Jump to content

Migration


Guest tracker
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nice work Bobby!

Ok, for the sake of this discussion let's assume your pattern is correct. Now we may be able to correlate it to other environmental factors.

You've already mentioned the possible growth of Colorado Springs as a motivating factor for the movement, and that sounds good. But let's take it a step or two further:

What are the prey animals doing in these periods of time? If there is a significant sized herd of deer or elk that favors the area, then there will certainly be USFW census data on them, along with their seasonal movements over time. If this population of prey has grown or diminished in the time period you are using, it might correspond to the number and location of sightings. Could the development of Colorado Springs have interfered in some way with these prey animals, and if so, could that also effect the number of BF sightings reported? I have a hunch there will be a direct correlation if we can find all of the necessary data.

I think i've found the data needed, i just have to load a Paypal account to get it. :D

One other thing to consider: the seasonal differences in sighting numbers and location may also be a product of where people are likely to be at certain times of the year. This is much more prevalent, for example, in my area where there is little or no human activity in winter (too much snow, and the nearest ski area is an hour away). But in Colorado Springs, this might not be as much of a factor because of a lively winter recreation industry. The local board of tourism would be able to tell you if there is a significant increase or decrease in transient populations at certain times of the year. (by "transient", I mean folks who are vacationing, not bums! :lol:)

Well i'm with you on what you're saying but the numbers on the Colorado Spring Maps just don't add up, for any Season..There is pretty much no activity in a 15 Mile radius of an area after 2000, unlike the previous 10 Years before it where the was a lot of activity. There MUST be a valid reason for that & one that can be found when thought about a little ??

Once these factors are taken into consideration, a possible pattern can be established. If a pattern becomes apparent, then you've just given any local researchers a great head start on where to be, and when. And we keep coming back to the "river as a highway" theory, which IMO has plenty of merit.

Yep, it's all about trying to find the relevent patterns, i'm sure of that & if anythign is of value, i'd 100% share it on the Board or with COGrizz directly if he wants to get out there himself, why wouldn't i/we ??

I've identified similar patterns in my area, but unfortunately there isn't enough data to be reliable. The number of sightings is so low that any pattern could easily be simple coincidence. But on the plus side, I've got a LOT of data on the local prey animals. And so far, the sightings follow the food.

Bobby, please allow me this brief moment of conceit when I say, "great minds think alike"...:lol:

And if you get more info and crunch more numbers, I'll be looking forward to seeing what you came up with.

Thanks!

S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, Paypal done & dusted & data purchased.. :)

& look what we have here, it's the 2 biggest Mule Deer Herd Migration Corridors in Colorado next to the " Triangle ".. ;)

post-136-027491600 1291829868_thumb.jpg post-136-089197800 1291829917_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, here are the Overlay with the Deer Herd & BF Sightings within that kind of Triangle Area..

post-136-083460700 1291831020_thumb.jpg

Below is it with the Elk overlay aswell as the Deer Corridor & BF Sightings.

post-136-000916100 1291831085_thumb.jpg

& finally, a pretty desolate Colorado Springs Area with the Deer & Elk Overlay's, from 2000 - 2010 including the BF Sightings, or lack of them..

post-136-014846700 1291831142_thumb.jpg

Guess we can now see what happened & why... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nicely done, Bobby!

It would appear that there is a direct correlation between the movements and numbers of ungulates vs. the number of BF sightings.

An important point being that this virtually eliminates hoaxing as a possibility in this area, unless you believe that hoaxers would also study the same data you've come up with and make a concerted effort to only hoax when it fits with the biological data. That's a stretch, IMO.

Another great big "plus" in the "follow the food" theory.

I think I've said this before (maybe a PM?):

Sasquatch could be to deer and elk, what Native Americans once were to Buffalo.

I looked into a reported track find a year or so ago in an area that just does not seem likely for BF to be. The area is more open than nearby mountainous areas. I originally thought it was a print from something else that had been misidentified. But I revisited it when I started studying the deer movement in the area. This print was found right in the middle of a very large deer migration corridor, and at the right time of year.

