JDL Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Why would someone have to bring in dirt from another area to cover footprints? Why not just use the dirt there? Or just use a shovel to destroy the prints. Economy of effort. Lots of prints. Easier and quicker to lay down new dirt. Like painting a broken stripe on the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 It wouldn't take much effort to mess the tracks up enough to the point of making them non-discript. Hualing in dirt from another location sounds like more work to me. Maybe it was a slow day and they didn't have anything else better to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 I still don't understand why cover up the tracks? Logging companies leave a lot worse mess than a few footprints in the mud. Those skidders alone leave a horrible mess and they gotta import some soil to cover squatch tracks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest watch1 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 If the area that had the tracks had soft soil and a track was easy to see, covering the spot with clay and gravel that is used on many dirt roads in many areas will solve the problem of tracks. After that stuff is rained on and packed, it will get just about as hard as concrete. This would "cover-up" the tracks that are present and make it hard for future tracks to be left. Just another "cover-up" and they don't care what it cost to do it. Mike (watch1) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I still don't understand why cover up the tracks? Logging companies leave a lot worse mess than a few footprints in the mud. Those skidders alone leave a horrible mess and they gotta import some soil to cover squatch tracks? I was just suggesting a possible reason, but we may be envisioning two different sets of circumstances. In my mind's eye I was thinking of a trackway in unharvested forest and someone coming along with a four-wheeler and dirt thinking that it would be less conspicous than turning the earth every five feet or so.. Others may envision a clear cut area where you could just drive over the tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Coonbo Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Coonbo. You say you had a 'highly publicized' encounter with BF, any add'l info on the web about this? Also, your thoughts on certain gov't agencies and an eradication program of aggressive RFP's? (Reclusive Forest Primates). Thank you. Cotter, here is a link to some reports about the incident in Texas: http://www.network54.com/Forum/99679/page-19 . The reports are around Feb 25th and 26th, 2002. The topics were started by Kelly, Bear, Dee, and Cliff J. Off the top of my head, I've only ever heard of one supposed BF eradication action firsthand from someone that lives in the area where it supposedly happened. The action in the story, as it was told to us, was directed against the "Beast of LBL" because of it allegedly killing some campers in the north end of the Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area. Supposedly, in the version told to us by the local person, there were possible Special Forces personnel involved in the action. Do a Google search on "the Beast of LBL" and you'll find quite a bit, but I can't remember if there's any reference to military forces being involved in the action. There is a LOT of controversy surrounding these reports and stories. We have made serious, multi-day research outings in the LBL area three times and I've made several day trips there. I never encountered a belligerent BF there or ever felt in real danger, although there are some really creepy places there. I HAVE seen some surprising things though. There are wolves in parts of the LBL and the last time I camped there, I saw them on two of the three days we were there and heard them howl several times. There are also roe deer living wild there in part of the LBL. And of course there are the fenced-in buffalo and elk. In the three outings there, I can only remember one actual sighting occur, although we did hear a few vocalizations. Generally, the activity there has been less than I had expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Coonbo Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 You sound like the same Coonbo who claimed to have treed one about ten years ago and got everyone in a lather then confessed that you made it all up? Heyyy MARTIN!!! Long time no see, ol' buddy!! But I see you're still as confused as ever! I'm the Coonbo that DID tree one, and tried my damnedest to take it's picture, but all I got was a really cool looking broken off dead snag. But I didn't know that at the time. Then I made the mistake of sending the pic to a certain high level member of a certain well known BF site with the explanation of where it came from and with the instructions that the pic needed to be checked out further before it was posted, therefore do NOT post it without my permission. I was assured that I had at least two weeks to check it out before their next sighting reports would be posted, BUT another high level person on that site jumped the gun and decided to go ahead and post the pic anyway, without my permission. The next day when I returned to the place where the incident occurred, I discovered that what showed up in the pics up in the tree was very repeatable, and not in the place in the tree where I had seen the booger, and therefore was NOT a BF. When I came home that night and found the pic posted, I was royally pissed. I called the owner of the website, told him, and he requested me to just keep quiet about it. I refused and said that I wouldn't have my name associated with something that I absolutely KNEW wasn't a BF. I demanded he take the pic down and he did. I held a lot of animosity against the person that posted that pic without my permission, but I've gotten over it and have forgiven them. Do you have any other questions that might be germane to the discussion at hand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 I've one. Did you capture any photos of the treed creature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted July 3, 2012 Author Share Posted July 3, 2012 I can relate to the frustration you felt having something posted after you said to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 ^Sure, and even on National Forest land those cuts were planned long before they took place. One of my jobs in the 1990s was to conduct environmental reviews of timber sales on National Forests. I would sometimes get the plans months before the saws were sharpened, and by the time they got to me, a lot of effort had already gone into the plan. I don't know what they're using these days, but I'm pretty sure they had a 5-year plan back then. In other words, they knew at least 5 years in advance where they were planning to cut The only exception seemed to be "pre-salvage" cuts. I hated those. The point was to get in and remove the marketable timber before gypsy moths expanded into new areas and killed the trees. Of necessity, the turnaround time on those was a lot shorter, but it was still on the order of months to get it all legal. And this was the FOREST Service, not the National PARK Service. In National Parks, anything that alters the way the land looks is a no-no, so timber harvest there is a far more complicated proposition. I wonder how Pine Beatles affects the time line for cutting. Some of the forest I've been in or near belongs to timber companys, and I really don't know their strategy for managing where and when to cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 I think it's only a problem if the Pine Beatles play too loudly. Then you can't hear the trees falling in the forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 if you could see the booger how did yo manage to only get pics of a broken branch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Coonbo Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 (edited) I've one. Did you capture any photos of the treed creature? Hell no! All I got was the end of a damned broken off tree limb or snag up in the tree. The thing was a juvenile and it was hiding behind the tree trunk like a squirrel. I kept trying to get the angle on it, but it successfully kept the trunk between us. My camera was a really slow digital and there was a multi-second delay from the time I pushed the button till it took the pic, because it was close to dark. This was around '99 or 2000, and the camera was already a few years old then. If I'd had my Olympus OM-1s or OM-2s Program, with some 400 or better film, I'd at least have gotten some hands, elbows, knees and feet. Edited July 3, 2012 by Coonbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted July 3, 2012 Author Share Posted July 3, 2012 Did you get a good look at the hands?Did they look like a human's hands or a chimps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 I can dig the frustration with slow shutter snap after pressing the button. That's where a DSLR (or SLR) has it all over the snapshot cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts