Missing 411

[Guest BFSleuth]

I would encourage anyone with time and knowledge of the outdoors to volunteer some time with SAR. Most SAR organizations will have training for new members.

I'm not sure how it is handled in other states, but in Washington it is usually the county sheriff that is in charge of any SAR operation and they would be the ones to call SAR. Then you get a phone call through the SAR command if there is a search. It's been decades since I was involved. Depending on the county the operation can be highly organized and professional, or it can be a fiasco (like the time a buddy of mine broke his leg in a rock climbing fall and we were privately set up to lower him down when the local SAR boys showed up and told us to stop so they could take over.... he finally got lowered down after 5 hours of pain and us climbers having to rescue some of the SAR boys...).

IME only a fraction of SAR operations seem to get reported in the local news. In any given county in the USA there are likely lots of missing persons that SAR never found.

[Guest UPs]

Ace, not real good at quoting, but you make some very good points. In reference to my database comment....this was in reference to the NPS only. The law requires them to provide the information to the public by Freedom of Information Act. Before reading this book, I was unaware that only federal agencies fall under this law. State and local authorities do have this data but are not required to release it per the FOIA. I did not mean to argue that it should be a SAR responsibility to maintain a database, but simply the number of missing in my area very well may be much larger than what I can find online. This interests me because of a bone I found about 8 years ago and I dismissed it as human for a number is reasons and one of them being there were no missing folks near my area. It was also much too big to be human.

BFSleuth.....where I live now, I am not near any large, forested areas, but when I do move back to the UP, I will be volunteering for SAR. I really appreciate people who use their own time to help others and I fairly good at finding things in the woods. As a young teen, I was lost for 2 days while in a program called outdoor challenge. Since that time, I feel very comfortable outdoors while alone. When reading these stories, my own memories of what it felt like and how I reacted come rushing back. Some make sense, but many are very hard for me to relate to. I am sure that is one of the reasons that I bought the books. UPs

[bipedalist]

The issue of missing clothing is pretty easy as Ace says. As much time as I've spent in woods over decades, I frequent a few areas like the "back of my hand", still when losing an item, and retracing steps stuff is never recovered. I'm not talking about forest green face towels and well camouflaged items, I'm talking about white items.... and not found even without snow pack. An example is I was carrying a portable spray bottle recently. It slipped out of the pack along with some dayglo twine. In retracing steps the next day, the dayglo twine was found, but not the white spray bottle? Sure animals could pick up on scents, etc. and move stuff too, but I think it is a matter of time/space and focused attention can only be so many places at a time for a single person on a single grid.

[Guest BFSleuth]

I once lost an entire roll of toilet paper while climbing a ridge on a windy early morning. I didn't notice it until I saw a pretty sunlit amoeba flying past me in the vortex. It may still be flying...

[Guest UPs]

The issue of missing clothing is pretty easy as Ace says. As much time as I've spent in woods over decades, I frequent a few areas like the "back of my hand", still when losing an item, and retracing steps stuff is never recovered. I'm not talking about forest green face towels and well camouflaged items, I'm talking about white items.... and not found even without snow pack. An example is I was carrying a portable spray bottle recently. It slipped out of the pack along with some dayglo twine. In retracing steps the next day, the dayglo twine was found, but not the white spray bottle? Sure animals could pick up on scents, etc. and move stuff too, but I think it is a matter of time/space and focused attention can only be so many places at a time for a single person on a single grid.

The big difference here is that there are hundreds and sometimes many more searchers looking specifically for clues. I have also lost things in the woods, but unless the searchers specifically were not looking for the clothing, some piece should be found. I am not talking about one sock missing, but shirts, coats, boots, shoes, socks, hats, etc. It seems somewhat consistent that they had their underwear on, but that also varies. Individually, these clues may not mean much, but when put together with some of the other irregularities on such a large scale, something smells wrong.

For any of you that participate in SAR often, is it common to find a mostly nude body and never find any of the victims clothing? Also, in most of these case the cause of death was determined to be within 24 hours and either no signs of trauma or that information withheld. Another strange parallel with some of them were the bodies found in an area that was previously searched. One theory was that the body was put there to be found, but why? These are in the wilderness and if pretty remote areas (the author uses the descriptive word desolate too many times IMO).

I do not even know that bf exists, but if it does and is an apex predator as described, this is a behavior that I would expect from a very small number of them. If abduction occurred more often, it may compromise their existence. To assume they do exist as a species and there are no rogue animals does not make sense to me. One of the problems with this theory is where a human is known to go missing, there is a flood of other humans in that area. To remain elusive, they would want to avoid human contact. Food for thought. UPs

[bipedalist]

Well, within a month or two recently, two random males in two apparently unrelated incidents disappeared within the Great Smoky MNP. Other than cars parked at overlook and pulloffs, no trace of either was ever found. One off a side trail near Sugarlands, one cross-country off the AT near Newfound Gap apparently. I thought that odd, even if they were suicidal to have a cluster like that. It's not like Hwy 441 crossing the park between NC/TN is known as a kidnapper thruway or something, either.

Mentioned within this thread by someone was the woman that disappeared and turned up dead near a waterfall outside the Skookum Meadows area during a Rainbow Gathering & was last seen like 1:30am and had been ill but was camped near a SUV and a road. By 8:30am she was missing, this in early July some years ago, her remains were found in October of that year as I remember. She turned up in an area that had been previously searched by at least two teams. That case has not been solved apparently.

Edited May 11, 2012 by bipedalist

[Guest]

The big difference here is that there are hundreds and sometimes many more searchers looking specifically for clues. I have also lost things in the woods, but unless the searchers specifically were not looking for the clothing, some piece should be found. I am not talking about one sock missing, but shirts, coats, boots, shoes, socks, hats, etc. It seems somewhat consistent that they had their underwear on, but that also varies. Individually, these clues may not mean much, but when put together with some of the other irregularities on such a large scale, something smells wrong.

I'm only speaking of my own knowledge and experience, but there are usually not hundreds of searchers in any search, and if there are, they are in teams of six or so. So, you have six people searching an area (part of a grid), six more searching another area and so on. You've got some number of people, maybe 50 - 100 split up within six or eight hour shifts. What you have to go by is if the person told anyone where they were going or where they were last seen, were they moving through or out of the area and how mobile were they. Do they think they can move out of the area, if so to where. Are they familiar with the area, etc. When there are hundreds of searches they are multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional, with multiple specialties...lots of variables.

If the probability of detection is low the incident commander may send in another six searchers in the morning (as an example). However, the thing to remember, at least relative to this forum, is you're looking for a needle (why don't we find BF bones for example) in a haystack that is so large, so spread out and has so many obstacles, that even if you knew exactly where someone was supposed to be and they couldn't move, you'd have a hard time finding them in a typical search. Think about it this way; you have to find a needle in a haystack and the needle moves around. You search an area and twenty minutes later that person you're looking for may be going by having no idea you were just there. As someone mentioned above, hug a tree is the mantra for a reason.

For any of you that participate in SAR often, is it common to find a mostly nude body and never find any of the victims clothing? Also, in most of these case the cause of death was determined to be within 24 hours and either no signs of trauma or that information withheld. Another strange parallel with some of them were the bodies found in an area that was previously searched. One theory was that the body was put there to be found, but why? These are in the wilderness and if pretty remote areas (the author uses the descriptive word desolate too many times IMO).

