What Is Killing Off The Sasquatch? Yoicks! Could It Be Us?

[norseman]

Global warming is a farce. That is my opinion based on facts that I have researched and not the media alarmists.

Polar Bears are not endangered Polar Bears not endangered

There has been calving in the western Antarctic. This happens every 10-20 years or so. The ice in Eastern Antarctic was more dense in 2009 than it had been in 10 years.

2009 article

I am not saying we shouldn't be caretakers of the earth, but the information that gets tossed out by alarmists is destructive and does nothing to further any cause once the truth is revealed. The alarmists lose steam for their cause and people become fed up with the whole "crisis" mentality that has become the norm in media.

I disagree.

Also the NOAA has 2010 as the 2nd warmest on record:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100915_globalstats.html

The first eight months of 2010 tied the same period in 1998 for the warmest combined land and ocean surface temperature on record worldwide. Meanwhile, the June–August summer was the second warmest on record globally after 1998, and last month was the third warmest August on record. Separately, last month’s global average land surface temperature was the second warmest on record for August, while the global ocean surface temperature tied with 1997 as the sixth warmest for August.

And that Polar bear article you posted is a right wing political website. I'd like to see some a bit more peer reviewed.

[norseman]

I agree that it seems that environmental arguments are over dramatic and the science allows for dissenting opinion. But it is getting off topic a tad, don't you think?

Vil, I don't think so.

The OP is asking for opinions on what could be adversely affecting Squatch populations. I introduced GW as a possible reason, and Redwolf is countering with the argument that GW isn't actually happening.

In my mind at least, this still all ties into the question of the OP's original post.

[masterbarber]

Folks,

Given the broad nature of this topic, environmental factors would be a pertinent avenue for discussion along with other factors.

Please continue discussing this topic and consider that each member has their own opinion and should be given some latitude within the scope of the thread.

[Guest]

I don't like to be an "alarmist" either, but norseman is absoultely right. I suppose my question to redwolf is..."Do you think the industrial revolution and/or carbon footprint of man has resulted in the earth being .01 degree warmer than it would otherwise be?"

[Guest]

No, I don’t.

The climate will change with or without our help. Many global warming alarmists labor under the assumption that the earth maintained a constant temperature which isn’t true. The only thing constant about our climate is that it changes. Some of the warmest temperatures in the last 2000 years occurred during the Medieval Warm Period from 1000 to 1350 ADFrom 1915 to the early 1930s temps were increasing. Then from 1940 to 1980 temperatures were decreasing. Temperatures then increased from 1980 to today and have leveled out.

Regarding NOAA, the data they have presented has been cherry picked and manipulated to benefit their agenda. The data used was taken from points around urban heat areas. Look up Hockey Stick. Due to our increased abilities to measure the earth temperature and depths of ice caps, and animal populations, we seem to automatically assume that the measurements show dramatic increase or decrease. The problem is that there is no historical reference for the measurements. NOAA did just that.

Regarding Polar bears and ice caps:

Here is a current article showing that the polar ice caps have recovered since the “great melt†of 2007.

http://www.timesonli...icle7086746.ece

In retrospect, the reactions to the 2007 melt were overstated. The lesson is that we must be more careful in not reading too much into one event,†Serreze said

.

Polar bears are cute as babies and beautiful as adults. They have been chosen as the poster child for the alarmists. Those touting the polar bears being endangered want to stop drilling of American oil. Polar bear populations did decrease, but that was due to overhunting and not climate change. Since restrictions were put in place on hunting, the overall population has increased.

http://epw.senate.go...6f-40eb31233026

http://bigjournalism...ng-polar-bears/

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations “may now be near historic highs

http://www.examiner....blem-locals-say

As for the original question. I think it is absurd to state that we are killing off an animal that has not been proven to exist. Again, I am all for living with nature and not against it as much as anyone. Do whatever you can to decrease our imprint on the earth, but do not use scare tactics and manipulated data to do so. Use logic not emotion.

Now if you'll excuse me, I am going to go club a baby seal for breakfast and a new coat, then drive around aimlessly in a gas guzzling vehicle in search of some old growth trees to chop down for my non-EPA approved woodstove.

Edited January 23, 2011 by Redwolf

[Guest Lesmore]

Kane2002 says:

"Ok, here are my thoughts on this. This is a theory only and I invite thoughtful rebuttal. I think there are very few Sasquatch and I wonder if we, Homo sapiens, are inadvertently killing them. "Wow," you say, "what's with this guy?" Well consider these thoughts.

A. We have not discovered or found a body or part of a body.

B. Really only one good set of film, the Patterson-Gimlin. And some won't even accept that.

C. Can you a Sasquatch hunter go out this weekend and find a certifiable castable track?

Anywhere, for sure?

D. Why are they so afraid of us? We don't hunt them, shoot them, or trap them, so why are they

so shy around us?

E. Why hasn't some 18 wheeler mowed one down, they get everything else?"

Lesmore says:

I have just quoted the first part of Kane's Thread starter. My take is that this first part that I quoted, is also a good rationale to support the view that Bigfoot does not exist.

