Guest Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I have a simple question, and i'm hoping for a simple answer. I'm no expert in tracking, but isn't a herd,pride,pack or family group easier to track then a single individual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Maybe it was my brother. His name is Armando. Someone ought to try leaving them a coupon to Olan Mills, Picture People, or maybe even Kiddie Kandids. Maybe they can sit down for a nice family portrait. Couldn't hurt to try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17x7 Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 If I was to venture an opinion, I would think they live in small family groups. Dad, Mom, and a couple of youngsters. It seems that most sightings involve males so I would guess that when they move, they spread out a bit with the male (bigger, stronger, faster) scouting ahead as the more vunerable Mom and kids follow behind. Mom and kids probably stay in heavier cover while the male does more hunting/gathering which explains the sightings. It also makes sense to me that the male would 'patrol' the edge of their territory more while the family stays put in a secure, 'sweet spot' that has good cover and easy food at hand. 17x7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I would think they would have families. A lot of primate species are social creatures at least to some extent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primate#Social_systems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kerchak Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I can't speak for all squatches, but Harry has a family: (1:38) LOL, I love how the actor in the suit is concentrating on trying to not trip up in that costume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I have a simple question, and i'm hoping for a simple answer. I'm no expert in tracking, but isn't a herd,pride,pack or family group easier to track then a single individual? Being in a family group doesn't mean they are all constantly within a few feet or yards of each other. As happens with a lot of animals, a "family group" could mean foraging within 50 or a hundred yards, and staying in touch by calling, rather than all being together in a clump. Tracks in woodlands are quite rare (the ground is hardly ever clean and clear and of the correct material, and tracks deteriorate rather quickly anyway). Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I have a simple question, and i'm hoping for a simple answer. I'm no expert in tracking, but isn't a herd,pride,pack or family group easier to track then a single individual? Actually, I think living in family groups or larger groups would be an advantage. They can cover more ground in terms of keeping watch for intrusion or danger, and can defend themselves. It seems to be a common thread in sighting reports and habituation reports that the big alpha males hang back out of sight, but will make themselves known if they think there is danger. The story of the mushroom digging family group is a good case in point: http://bigfootology.com/?p=418 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Maybe that's why there is so little known about them. Most of us are way too comfortable with our preconceived ideas of presumed BF behavior & sounds. Can't see the forest for the trees certainly applies to BF research. Regarding the area that I bolded don't you think that you could help people by releasing what evidence you have and thus bring about a huge change in "preconceived ideas and presumed behaviour and sounds"? With all your claimed facts you try and show superiority in your knowledge but you do not help things one bit by not sharing your evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted February 28, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 28, 2012 Regarding the area that I bolded don't you think that you could help people by releasing what evidence you have and thus bring about a huge change in "preconceived ideas and presumed behaviour and sounds"? With all your claimed facts you try and show superiority in your knowledge but you do not help things one bit by not sharing your evidence. I have tried but it gets rejected and so it does with alot with others.The truth is out there and all you have to do is prove it to yourself.The only thing that stops one is fear and thats not a bad thing since fear is good.Many people are very closed minded and are more willing to reject then accept what is truth. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Transformer, Who says Sasfooty has not shared her evidence. Maybe not on a publicly viewed forum and maybe not to you personally. Edited February 28, 2012 by indiefoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Transformer, Who says Sasfooty has not shared her evidence. Maybe not on a publicly viewed forum and maybe not to you personally. Sharing with only some people and then being derogatory and condescending to those she has not shared with is wrong in my book. I honestly do not see why she would not share evidence publicly since she makes such public pronouncements about her supposed knowledge. This makes it seem like she has no confidence that her evidence is actually going to stand up to any questioning. If one does not have confidence in their own evidence I am not sure that anybody else should have confidence in it either. That is just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Where did you get the idea that I don't share evidence? Do you not see the link in bright blue letters in my signature? Do you think it's just there for decoration? Being falsly accused tends to make some people get condesending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) This was meant to be a discussion about whether or not you believe BF lives in a family group. Not an attack on Sasfooty's character or credibility. I have a simple question, and i'm hoping for a simple answer. I'm no expert in tracking, but isn't a troop, herd, pride, pack or family group easier to track then a single individual? It seems that simple answer has eluded me once again. Edited February 29, 2012 by Caesar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Well the simple answer is that yeah in theory a group of animals would be easier to track than an individual, but that doesn't necessarily apply to Bigfoot. It doesn't matter if it's one or ten, creatures either wired or taught to do what they can to avoid detection are going to be hard to find. A pack of ninjai is every bit as hard to find as one lone ninja. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 The first link posted by BFSleuth mentioned that Derek Randle "Derekfoot" on here had done an investigation at the sight. Maybe he will chime in on what his thoughts are or the op could send him a pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts