Migration

[BobbyO]

This is why I think it's rare to find deer carcasses out in the field.

You won't mind if i quote this from you wwhen the Cycle of " Why dont' you find any Bones ? " post arround about October 2011 comes around again Sas would you ??

So what I was really getting at was the spatial distribution of carcasses found, not their number.

Ok, that's what you was " really " getting at..It's just you're normally so thorough intially with what you're " really " getting at that i didn't really expect you to say one thing, but you was " really " getting at somethign else but now i know, comprende..

So if (1) bigfoots are specialist predators of white-tailed deer and deer is a primary source of winter nutrition for them, and if (2) bigfoots occupy winter ranges that overlap areas of high deer density, then I assume that there should be some localized areas where an unusual density of carcasses could be found, especially in late winter/early spring. If such areas exist, then I don't think it's too far-fetched that some human could take notice and investigate further. Maybe, unlike at Yellowstone where wolf reintroduction is thought to have reduced elk numbers and increased riparian vegetation density, the introduction of a small number of deer-specialist bigfoots would not improve oak regeneration. In other words, a population response in the state deer herds would be unlikely. But more local effects? I think they could be noticed.

Completely, they could be noticed for sure, but by no means does that mean they would be noticed.

Especially when you consider that a very small, if any, % of " local populations " of Human Beings would report such a thing ( certainly not to a BF related Website i wouldn't imagine ) & if they did, it'd be pretty much be put down to Scientifically proven Predators & NOT BF.

& rightly so as i'm sure 9 times out of 10 or more, that would be the cause anyway.

[Guest WIKayaker]

Migration or “nomadic movements� Transience or transient? Speculating that there are a lot more irregular movement patterns out there depending on geographical location. Not much elevation change here in the Great lakes/Midwest for example. Not much deer migration. They stick around year round. There are still bf reports in winter despite the frigid temps.

There is very likely a deer connection with the BF in my opinion. So infer the many anecdotal reports.

I like this one… http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/washington_cntyWI.htm

A guy on road kill clean-up duty has a whitetail carcass taken from the bed of his pick-up by an upright walking bear-wolf-guy thing with hands.

(or do a web search for “Bigfoot Holy Hill†for MANY other media references)

Maybe this is a better more familiar link...

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=16564

Edited January 7, 2011 by WIKayaker

[Guest]

This is a topic of interest to me and one that always draws some interesting theories …

[BobbyO]

Wow, now there's a blast from the past...

Page 3 of this thread was the start of my now insatiable appetite to apply a new type of analysis to this field.

Just over 4 years ago now, wow.

[Guest]

^^^

Yes it is, somebody mentioned something on the Moon Phase thread that could be appropriate here too.

[Trogluddite]

From what I am seeing, dumping in lots of data and then sifting through it, there is a pattern somewhat like slash-and-burn farmers.  There will be one area with a concentration of encounters, then a break, then a new area, fairly distant from the first one, where a new concentration of encounters occurs.  Buy the first chapter of the thesis over in the Northeast Encounters section - nevermind, you get to download it for free there.  

 

There's also some encounters that are consistent w/a wandering male. 

 

I have to say that it's pretty darn enjoyable when you're sorting through data and you randomly check on one or two attributes (e.g., 7' tall, red-haired Bigfoot) and then you find out that a group of these, from different counties, occurred over a 300 square mile area and a 10 or 15-year time span.

 

But you've really got to slog through the data input and be prepared for a lot of disappointment. 

[Lake County Bigfooot]

The territory of these creature is large, but I would not call it migration, no more than a bear migrates south to catch the berries in bloom, or

the salmon run, the movement is not due to climate, this creature can endure the coldest of climates due to its mass, the movement is due to

seeking out food sources. Perhaps they have a gathering point where territories meet, but I do not think they travel to avoid weather or 1000s

of miles to find food, food is available in different forms at different seasons, they probably fatten up before the winter months, and rely on 

killing deer and elk, smaller mammals, through the winter, returning to a more omnivorous pallet in the warmer months. This is my current 

perspective based on studying sighting data, and other primate behavior.

Edited March 8, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot

[Guest]

The territory of these creature is large, but I would not call it migration, no more than a bear migrates south to catch the berries in bloom, or

the salmon run, the movement is not due to climate, this creature can endure the coldest of climates due to its mass, the movement is due to

seeking out food sources. Perhaps they have a gathering point where territories meet, but I do not think they travel to avoid weather or 1000s

of miles to find food, food is available in different forms at different seasons, they probably fatten up before the winter months, and rely on 

killing deer and elk, smaller mammals, through the winter, returning to a more omnivorous pallet in the warmer months. This is my current 

perspective based on studying sighting data, and other primate behavior.

 

What is an average home of the American black bear maybe between 65-100 miles? Call it anything you like migration is simply moving from one to another, does it matter if it’s one away or ten mile. Maybe a better term would be nomadic …. I personally subscribe to the thought they remain static in one area.