Insofar as the premise that we...human kind....killed off BF through disease, etc.....well that has the ring of plausibility to me.

Les

[Guest Lesmore]

I disagree.

Also the NOAA has 2010 as the 2nd warmest on record:

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100915_globalstats.html

The first eight months of 2010 tied the same period in 1998 for the warmest combined land and ocean surface temperature on record worldwide. Meanwhile, the June–August summer was the second warmest on record globally after 1998, and last month was the third warmest August on record. Separately, last month’s global average land surface temperature was the second warmest on record for August, while the global ocean surface temperature tied with 1997 as the sixth warmest for August.

And that Polar bear article you posted is a right wing political website. I'd like to see some a bit more peer reviewed.

I think we are going through a climate change....but the Earth's history has indicated that this not uncommon and has happened over the years.

Thousands of years ago, where I write this now, the land mass was covered by very thick, deep ice...then a huge sea....known as Lake Agassiz. Before the ice age, many dinosaur remains and tropical plant (including flora from the Palm tree family) fossils were found, indicating a warm, possibly tropical climate.

Currently, (last night) the temp was 30 below......but in the summer during growing season the temps will be very warm...70's to 90's. The place the Canadian Prairies...part of the huge North American Grasslands topography.

I don't think that SUV's, etc are the reason, as some more extreme groups seem to cite, as to why climate change is taking place...again climate change is a natural part of the Earth's cycle.

BTW, I'm not political.....but I am suspect of any extreme group...whether they be extreme right or left.

Balance and a calm analysis of the facts always appeals to me and I would think the great majority of people.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

Some discussion or opinions about climate as how it may relate to "What is Killing Off The Sasquatch" is fine but let's please not let this turn into a Global Warming debate. That's a highly political subject that would likely lead to heated tempers and a thread meltdown. A casual mention of the climate as relates to the topic doesn't hurt anything IMO as long as we're not trying to prove or disprove Global Warming theories. Please help us keep it within the Guidelines by staying away from the politics.

Thanks, Chris B.

[wolftrax]

extinction factors past, present, and future have always taken into account a dominant species impact. Population entails territory and prey species impact and competition for the same resources, disease, direct impact on the species in question such as hunting or defense or harrassment and stress. Change in environment also can play a role.

[Guest]

There are plenty of bigfoot out there and they aren't being killed off. Well, not at any alarming rate anyhow. Yahoo's occasionally shoot at them for different reasons however. They are just as elusive as they always have been. Their strongholds are the Wilderness areas but no question they must supplement by taking from our farms.

Ironically I'm watching a PBS program right now called 'A Wild American Forest'. So far bigfoot has been mentioned a couple of times. The main area of focus is the Klamath-Siskiyou region and the remaining old growth forests between Northern California and Southern Oregon.

As someone who has worked in the woods, I see the change that has taken place. Not from my memory of the way it used to be, I'm not that old. But I've been in enough old growth to understand its importance. Throughout the PNW, the trees were so big 100 yrs ago that single trees would be 100 feet apart, and the canopy above would offer protection to the ground below during Winter months so that life could continue to proliferate. In the hot Summers, moisture would be contained in the same areas. Mushrooms and grasses would provide a staple for ungulates throughout the year. Mushrooms don't grow in new growth tree plantations! When the PNW was comprised of mostly old growth, it was enough to affect the weather. The canopy of branches from giant trees alone protected a giant sponge below that would affect the weather in a positive way. There weren't massive forest fires like there are today because the thick bark of these 500-1,000 year old trees also resisted fire. Fire RARELY reached the canopies which were hundreds of feet in the air. When fire did move through these forests, it was a slow crawl that didn't burn like an inferno as today's fires do, which essentially sterilizes and kills everything. Claims that opened up areas from logging offer new food for deer, is a made up lie by the logging industry so as to minimize the political impacts of their activities. If anything, that loss in natural habitat is what has harmed Sasquatch by decreasing available food sources at all levels. The deer population in the region where I live is so diminished that few hunters I know succeed in getting a deer anymore.

Ironically an old forest service co-worker of mine was on the program as well. We both worked in timber on the same district. It was good to see his face on the show even though it was a one way view.

I didn't last long with the forest service because I felt guilt for how I was damaging the forest just by doing my part, which was marking timber boundaries. I much preferred working with the archeologist or on fires. But working in Timber allowed me to understand how we are affecting our environment and to know that the public really wasn't being told the truth. What the public saw was the result of political pressure, the dollars that logging brought to communities. They didn't see how the environment and the animals were being harmed.

The show is over. There were not more mentions of bigfoot. I was a good program. Being that bigfoot are a being that relies on our forests, maybe they too are an indicator species. But of course they aren't recognized to exist so the scientists aren't out there determining how their food sources have been affected by logging. If there is a benefit to ever listing Sasquatch, well determining the affects of logging in a context as never before would be one of them. The deer populations in the PNW have been severely harmed with the loss of old growth habitat and the life sustaining properties they provide.

[Guest TooRisky]

Since when is the species dieing off, or is this just speculation... I feel the population is very stable if not growing slightly here in WA.... Or is this leading to White Man is horrible and is the scourge of the earth conversation mixed in with econazism...???