I think this thread is going to prove very valuable for those trying to have a sighting or find signs. By limiting efforts to times and areas where ungulate populations are predictable, we might actually be able to increase our odds of discovery. And these exercises could be repeatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also:

I think we need to concentrate more on hunters. Since they are also following the deer and elk, they may be effectively following the same behavioral pattern of possible BF without realizing it, although likely on a smaller scale and in areas not quite as "deep" as we might expect to find BF. A hunter won't go too far for a deer because he will have to carry it out. I don't know of many hardcore hunters willing to pack a deer (or even a quarter) for several days.

I think another plausible research strategy might be to have a team of two or three researchers with very good backcountry skills follow and stay with some large herds for an entire season, if possible. It would be hard, for sure. It might require aerial resupply on occasion. But if they could stay with the deer (or elk), they would be able to observe a lot of predatory activity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From time to time there is mention of structures built that may or may not be attributable to the target spp. If they or some are, there has been talk about them possibly being blinds.. for ungulates including elk. I wonder if anyone has seriously reviewed hunter journal/entry/log/forums regarding say bowhunting..to see if there has been any comments on this sort of thing. Just an idea but if you hit a couple of times it might suggest there is more out there and who knows, patterns may develop. I have noticed in a few deer hunting journals talk about what you experienced on the way to the deerstand in the dark.. and that has been interesting.

Edited by treeknocker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also:

I think we need to concentrate more on hunters. Since they are also following the deer and elk, they may be effectively following the same behavioral pattern of possible BF without realizing it, although likely on a smaller scale and in areas not quite as "deep" as we might expect to find BF. A hunter won't go too far for a deer because he will have to carry it out. I don't know of many hardcore hunters willing to pack a deer (or even a quarter) for several days.

I think another plausible research strategy might be to have a team of two or three researchers with very good backcountry skills follow and stay with some large herds for an entire season, if possible. It would be hard, for sure. It might require aerial resupply on occasion. But if they could stay with the deer (or elk), they would be able to observe a lot of predatory activity.

Spazmo

I would not say all hunters stay close to get a deer or elk ,trophy hunters go in deep and some other hunters will do it on public land to stay away from others who would be crowding those woods.

I would say that these creatures could track at least twenty to fifty miles in a single night if they wanted too.Also always believed that they depend on survival in the winter when food might not be available,so that means they need to fatten up.Following herds seems the most likely source of high protien and whatever nutishment they need to survive. Farms being the second source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nicely done, Bobby!

It would appear that there is a direct correlation between the movements and numbers of ungulates vs. the number of BF sightings.

An important point being that this virtually eliminates hoaxing as a possibility in this area, unless you believe that hoaxers would also study the same data you've come up with and make a concerted effort to only hoax when it fits with the biological data. That's a stretch, IMO.

I can't believe that, it doesn't cut it for me as i simply can not see a valid reason for it, like you..

Another great big "plus" in the "follow the food" theory.

Which makes perfect sense.

I think I've said this before (maybe a PM?):

Sasquatch could be to deer and elk, what Native Americans once were to Buffalo.

I looked into a reported track find a year or so ago in an area that just does not seem likely for BF to be. The area is more open than nearby mountainous areas. I originally thought it was a print from something else that had been misidentified. But I revisited it when I started studying the deer movement in the area. This print was found right in the middle of a very large deer migration corridor, and at the right time of year.

I think this thread is going to prove very valuable for those trying to have a sighting or find signs. By limiting efforts to times and areas where ungulate populations are predictable, we might actually be able to increase our odds of discovery. And these exercises could be repeatable.

Me too, i hope so anyway..I'm just glad finally we have a Thread where like minded individuals can, & are, really look at doing something positive for a change, something that couldmake a difference to some Researcher out there possibly & help him/her out or gives them a heads up on an area when you see Patetrns like this & if it does, then it's a it makes the thread & the Forum a success.. :)

Edited by BobbyO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice work Bobby!

Ok, for the sake of this discussion let's assume your pattern is correct. Now we may be able to correlate it to other environmental factors.

