N A W A C - Field Study Discussion

[Guest DWA]

You can pile up all the buffalo skulls you want, and show me all the grizz necklaces you want.

 

Then you have to explain to me all the hunters who have - THEY'RE, HELLO!, HUNTERS - built up their own little nice piles of deer and turkey and bear etc. who looked at one of these through a gunsight and said:  I can't shoot that.

 

Evidence says it's not impossible, because evidence says it happened.

[Guest]

Green means trees, sure is alot of devoid areas in Washington State and some of that area must not be any Squatch there.

 

Next time I'm in X, I'll bring a print out of these maps and show it to the monkeys. Maybe they're not aware they can't be living there. 

[Guest DWA]

I guess this is what it comes down to for me:

 

1.  Lots of people who seem utterly reasonable tell us they've seen and interacted with these animals.

2.  Lots of evidence has been found in compelling connection with these interactions that appears to be just the kind of sign one would expect, the kind that other animals leave.

3.  I see a choice between two propositions here:  Either the evidence says what it looks like it says, or we need to just disregard it based on assumptions that make us comfortable, and assume that thousands of non-biologists are having a biologically-correct hallucination.

 

Easy call for me.

Edited July 17, 2013 by DWA

[Drew]

And they may have killed a Sasquatch as well but did not make a necklace out of finger nails......to be traded for an iron pot and end up in a museum somewhere.

Drew? Your simply making assumptions.

 

I'm simply comparing types of evidence.

 

MIB brought up: Smeja, Ape Canyon, Bauman, and "Hunters who couldn't pull the trigger"

 

Those are stories.

 

I showed pictures of what N. American hunters did.   That is real, tangible evidence, that Large, Dangerous animals were killed in Droves, and extirpated from their ranges.

 

The claim is that Wood Apes must have repopulated Oklahoma, when it was completely devastated by this same exact mentality that wiped out the bears and bison.   They could not have stayed in Oklahoma when all the trees were cut, and all the deer were killed, could they?

[slabdog]

Staff announcement:

The direction of discussion on this particular thread is putting it at risk of becoming derailed.

This thread was started specifically to discuss the field research of the NAWAC.

If you want to debate the existence of this creature or its potential historical interaction with Native Americans - or lack thereof- there are a multitude of other threads for you to do that on.

It won't be done here.

[Guest DWA]

Um, generally, all the trees are never cut and all the deer are never killed.  We just assume that when we stop seeing them every day everywhere we go.  The deer are all over the place now, so clearly there were more than enough left to start the population back up, eh?

 

Again, I take the evidence and say:  OK, explain it.

 

"Thousands of non-biologists having a biologically-correct hallucination" has never happened that I am aware of.  I'm doubting it here.  Call me skeptical.

[Guest]

 

The claim is that Wood Apes must have repopulated Oklahoma, when it was completely devastated by this same exact mentality that wiped out the bears and bison.   They could not have stayed in Oklahoma when all the trees were cut, and all the deer were killed, could they?

 

 

Some of our thoughts was a 100 years ago when deforestation occured they had retreated into the deeper river valleys Eastward and since recovered/returned and increased their poulations as forest and game management improved habitiats and deer populations every year till now. Keep in mind also as alternating tracks of pine get cut down, alot of deciduous nut bearing trees and wild blackberries plus more grasses grow back in their place faster providing better deer habitat and food sources. Cover is more than adequate they are called leafs rather than pine needles.

 

Here is a picture with me sitting with friends at the Honobia "dump" area kind of a gravel pit spot sorta, note background relevant to this thread

Edited July 17, 2013 by GEARMAN

[norseman]

And they may have killed a Sasquatch as well but did not make a necklace out of finger nails......to be traded for an iron pot and end up in a museum somewhere.

Drew? Your simply making assumptions.

I'm simply comparing types of evidence.

MIB brought up: Smeja, Ape Canyon, Bauman, and "Hunters who couldn't pull the trigger"

Those are stories.

I showed pictures of what N. American hunters did. That is real, tangible evidence, that Large, Dangerous animals were killed in Droves, and extirpated from their ranges.

The claim is that Wood Apes must have repopulated Oklahoma, when it was completely devastated by this same exact mentality that wiped out the bears and bison. They could not have stayed in Oklahoma when all the trees were cut, and all the deer were killed, could they?

I have no idea. But comparing hunting a buffalo herd to the mystery of Sasquatch is odd. Yes if Sasquatch stood on the open plain and chewed their cudd while we drew a bead on

Them? I would agree with your assessment. But I would say that if its difficult to kill one now ? It was probably just as hard back then. But did it happen on occasion? We don't know. But unfortunately if it did happen we have no proof.

[WSA]

What I take away from this discussion, mainly, is if  BF in OK were massed in dense herds on open ground, as buffalo were, or as bold as Grizzlies to dwell/forage in open areas, they would have been rubbed out fer sure. Not so sure I find anything useful in that analysis though. I'll have to give it some thought.  

[Drew]

Essentially every deer was killed, every wolf, every elk, every cougar.

 

But Bigfoot gets a pass.

[Guest DWA]

Well - and hey guys, we're getting way away from the purpose of this thread here! - if that were true, Drew, how do we have any now?

[Guest]

This thread was started specifically to discuss the field research of the NAWAC.

 

Appreciated. 

Pennsylvania and the northeast are heavily forested but Oklahoma and Texas don't have much at all. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forest_cover_by_state_in_the_United_States

I would think if Bigfoot was anywhere these days your best bet would be in BC north of Vancouver. Lots of forest low human population density.

 

It's been brought to my attention that we've published an article on this very subject. 

 

http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/67-ecological-patterns

 

Worth a read. 

[Guest DWA]

^^^Worth pulling from that:

 

"While the forestlands of Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma may be somewhat more fragmented than northwestern forests, it is obvious that they are enormous in scope and depth, contrary to the misperceptions of some. Wildlife biologist Dr. John Bindernagel, who visited the region in 2001 and 2002, was struck by the richness and scope of the region’s forests, which are predominantly mixed deciduous, as opposed to the largely coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest. Dr. Bindernagel recognized the value and productivity of deciduous forests in terms of wildlife habitat and he pointed out that large species of mammals living in the southern forests would almost certainly require smaller home ranges than in northern coniferous forests."

 

Combined with the sighting records and other evidence, this constitutes a decisive counter to any skeptical objections, which must perforce be reduced to:  we await the proof.

 

[Drew]

"...require smaller home ranges than in northern coniferous forests"

 

Which would mean: More poop/square mile,  more hair/ square mile,  much easier to capture on camera traps.

[WSA]

Interesting thing about the correlation of rainfall to reported sightings and purported activity. I live in one of the wettest states, possibly THE wettest state in the country. The majority of Alabama counties receive as much as 50+ inches of rain a year. In one of our driest years, we still received an annual average exceeding Seattle!

 

When I overlay the rainfall map with the sightings databases for AL, I also see a correlation for some of the wetter counties. I suppose though, if you are confined to the house by more rainy days, you'll be more eager to hoax Bigfoot sightings? Right...nevermind.  :-)     

Edited July 17, 2013 by WSA