Edited January 24, 2011 by TooRisky

[norseman]

No, I don’t.

The climate will change with or without our help. Many global warming alarmists labor under the assumption that the earth maintained a constant temperature which isn’t true.

I don't think many scientists will deny that the earth's temperatures have fluctuated greatly in the past. What they will deny is that the earth in the past has ever experienced a change in temperature this QUICKLY.

The only thing constant about our climate is that it changes. Some of the warmest temperatures in the last 2000 years occurred during the Medieval Warm Period from 1000 to 1350 ADFrom 1915 to the early 1930s temps were increasing. Then from 1940 to 1980 temperatures were decreasing. Temperatures then increased from 1980 to today and have leveled out.

Where do you get your numbers from?

As for the original question. I think it is absurd to state that we are killing off an animal that has not been proven to exist.

Actually I agree. And have stated many times on this forum that without the data to crunch we simply do not know. BUT, I did state reasons that we could be harming their habitat, and GW was just one such issue that I brought forth. I also stated that things like Logging and Dam building could also be contributing to habitat destruction.

Yes, it's all conjecture about how all of this interacts with a unknown species, but we are changing the environment around us, that is fact.

Again, I am all for living with nature and not against it as much as anyone. Do whatever you can to decrease our imprint on the earth, but do not use scare tactics and manipulated data to do so. Use logic not emotion.

I agree, but I think sometimes people feel the need to "shock" their fellow man out of complacency, especially with issues they deem extremely important. And this just doesn't apply to environmental concerns, look at the drunk driving and smoking adverts of late?

Now if you'll excuse me, I am going to go club a baby seal for breakfast and a new coat, then drive around aimlessly in a gas guzzling vehicle in search of some old growth trees to chop down for my non-EPA approved woodstove.

Again the bottom line is that we need a type specimen to prove it exists so that science can do it's job and fill in the gaps of our understanding. Only then can we truly know. With that said I don't think it's a large leap of faith to understand that shutting down a large salmon run with a Dam with no fish ladder is NOT going to do ANY omnivore any favors up stream.

Some issues like GW are not as clear cut and we can argue for hours about the details. But other issues like Grand Coulee Dam have altered the environment for ever and that is simply a unmovable fact that we must accept.

[norseman]

Since when is the species dieing off, or is this just speculation... I feel the population is very stable if not growing slightly here in WA....

I think it's safe to say that almost every thread we talk about in here is simply conjecture.

Or is this leading to White Man is horrible and is the scourge of the earth conversation mixed in with econazism...???

It was never my attempt to make this debate racist or all about global warming (nor anyone elses). The OP is simply discussing his view point that the species could be in trouble. If you would like to expand on your assertion that the population is indeed growing to add to this debate, I think that would be great.

[Guest Kane2002]

We have some good responses here. Thank you, positive, differing, intelligent opinions, that is what this is all about. Right?

We had a break from our winter rains yesterday. So I loaded up the Mrs., our lunch, a couple cameras and headed out to look for tracks. I live near Snohomish, WA and get out as often as I can. Up into the Skagit watershed and along the banks of the Stillaguamish (sp?) River we went. The Bald Eagle are here. But I don’t think they are as abundant as in years past. The rivers are high and rolling with silt. We couldn’t see any Salmon. At the places we stopped we saw tracks, Raccoon, Mink, Muskrat, one set of Beaver and some Coyote. No Sasquatch.

An abundance of Tundra Swan, migrant Mallards and thousands of Snow Geese were feeding in the fields of Fir Island. I don’t think a Sasquatch could catch a healthy bird for lunch, not in that mud. The Eagles do, they are here to winter and feed on fish and the crippled game birds as they can find them.

Man had left his presence, tire tracks, ruts, spent shotgun shells, old fire rings and half-burnt trash. It takes so little time to pick up; I can’t understand why people won’t do it. We usually pick up some of the trash as we go along, but some of it even we won’t touch.

Of course, I don’t know if our diseases are transferable to the BF. My own wife says no. But then, she is a non-believer.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Kane2002

[Guest TooRisky]

norseman : It was never my attempt to make this debate racist or all about global warming (nor anyone elses). The OP is simply discussing his view point that the species could be in trouble. If you would like to expand on your assertion that the population is indeed growing to add to this debate, I think that would be great.

We at WASRT have 3 very large research area's... We have been concentrating on research area 1 which has been very active in the last year... we have seen differing sized prints to indicate what one would call a breeding group... if you have a breeding group then you have stability and/or growth... This is coming off a 2 year light winter scenerio where the young and the old have a greater chance of survival without succumbing to the elements... Now we are having a harsher winter here in the PNW and studies will determine how the groups fared this winter in the late winter and early spring

To answer the racist remark, I don't know what you speak of, I did not mention nor did I read any form of racism at all... As for the Global warming issue, well that debate and misinformation is yet to work itself out... All I know is that tree huggers lied to the people of WA. and it cost thousands of jobs, millions of acres of public land and is still hurting the economy to this very day...