but humans touched.   Yet we have stories of Bigfoot touching windshields, tents, doors, door handles, destroying tools, breaking into refrigerators, and so on.

 

I cannot make the leap that Bigfoot is aware in any way of trail cams and certainly not aware they are cameras that can takes its picture.   I can only make a little room for the idea Bigfoot might avoid a trail cam based on it being new to it introducing a human smell and that might make it move on.   (There are just not stories where human items touched by human repel bigfoot.  The opposite seems true).  There are decades of reports that clearly claim bigfoot moves away from people in a face-to-face encounter but NOT the things touched by people. 

 

The most reasonable way to account for the lack of trial cam sightings or even a new PGF film is a low number of Bigfoot.    I will say it again. There number of 'eyes' is magnified since 1967 by millions.  That in spite of more ways to capture Bigfoot and 10,000's cameras out there, it is Bigfoot's near extinct numbers that account for the lack of new Roger Patterson's today. 

 

 

Edited January 29 by Backdoc

[MIB]

14 hours ago, DarkEyes said:

What are people’s thoughts about the allegations that Sasquatches “avoid” or are “deterred” by game cameras? I’m not 100% sure on what to think, I know there are little “photos” of them from game cams. Not sure if it’s just not having luck and capturing a photo of them or if they are able to detect or see the IR light. What do you think? What are your experiences?

 

There are a couple things to consider.   

 

1) None of the current trail cameras use a "trip beam" to trigger the camera, so there is no projected light, IR or otherwise, for a sasquatch to see EXCEPT when the flash is happening.   That is an assumption based on decades old, decades-abandoned, technology.    The only chance they'd have to see light, IR or otherwise, from the camera is when something else is getting its picture taken.

 

2) Cameras have plastic bodies .. probably out-gas.

 

3) Cameras have batteries and capacitors.    a) Capacitors make noise .. some humans hear them, some do not .. when they charge.    b) Some people speculate BF can detect electrical fields.

 

4) I've done some experimenting .. as seen by an IR camera by IR flash, our "camouflaged" cameras are plain / bland square, artificial-looking boxes on the sides of trees, not camouflaged at all, so if BF sees in IR, our cameras are probably glaringly obvious and out of place.

 

5) I'm a hunter.   When I hunt, I don't walk down the game trails, I walk 25 - 200 yards off to the side so I can see without being seen.    Most all of those bajillions of trail cameras are set watching the game trails, not watching the woods for things watching the game trails.    

 

6) BFs are tall.    This, too, would lead them to walk in different places than short critters like deer walk.

 

7) Most hunters do not leave their trail cameras out year around, they're only out seasonally.

 

8) Cameras require visits to change batteries, swap SD cards, plus putting them out and picking them up.   I usually only visit mine 1-2 times a year but hunters often go back every week or two.   That's a lot of tracks going to an otherwise nondescript place for no apparent reason and even if a human maybe doesn't notice them, a sasquatch might well.   Plus scent.   

 

I think the odds of a picture taken by cameras set up for deer / elk / etc instead of specifically set up for sasquatch don't have a lot of chance.    Groups who are using trail cameras specifically for bigfoot research have a better chance but IMHO they need to do a better job of hiding their stuff and they need to leave it absolutely alone for longer periods of time rather than having their curiosity draw them to the camera too frequently.   

 

People think that numbers are the answer.   Numbers don't matter if ineptly or inappropriately used.   Those cameras are just clutter.    So how many are really useful of all those millions?    A few hundred?   Maybe 1000?   The rest are relying on luck.

 

 

 

[Patterson-Gimlin]

^^

Outstanding information and explanation. Personally, I think the answer is obvious. 

[MIB]

^^ I'll concede that your explanation, if it were correct, would account for the outcome.     In that case, I'd wonder a lot more about what the blurry pictures actually depict.    Hope things are going well for you!

[Backdoc]

Question:   If there anyone on this thread who feels Bigfoot:

 

1-Knows Cameras are there?

 

AND

 

2-Feels Bigfoot Understands they are cameras who could take his picture or otherwise reveal or tip off searches to its whereabouts?

 

What I guess I am trying to see if how many people not only think Bigfoot might be some level of intelligent but is so intelligent it has a human understanding of what a camera is.   Then they think Bigfoot also has animal sense something is there that shouldn't be?

