N A W A C - Field Study Discussion

[southernyahoo]

90% of what we believe we've learned has happened in the past three years. Much of what we thought was true has been proven incorrect. 

 

Bipto, can you elaborate on that?  Also What are your thoughts on Concho, Ok.  and the sightings in that area. Does what you've learned shed any light on them?

[Guest]

While we can't get trail-cams of the Oklahoma Apes, we apparently can get shots of the most rare big ape known to science: http://www.wcs.org/news-and-features-main/video-captures-hidden-world-of-elusive-apes.aspx

 

Successful results of exactly what we were doing for six years. This sounds very familiar:

 

A person can study these animals for years and never even catch a glimpse of the gorillas, much less see anything like this.

 

I don't understand how the successful capture of footage of an incredibly rare animal after years of trying in any way casts our attempts in a negative light. They're the same. You make it sound like they hung a camera out back of the local Piggly Wiggly and got pictures of apes, so why can't we? They don't say, but I bet they had more than one camera out there and I bet it was out there for years and years. I bet they invested thousands of man-hours servicing those cameras. The Kagwene Gorilla Sanctuary is under eight square miles in size. That's not so far off from the general area around X. They finally got some footage in conditions similar to ours and that's somehow an indication that our target species can't exist? All I see is parallels. 

 

Bipto, can you elaborate on that?  Also What are your thoughts on Concho, Ok.  and the sightings in that area. Does what you've learned shed any light on them?

 

 

We thought they were nocturnal. They are not exclusively so. We thought they were nomadic. They are not. They've been right there in that area for more than a decade. We didn't put much stock in wood knocking or rock throwing. We were wrong. They wood knock to communicate. Clearly this is true. They throw rocks for a variety of reasons. We thought they would shy away from human contact. That's not always the case. We've learned about their vocalizations, we've gotten glimpses into their social structures, we've discovered possible evidence of how they feed. All we've done is learned for three years. We seemingly knew nothing before Operation Endurance and now there's barely a week that goes by where we don't experience new behavior. 

I'm not sure specifically what you mean regarding Concho. 

[southernyahoo]

 

While we can't get trail-cams of the Oklahoma Apes, we apparently can get shots of the most rare big ape known to science: http://www.wcs.org/news-and-features-main/video-captures-hidden-world-of-elusive-apes.aspx

 

Successful results of exactly what we were doing for six years. This sounds very familiar:

 

A person can study these animals for years and never even catch a glimpse of the gorillas, much less see anything like this.

 

I don't understand how the successful capture of footage of an incredibly rare animal after years of trying in any way casts our attempts in a negative light. They're the same. You make it sound like they hung a camera out back of the local Piggly Wiggly and got pictures of apes, so why can't we? They don't say, but I bet they had more than one camera out there and I bet it was out there for years and years. I bet they invested thousands of man-hours servicing those cameras. The Kagwene Gorilla Sanctuary is under eight square miles in size. That's not so far off from the general area around X. They finally got some footage in conditions similar to ours and that's somehow an indication that our target species can't exist? All I see is parallels. 

 

Bipto, can you elaborate on that?  Also What are your thoughts on Concho, Ok.  and the sightings in that area. Does what you've learned shed any light on them?

 

 

We thought they were nocturnal. They are not exclusively so. We thought they were nomadic. They are not. They've been right there in that area for more than a decade. We didn't put much stock in wood knocking or rock throwing. We were wrong. They wood knock to communicate. Clearly this is true. They throw rocks for a variety of reasons. We thought they would shy away from human contact. That's not always the case. We've learned about their vocalizations, we've gotten glimpses into their social structures, we've discovered possible evidence of how they feed. All we've done is learned for three years. We seemingly knew nothing before Operation Endurance and now there's barely a week that goes by where we don't experience new behavior. 

I'm not sure specifically what you mean regarding Concho. 

 

 

Regarding Concho, are the sightings plausable there? You and Alton went there for Bipcast 4, interviewed Roger Roberts, The Photo's that Alton had been given from there and submitted in a write up to Meldrum's Relict Hominoid Inquiry Journal. Are they Legit? Alton's sighting was there right?

 

Just thinking out loud here, but the evidence seems easier to find, capture or collect in that place.

[Guest]

Oh, I see. Yes, I believe the Oklahoma Prairie photos to be totally legit. Roger Roberts is the real deal and, yes, Alton's sighting was near there. Thing about that place is there was activity for a while then it seemed to go away. It was one of the reasons we thought they could have been nomadic. In a place for a while then moving on. It seems that's what happened there. However, that's not what's at X. We can't say why. 