[BobbyO]

I think like many creatures, they move because of one major reason, food sources or lack/abundance of them.

Add to that they're probably lack of numbers and we could add breeding into that too.

And then in certain parts of the continent, the climate and season too, but that may coincide with the first sentence.

[BigTreeWalker]

In the older part of this thread I noticed something that appears to have been completely missed. If Bigfoot has been in existence contemporary with other predators for thousands of years. He has been moving/migrating for that same period of time. He has been eating deer, elk and whatever for that same period of time. Then way would we even notice an increase in carcasses? The answer is nothing has changed!

Of course, I might add here: was there a decrease in carcasses in the Colorado Springs area after the Bigfoot moved elsewhere?

Just wondering.....

[gigantor]

^^ it seems to me, you're assuming BF is mostly a carnivore. I disagree and think it's an omnivore.

 

I think it mostly eats plants/veggies and is an opportunist with meat/fish. Just my two cents.

Edited March 22, 2015 by gigantor

[BigTreeWalker]

^^ it seems to me, you're assuming BF is mostly a carnivore. I disagree and think it's an omnivore.

 

I think it mostly eats plants/veggies and is an opportunist with meat/fish. Just my two cents.

Nope, not assuming anything. The statement was predator, not carnivore. I do agree with you that they are probably omnivorous. However, I and others have seen evidence of predatory tendencies at times; be it deer, elk or groundsquirrels.

The point I was trying to make, in the same vein as this thread, is that if they have always existed in an ecosystem, then what extra evidence of their presence are you going to find that wasn't already there and just wasn't noticed. It's not like it was never there before but now it is. That is the idea I was getting from some of the previous posts. If they exist in an area, then they have been there before. What are you going to look for that is different?

[BigTreeWalker]

BobbyO, previously you were correlating mule deer migration routes with BF sightings in CO. I found this in my search for elk predation information for my research. It is a study of elk migratory patterns south of Mt Ranier NP.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=RxIPVeDjCsq4ogTKxYAg&url=http://access.nwifc.org/wildlife/documents/moeller-bj-thesis.pdf&ved=0CB8QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNG3IpAvnMNda52NdkIMY4GSa-saPA&sig2=Q4LBiNQe00ADCvRke3PZmw

That should take you to a PDF file.

I found a statement in the paper that it would be interesting to know the story behind: "Special note of significance were two GPS collared elk mortalities, for which the cause of mortality was unknown, which occurred in May of 2008."

Hope this is helpful.

[Guest]

OP I think Cisco of Taranto said it best: "It's all about politics and war baby." Food food, yea sure, there's always food: that's what the earth does.

[Guest]

BobbyO, previously you were correlating mule deer migration routes with BF sightings in CO. I found this in my search for elk predation information for my research. It is a study of elk migratory patterns south of Mt Ranier NP.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=RxIPVeDjCsq4ogTKxYAg&url=http://access.nwifc.org/wildlife/documents/moeller-bj-thesis.pdf&ved=0CB8QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNG3IpAvnMNda52NdkIMY4GSa-saPA&sig2=Q4LBiNQe00ADCvRke3PZmw

That should take you to a PDF file.

I found a statement in the paper that it would be interesting to know the story behind: "Special note of significance were two GPS collared elk mortalities, for which the cause of mortality was unknown, which occurred in May of 2008."

Hope this is helpful.

 

Nope, not assuming anything. The statement was predator, not carnivore. I do agree with you that they are probably omnivorous. However, I and others have seen evidence of predatory tendencies at times; be it deer, elk or groundsquirrels.

The point I was trying to make, in the same vein as this thread, is that if they have always existed in an ecosystem, then what extra evidence of their presence are you going to find that wasn't already there and just wasn't noticed. It's not like it was never there before but now it is. That is the idea I was getting from some of the previous posts. If they exist in an area, then they have been there before. What are you going to look for that is different?

 

Hello BTWalker,

 

I am not certain the earlier poster’s premise works and here’s the short reason why: Unless hunters, fisherman, farmers and home gardeners experience sudden shortages of cabbage, tomatoes, corn, wild game, fish and wild roots and plant life are consumed and bark stripped trees to such extent leave the forest bare and the ground so barren that it becomes a desert; or wild game and fish shortages start popping all over the country who would ever notice?

 

As G (Gigantor) previously suggested, we believe Sasquatch (Bigfoot) to be an omnivore and probably an opportunistic one due to that fact that many, many people report observing these animals in various states of feeding and it doesn’t seem to care if its dog food, chewing tobacco, an onion, some trout or left over Thanksgiving turkey or a piece of candy they’ll eat it. Therefore, because of its opportunistic and nomadic nature I firmly believe its movement is directly connected to food and safety and shelter and probably not necessarily in that order.

 

 

 

 

   

Edited March 23, 2015 by Gumshoeye