Erickson: Sasquatch More Widespread Than Common Black Bear

[BobbyO]

Lets look outside the box(USA)im sure most of us had to study about the explosion in Tunguska Siberia.

There wasn't documented reports only word of mouth amoung the "locals",but it was known that there was,

Strange beings along the Tunguska river & the people that seen these beings called them "Derevo Chelovek"

In russian means"Human Tree"or Tree People.I heard this only one time & never again.It was in the early 90s

By Grover Krantz.

There are Black Bear in Russia so if there are BF there then they both are, Eastern Russia is a lot like the PNW..

Big Brown Bear too with Russia having the biggest Population of them on the Planet.

Edited March 11, 2011 by BobbyO

[bf2011HBMay]

In the county I live in Mississippi, we just had a mama black bear give birth to triplet cubs, which is a good thing since our black bear population in this county is almost basically extinct. I do suspect we have 'Squatches in this Northern Mississippi County as well, so the distribution of black bears to 'Squatches could be about equal. Krantz said once that there are at least 100 bears for every one Sasquatch, and he may have been right. Great topic here.

[norseman]

With all the hype about the Erickson project, I decided to listen to a blogtalk radio show in which Mr. Erickson is interviewed about his project. The interview occurred in October 31, 2010.

During the interview (minute 87) he says:

"One thing I'd like to say is that Sasquatch is more widespread than the common black bear... we have reports, enough to know that they occur in most forested areas in North America."

I know some of you agree with this view, but I'm highly skeptical of this claim. According to wikipedia, there are 300,000 black bears in Canada + 200,000 in the US, that's half a million black bears.

I think the number of BF is zero, but if it does exist, no way they come even remotely close to that many, and there would have to be a lot of them in order to cover that much territory.

The American black bear inhabits most forested areas in North America. And I would argue in much higher numbers.

(Also Erickson's interview doesn't come up, it's somebody else)

[Guest MAN OF THE WOODS]

Mr.Krantz made a comment in the summer of 92? That there are insects,animals & tribes of people that havent been discovered & never will be.

I guess take it for what its worth.

[Guest]

The American black bear inhabits most forested areas in North America. And I would argue in much higher numbers.

(Also Erickson's interview doesn't come up, it's somebody else)

I do not know what numbers were given norseman, but I know many would agree with you regarding the fact that the spp probably occurs in higher numbers than many states suggest. (black bear). Plus they are mobile and a few states have not gotten around to even documenting them let alone working pop dy studies.

Edited March 11, 2011 by treeknocker

[gigantor]

The American black bear inhabits most forested areas in North America. And I would argue in much higher numbers.

right, what I'm saying is that it's highly unlikely for BF to have a greater populated range than the black bear.

Erickson comes on at minute 87 on the show.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

Maybe the Bigfoot creatures have a greater range than bears? I'd bet there are many more black bears in the US than there are Bigfoot creatures. Maybe that's what Erickson was trying to get across? I don't know. I don't think we have any black bears in South Central Ky now,(I've never seen any in this part of the state myself that is) The bear population here was hunted out completely long ago. I do know we still have a few primates that are not on the books yet though. Chris B.

[Guest Knuck]

Chris, I agree that there are more black bears, however, I seriously suspect that thier range nowhere near matches the sasquatch's range. I know that my area here in the South Piedmont of NC, black bears only come around here when wandering. (Not indiginous to the region.) But squatches live here in numbers. I know, I know, some won't swallow this, but it is what it is. I think sasquatches inhabit most regions of the US, other than urban, while the black bears maintain (as a whole) a little more remote environment. I feel that Erickson's remark mearly was meant to say that sasquatches habitat may be way more widespread than black bears. I highly agree with this. JMEO-Knuck

[Guest fenris]

Chris, I agree that there are more black bears, however, I seriously suspect that thier range nowhere near matches the sasquatch's range. I know that my area here in the South Piedmont of NC, black bears only come around here when wandering. (Not indiginous to the region.) But squatches live here in numbers. I know, I know, some won't swallow this, but it is what it is. I think sasquatches inhabit most regions of the US, other than urban, while the black bears maintain (as a whole) a little more remote environment. I feel that Erickson's remark mearly was meant to say that sasquatches habitat may be way more widespread than black bears. I highly agree with this. JMEO-Knuck

Regarding Bears the chart that was referenced is "Conseravtive" because I know for a fact they range further south in my area than it is on the map.

[Guest tracker]

If there are so many why couldn't any one show us a track when I threw down the gauntlet? Fish and game people tell me there are only 25,000 black bear in WA. When I ask about Sasquatch they just roll their eyes and laugh. In fact and for a fact I have talked to 3 different F and G personel in the last six months and they all just laugh when I mention Sasquatch. And those are the guys who are out there much more often and more hours than most of us.

They only laugh because they have never run into one while counting beavers at a pond and it was not in their text book . Most people that see prints are not prepared to capture the moment same goes with sightings. Time in the bush helps increase your chances but it's more like a lottery.

JMO tracker.

[southernyahoo]

Perhaps people could post some pics of Black bear tracks found outside the presented range of the species, and with good provenance where they were found so we can examine this concept more closely. Surely with all the outdoors experience we have in this thread people should have good pics of bear tracks in most forested areas in North America.

[Guest fenris]

Perhaps people could post some pics of Black bear tracks found outside the presented range of the species, and with good provenance where they were found so we can examine this concept more closely. Surely with all the outdoors experience we have in this thread people should have good pics of bear tracks in most forested areas in North America.

I'll look for the one I have from Connecticut, which seems a bit south of where they place the range in the NE. They are known to be overrunning New Jersey as well in some areas.

[Guest]

I don't believe there are more Sasquatch then black bear for a second. I have many pictures of black bear in Washington state, that I took. I have many pictures of their tracks as well. I have no pictures of Sasquatch, but do a few of their tracks. I have never been looking for Black Bear but I have been looking for Sasquatch.

There has been a theory proposed that Giganto had a life span close to 100 years. The longer the life span of an animal, the longer other things in it's life take, such as gestation periods, infancy, etc. With longer infancy comes greater intelligence and smaller numbers of young at any one time. This isn't true with Black Bears. I may not be making a clear enough point of it here but to think that there are more Sasquatch and that they inhabit every forested piece of real estate is ridiculous. They not only would have been seen more often, but for longer periods of time. They would be impacting the environment more. They would have to compete for the same resources already allocated so we would see more competition evidence.

This statement was made as a sound bite and to be slightly controversial is all.

[Guest fenris]

There has been a theory proposed that Giganto had a life span close to 100 years. The longer the life span of an animal, the longer other things in it's life take, such as gestation periods, infancy, etc. With longer infancy comes greater intelligence and smaller numbers of young at any one time. This isn't true with Black Bears. I may not be making a clear enough point of it here but to think that there are more Sasquatch and that they inhabit every forested piece of real estate is ridiculous. They not only would have been seen more often, but for longer periods of time. They would be impacting the environment more. They would have to compete for the same resources already allocated so we would see more competition evidence.

This statement was made as a sound bite and to be slightly controversial is all.

But you still have to prove that squatchy is Giganto, which massively unlikely again, imo. It wouldn't have made the original journey.

[Guest BDK]

I haven't seen a black bear in the wild since I was 10 does that mean they are extinct like cougars

I'd say Sasquatch has a larger range and appear in more areas than black bear but not that there is more of the big guys than bears.