 

Of course, that's near the middle of the state where the tree cover is much more broken up and separated by wide prairies and fields. There are also many more people in and around there. In X, there's little human involvement and ample cover year-round. 

[hiflier]

Hello bipto,

The observation that the creatures are believed now to NOT be nomadic is why I had started the thread about SSQ not perhaps sharing habitat with bears. My thinking was that SSQ was the dominate of the two and that if an area was seen to be lacking in a bear presence then it may indicate a Bigfoot community was in residence. Even though the point was brought up regarding the fact that both enjoyed similar habitat I was pushing the idea that the inhabited regions of each species, both bears and SSQ, might not overlap. Have you seen bears in X?

Edited July 13, 2013 by hiflier

[Guest]

Yeah, lots of bears in X. We have hundreds of pictures of them and we've observed them directly on a number of occasions. They *do* have overlapping habitat and it's possible that in areas where resources are scarce, the apes push the bears out, but that's not an issue in X. The bears have sheer numbers on their side while the apes would have a higher intelligence and size/strength.

[hiflier]

Hello bipto,

Now that's the sort of information that I personally find valuable to know. Thank you again because if you and your group wasn't out there I would be in limbo wondering about such issues as these. I bet they stay pretty much out of each other's way? These are entirely Black Bears that you have observed?

Edited July 13, 2013 by hiflier

[norseman]

 

 

While I admire my skeptic colleague from Alaska for many reasons, I think he and other skeptics miss the boat when they argue that Bigfoot advocacy is nothing but fraud and lies for profit.

I do think he is correct to point out that Area X is not the Congo. Sure, it is dense. But only those who are acclimated to Bigfoot lore will find the area remote enough to have kept its secret from the world, as we are half-way through 2013.

As to the density of flora in Area X. How do giant, broad-bodied apes navigate through such foliage without forging trailways and leaving abundant hair (red, black, white/gray) to be discovered?

 

No, we are not talking about the Congo, in the SE US.......... But a couple of points I'd like to make. The mountain gorilla lives in a 100 x 300 mile range within the Congo. The adjoining forests from the middle of Missouri to the Gulf coast (North/South axis) and from E. Texas to the Mississippi river (East/West axis) is roughly 600 x 300 miles. But then again, the plight of the mountain gorilla is human encroachment, and not just the bush meat trade, but slash and burn farming practices and human populations. Same goes for the Orang in Borneo and palm oil plantations.

 

At least from a habitat POV, I don't think it's a stretch at all. Skeptics point to lack of physical proof and lack of fossil record evidence and they definitely have the right to do so.......it doesn't help proponents at all. But it's not impossible.

 

But in the Macro view? The Canadian shield forest and adjoining forests that cascade down through the US? Smash the whole Congo basin in size, and not just the part that the mountain Gorillas live in, it's not even comparable. And 90 percent of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the US border. Again, improbable but certainly not impossible. I think we tend to see Africa as an exotic place, and North America not so much, it's a jaded view because we live in the more populated places in it.

 

Also, concerning hair, I'm positive that foliage rips hairs away, but finding them in the undergrowth is another matter. If it was me, I would tend to look for hair on barbed wire fence lines if there are any in the vicinity. That's about the only place I notice deer hair caught that's easily seen.

 

Your analysis is interesting, but not relevant to the point I was making. If you think the beast in question is of low population (in the high hundreds or low thousands) and is very nomadic (if I'm not misremembering, Meldrum once stated single male sasquatch roam up to 1500 miles yearly), then your remarks are certainly germane.

I was striving to note something else. Area X is not remote as it relates to a secreted habitat of a shrewdness of Giant Apes. There are roadways and even scenic hi-ways nearby. Hunters hunt the area. Illegal drug manufacture occurs in the area. (Remember, when the cabin owner's kin was startled by gunfire initiated by a NAWAC member, he fled;he thought he was being fired at by drug operators.) Tourism is important in the area. Everyone from forest rangers to biology field operators to local folks who move about in the woods for adventure and even individual Samaritans who clean trails, are part of the makeup of the area around Area X.

 

And do any of these hunters, vacationers, rangers, etc, report seeing giant apes in this area? I completely hear what your saying, it's not an easy thing to wrap your head around. Not for Tibet, British Columbia and especially Oklahoma. But people are seeing something and despite the some what fractured habitat, there is a lot of forest there. It's surprising when you get on google earth and start looking from Missouri south. And NAWAC is in there trying to sort it out.