 

(Yes, it's clear I don't think any of this but I am curious who might and why?)

 

Edited January 29 by Backdoc

[MIB]

I suspect they recognize tech as a human thing.    The don't seem to overly trust us and by extension, our stuff.    Exceptions of course, but there seems to be a difference between what we've seemingly tried to hide (cameras) and things we just leave on the ground (grader tires).   

[Catmandoo]

3 hours ago, Backdoc said:

Question:   If there anyone on this thread who feels Bigfoot:

 

1-Knows Cameras are there?

 

AND

 

2-Feels Bigfoot Understands they are cameras who could take his picture or otherwise reveal or tip off searches to its whereabouts?

 

What I guess I am trying to see if how many people not only think Bigfoot might be some level of intelligent but is so intelligent it has a human understanding of what a camera is.   Then they think Bigfoot also has animal sense something is there that shouldn't be?

 

(Yes, it's clear I don't think any of this but I am curious who might and why?)

 

 

I think that the opening scenes of "History of the World, Part One" depict early human group thinking very well. It has continued through the ages. Mel did it again.

 

MIB touched upon many good details.

I have been watched putting up  trail cameras. They can smell me for 3 days under the right conditions and I wear nitrile gloves. When placing / servicing a trail camera, I move about the base of the tree and disturb the ground. Simple creatures like spiders and ants love trail cameras. How do they find them? ( magnetic fields ). The flash-less camera PlotWatcher emits obnoxious ultrasonic noise.

Lack of images does not mean lack of Sasquatch.

[wiiawiwb]

7 hours ago, MIB said:

 

There are a couple things to consider.   

 

1) None of the current trail cameras use a "trip beam" to trigger the camera, so there is no projected light, IR or otherwise, for a sasquatch to see EXCEPT when the flash is happening.   That is an assumption based on decades old, decades-abandoned, technology.    The only chance they'd have to see light, IR or otherwise, from the camera is when something else is getting its picture taken.

 

2) Cameras have plastic bodies .. probably out-gas.

 

3) Cameras have batteries and capacitors.    a) Capacitors make noise .. some humans hear them, some do not .. when they charge.    b) Some people speculate BF can detect electrical fields.

 

4) I've done some experimenting .. as seen by an IR camera by IR flash, our "camouflaged" cameras are plain / bland square, artificial-looking boxes on the sides of trees, not camouflaged at all, so if BF sees in IR, our cameras are probably glaringly obvious and out of place.

 

5) I'm a hunter.   When I hunt, I don't walk down the game trails, I walk 25 - 200 yards off to the side so I can see without being seen.    Most all of those bajillions of trail cameras are set watching the game trails, not watching the woods for things watching the game trails.    

 

6) BFs are tall.    This, too, would lead them to walk in different places than short critters like deer walk.

 

7) Most hunters do not leave their trail cameras out year around, they're only out seasonally.

 

8) Cameras require visits to change batteries, swap SD cards, plus putting them out and picking them up.   I usually only visit mine 1-2 times a year but hunters often go back every week or two.   That's a lot of tracks going to an otherwise nondescript place for no apparent reason and even if a human maybe doesn't notice them, a sasquatch might well.   Plus scent.   

 

I think the odds of a picture taken by cameras set up for deer / elk / etc instead of specifically set up for sasquatch don't have a lot of chance.    Groups who are using trail cameras specifically for bigfoot research have a better chance but IMHO they need to do a better job of hiding their stuff and they need to leave it absolutely alone for longer periods of time rather than having their curiosity draw them to the camera too frequently.   

 

People think that numbers are the answer.   Numbers don't matter if ineptly or inappropriately used.   Those cameras are just clutter.    So how many are really useful of all those millions?    A few hundred?   Maybe 1000?   The rest are relying on luck.

 

 

 

 

Well thought out MIB.  I'm confident that sasquatches, like you, know that staying hidden away from game trails, yet nearby, is fruitful for catching game. Perhaps they've seen enough trailcam flashes while stalking deer, elk, or other prey that triggered them to know that the hairless, little men use those trails for bad purposes.

 

I agree wholeheartedly about hiding trailcams. There was a guy who used to create amazing camouflaging for his trailcams rendering them impossible to see even when he told you where they were. I can't his find videos any more. Too bad...he was the Michaelangelo of trailcam disguise if ever there was one.