I do not even know that bf exists, but if it does and is an apex predator as described, this is a behavior that I would expect from a very small number of them. If abduction occurred more often, it may compromise their existence. To assume they do exist as a species and there are no rogue animals does not make sense to me. One of the problems with this theory is where a human is known to go missing, there is a flood of other humans in that area. To remain elusive, they would want to avoid human contact. Food for thought. UPs

You're looking for clues, socks, shirts, whatever. But, the person discarding them isn't leaving them as clues in those cases. They think they are hot so they strip off a shirt and throw it off a trail (if they're on a trail, which they probably aren't because they think they have to go cross country to get to the nearest road), or into a creek with running water, and then they keep moving. You're not apt to find their shirt anywhere near where you find their body. There is no reason they would have to be close to each other. It doesn't mean they can't be, but again, you're looking for a moving target, so what they take off doesn't have to have a relationship to where you find them. Also, sometimes a sock, shirt, piece of clothing is found and you have to log it, but it doesn't mean it belongs to the person you're looking for.

You wouldn't have "trauma" per se if you died from exposure or dehydration. Most people are found within three days of being lost. A search usually isn't started (unless there is some significant information to move people, like a cold front moving in or significant heat, or whatever) for almost 24 hours. So, if people are typically found within three days, and the search didn't start for almost a day, you're going to find they died within 24 hours (if they're dead). Also, it takes about three days without water to die, so if you searched for a few days, you'd find a dead person had just died. It's the reason SAR is critical.

I'm going to also say that dying people, searches, what people suffering from exposure do, what areas are searched to what degree, what equipment is used, etc., etc. are all variables that are not set in stone. They are all variables because they vary, and significantly. If someone said it was strange that someone was found mostly naked, I'd probably think, well, not that strange. People do what would otherwise be considered strange when they are scared or suffering from exposure. If someone said the area where a body was found was searched twice, I'd think, not that strange. People have a probability of detection, they have different search styles/tactics, etc.

I'll give you an odd example. We had a search in a remote area where we knew the destination but didn't know whether the people (three of them) would take a more direct route there and maybe a less direct route out. We had teams (maybe 30 - 50 searchers) searching a WIDE area. We had ground searchers on foot, we had canine, a horse team and ATV teams. We had a helicpoter with FLIR. One guy was diabetic that was lost so we had medical on scene as well.

We were searching a trail that we thought they might take when one in our group said, maybe they took a cross country more direct route because they are young and strong. They probably don't think they need to stick to the trail. Made sense so we back tracked to check out a more direct cross country route. The horse team went by us on the trail. We heard the helicopter above us. Within a half hour the horse team had them on the trail we abandoned to cut through the bush. The guys had a fire built that the helicopter with FLIR missed and none of us smelled. We had walked on the trail within 1/4 mile of them, all the while signaling (whistles, etc), which they heard but we couldn't hear them. They had indeed crossed country but came back on the trail before deciding to start a fire. We were basically all walking around each other, they had a signal/warming fire, we had a helicopter with FLIR and although we found them we still had teams tens of miles away, deep in the woods on foot and ATVs searching areas that made sense that were no where near where they were found. We knew where their car was, we knew where they were going and we still exhausted huge resources to find them. Had the horse team not found them, we would have walked their route up the mountain but missed where they ended up coming out. They were moving, we were moving and it wasn't until they stopped that a team located them. It was all relatively quick, but that same scenario could have been days with a dead diabetic. There are just so many variables you can't really consider anything out of the ordinary.

BTW, again, I haven't read the book, so I'm not commenting on the book. I'm commenting on what I've experienced as a searcher. There is no formula, there are usually best guesses and judgements and irrational human behaviour of the lost and scared.

Edited May 11, 2012 by Ace!

[JDL]

I got the book a while back and skimmed it. Now I'm actually reading it.

I get the impression that this was originally conceived as a bigfoot-related book, but as he got into things, he decided to shift focus to the broader picture and remove explicit reference to the bigfoot-related thesis. As I read it, some of the assertions he stresses only make sense if he was originally trying to build the bigfoot case. It seems to me that as he broadened his focus and edited out specific references to bigfoot, he was less efficient in removing the implied references. As a result, he seems to be stressing an implied thesis without actually coming out and making the specific statement.