 

Consider this juxtaposition: the gorilla was confirmed in 1861 when Paul Du Chaillu, a Frenchman, brought back mounted gorillas and gorilla bones from western equatorial Africa/ over 150 years later there is no similar definitive evidence for the existence of Giant Apes living, we are told (and told more often nowadays), right off the main road in Anywhere North America.

Just think. The remote jungle of Gabon relinquished its ape over 150 years ago, to a Frenchman, while the hinterland of Oklahoma has stubbornly refused to give up its Greater Ape. As I said, only someone totally acclimated to Bigfoot lore would not see the problem with Giant Apes living unfound in the state of Oklahoma.

 

Understood. But let's just say for a moment that the creature is real, it was just proven this morning. We would all have to admit to ourselves because of your very points made that this creature is very different from a Gorilla or a Chimp living in the Congo. And this is a very sore subject between proponents..........what in the heck is it and why does it do what it does?

 

Not only has it managed to evade "great white hunters" but it managed to stay off the lodge poles of native Americans as well. Why? How? 

 

You've came to your conclusion based on the odds of such a creature existing, and I cannot fault you for that. But if you had ever seen one, then your world is turned upside down. I've talked to a few witnesses and it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to them either.....

 

You have the weight of known science and the odds in your favor, and I'll openly concede that to you. Science has no proof of a north American Ape. Nor do current Apes live outside of equatorial areas.

 

 

While we can't get trail-cams of the Oklahoma Apes, we apparently can get shots of the most rare big ape known to science: http://www.wcs.org/news-and-features-main/video-captures-hidden-world-of-elusive-apes.aspx

 

 

Looks like a hoax to me............

[Guest]

These are entirely Black Bears that you have observed?

 

I believe the species is black bear (transplanted from Minnesota, once upon a time) but their actual color range is pretty dramatic. We've seen reddish brown ones, honey colored ones, and brownish ones in addition to black. The natural color variations are pretty dramatic. 

[Guest]

(transplanted from Minnesota, once upon a time) 

 

I'm told it was Manitoba. Pretty much the same thing as Minnesota. Probably the same population of bears. In any event, they came from Manitoba. 

[Incorrigible1]

Really? The bear population of X isn't naturally occurring, but came from Manitoba? That is interesting. Is there any more tidbits of info about that? Thanks.

[Painthorse]

Really? The bear population of X isn't naturally occurring, but came from Manitoba? That is interesting. Is there any more tidbits of info about that? Thanks.

http://www.wildlifedepartment.com/hunting/bear.htm

[Guest]

I have seen one of the big black bears up on the nearby Talimena Scenic drive back in the 1990's its was huge.

 

Black Bear

 

Black bears once ranged across North America, including the entire area of what is now Oklahoma, but by the early 1900s, sightings had become rare. Factors like land use changes, unregulated hunting and habitat fragmentation caused black bear numbers to eventually decline drastically.

In the late 1900s, however, black bears began making a comeback in Oklahoma after the successful reintroduction of black bears in the Ouachita and Ozark Mountains of Arkansas. That initial relocation of about 250 bears from northern Minnesota and Manitoba, Canada, turned into thousands of bears in the mountains of Arkansas, which then expanded into southwest Missouri and eastern Oklahoma.

This successful reestablishment of black bears led to a renewed black bear hunting season in Arkansas in 1980.

Today bears have a growing population in southeast Oklahoma and are an important part of the state's wildlife diversity. Biologists with the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation have collected biological data mainly from bear surveys and research projects.

 

 "

Edited July 13, 2013 by GEARMAN

[Guest]

That initial relocation of about 250 bears from northern Minnesota and Manitoba, Canada, turned into thousands of bears in the mountains of Arkansas, which then expanded into southwest Missouri and eastern Oklahoma.

Oh look, we were both right.

[southernyahoo]

Oh, I see. Yes, I believe the Oklahoma Prairie photos to be totally legit. Roger Roberts is the real deal and, yes, Alton's sighting was near there. Thing about that place is there was activity for a while then it seemed to go away. It was one of the reasons we thought they could have been nomadic. In a place for a while then moving on. It seems that's what happened there. However, that's not what's at X. We can't say why. 

 

Of course, that's near the middle of the state where the tree cover is much more broken up and separated by wide prairies and fields. There are also many more people in and around there. In X, there's little human involvement and ample cover year-round. 

 

 

Very good. I'm familiar with the place myself. This is where I found the hair sample I submitted to the Ketchum study. If you remember the dead horse Roger said he found in the woods in bipcast 4 in Concho, well, I found that too among other things.

 

 

I'm wondering if you or Alton could put a place mark on this photo where the photo's of the Sasquatch were taken by Keith L.