You've already mentioned the possible growth of Colorado Springs as a motivating factor for the movement, and that sounds good. But let's take it a step or two further:

What are the prey animals doing in these periods of time? If there is a significant sized herd of deer or elk that favors the area, then there will certainly be USFW census data on them, along with their seasonal movements over time. If this population of prey has grown or diminished in the time period you are using, it might correspond to the number and location of sightings. Could the development of Colorado Springs have interfered in some way with these prey animals, and if so, could that also effect the number of BF sightings reported? I have a hunch there will be a direct correlation if we can find all of the necessary data.

One other thing to consider: the seasonal differences in sighting numbers and location may also be a product of where people are likely to be at certain times of the year. This is much more prevalent, for example, in my area where there is little or no human activity in winter (too much snow, and the nearest ski area is an hour away). But in Colorado Springs, this might not be as much of a factor because of a lively winter recreation industry. The local board of tourism would be able to tell you if there is a significant increase or decrease in transient populations at certain times of the year. (by "transient", I mean folks who are vacationing, not bums! :lol:)

With regards to Colorado Springs, i found this...

http://www.censusscope.org/us/m1720/chart_popl.html

Could/Would this have directly affected the movements of the Animal's that we may have possibly found ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is definitely a factor.

The increased activity and encroachment in areas further from the center of civilization could/should effect the numbers or routes of deer and elk, which would in turn (theoretically) effect the number of BF and sightings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is definitely a factor.

The increased activity and encroachment in areas further from the center of civilization could/should effect the numbers or routes of deer and elk, which would in turn (theoretically) effect the number of BF and sightings.

To be honest Spaz, i can't really see any reference to Deer/Elk migration patterns in the Colorado Springs area before 2000, when there were more BF Sightings, anyway..

I'm not sure WHY the Animals would be in that specific area before 2000 anyway but it seems, due to the dates of the Sightings publically listed, that it's from the period between 1980 - 2000, a Twenty Year period ( could this reflect maybe a doiminant Male in his prime time frame ?? ) that they were there, for whatever reason..

Colorado Springs between 1980 - 2000 BF Sightings - Colorado Springs between 2000 - 2010 BF Sightings

post-136-007700800 1291877779_thumb.jpg post-136-043050200 1291878030_thumb.jpg

Then from 2000 & the height of Colorado Springs growth, they were gone as you can see above, the vast majority of Sightings moved to an area where there were virtually none prior to 2000 & an area which was between ( within 10 miles ) of the 2 biggest Mule Deer Migration Corridors in the State of Colorado, 120 Miles from Colorado Springs..

Perhaps, if we are to agree with what i'm trying to suggest here, the reason for the Pattern of movement was quite simply the growth of Colorado Springs between 1980 - 2000, as my previous Post link shows, & them moving to an area MUCH less populated AND had the added bonus of all those Mule Deer, smack bang in the middle of them ?? ;)

Of course we can only guess & don't actually know & may never know, but we CAN attempt to put parts of teh Jigsaw together & see what we come up with..

I guess then, when we were happy enough to feel that what we are doing is sufficient to accept an Animal movement pattern is probably what we are looking at, we'd then try to clone what we did with another part of teh Country to see if we could find the same thing there & if we did, this hypothesis that we have could really be used & utilised by Field Researchers in having a better chance of getting a Sighting or obtaining some evidence of some kind or at leats get them in the area's that give them a better chance of a Sighting or obtaining some evidence of some kind, in certain areas of the Country..

Edited by BobbyO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just chiming in on migration. Short distance, seasonal, elevational movements "count" as migration. The definition I use is: "a two-way (at least), seasonal movement from one home range to another."

Could bigfoots migrate? Sure, why not? But if they did, it would probably be small-scale, elevational-type movements. If otherwise, we might expect a much higher density of bigfoots in southern forests during winter, as northern migrants come to share areas with southern residents.

Could bigfoots follow deer and elk herds as a source of primary sustenance? Sure, why not? But if they did, I'd expect a lot more carcasses lying around out there by springtime.

Could bigfoots have an affinity for The Carpenter's music and Sudoku? Sure, why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...