I do believe that some of these cases are bigfoot-related. I would speculate, however, that some are simple abductions, rather than predation. In primate troops, the abduction of infant primates by non-parental adult primates is a known behavior. Some of these cases where a young human child is found many miles away from the point of abduction may be nothing more than this, with the caveat that the child was released when the abductor lost interest. A toddler abandoned like this is still in real trouble, still alive, but in danger of dying of exposure.

Also, when primates steal something from other individuals in the troop, they often retreat to a defensible high point in a tree where they can observe any attempts at pursuit and recovery. Finding remains at a higher elevation may indicate that bigfoot parallels this behavior, making it's capture and then retreating to a point where it can watch for pursuit.

I can't help but notice that one of the clusters in California is located in the area where I was stalked when I was fourteen.

[Guest UPs]

JDL........that was a really good overall review. Have you read the eastern one that deals with the cases in and near the smokies? If the author did edit it to remove specific bf references, he may have done so to appeal to a wider audience. Also, some of these cases just have nothing in common except location.

Ace....Thank you for all of that SAR info and also for being part of it. This is the type of information that will help me get a mental picture as I am reading what happened.

In a previous link from Willy, statistics showed that 1-6 year olds have the greatest chance of survival, even more than fit hikers, hunters, etc. The 7-12 year olds were found to basically run until they drop (my own words) in many cases. The theory behind this is once a child becomes capable of reasoning, something changes in how they behave when they get lost. The article further said that there are only a few studies to base this on. There is much more information in it, but the big differences in children's reactions based upon age surprised me.

[JDL]

Haven't got the second book yet. Just learned that it is available.

[salubrious]

Has anyone here read this? Thoughts?

http://www.nabigfootsearch.com/missing_411.html

[Guest]

Yes, I think there is far more to this than meets the eye. Some of the accounts are just downright frightening, especially those that go missing because they step away from a group for a few seconds and then vanish with no trace.

Also the proposed cost for the lists of names if compiled was staggering. Something stinks.

[Guest MikeG]

Threads merged

[Guest]

I bought both books at once and am just getting started in the first one. I do notice that he doesn't say how far away from where they disappeared the missing person was found. I'd bet I could figure it out from Google Earth but am not feeling that energetic right now. I think the stories are very interesting, although he does have a Joe Friday kind of writing style......

[Guest Nalajr]

Hey all,

This guy was on Coast 2 Coast 2 times telling the story about his new book. His book is about people that went missing in our Nations National Park System. If you haven't heard it, I would suggest looking it up on Your Tube and listening to it.

A lot of these stories he tells are of people, often young, that disappear without a trace under unusual circumstances. What adds to the strangeness is that when he was researching the book he went to the National Park Service, a Federal LEO Agency in charge of the Nations Parks, told him they didn't keep lists of people that went missing in the parks. He files FOIA documents to get what they have, and the authorities don't want to give him any info at all. The FBI won't give info on cases they have been called in on citing privacy concerns for the victim who has been missing for over 20 years.

Why all the secrecy? Why wouldn't you want to give out the info? Something really strange going on here and it appears that the authorities don't want anyone to know about these disappearances.

I posted this because although he doesn't say it, there are hints that at least some of these cases might be related to SASSY. I also found out that the author is involved in the SASSY community, but I am not familiar with his works in that area or what reputation he has regarding it.

There were some witnesses that told of seeing a "hairy thing" with something on it's shoulder running away from the scene of where a boy went missing.

I just thought it was a very interesting topic and show that could very well involve SASSY causing these very strange disappearances of young boys. You should listed to it if you haven't heard it.

I'd like to know what you think of this book and also whether you think SASSY could be a MALEVOLENT critter that is out there causing these cases of missing boys. Something is going on that the FEDS don't want people knowing about, that's one thing that's certain.

Nalajr