The Stealth Of Bigfoot

[hiflier]

Hello All,

 

 

First of all, this is NOT my idea. It was brought up by a member on another Forum. It was promoting the information that Sasquatch uses parallel trails that run 10 maybe 20 yards off main game routes. It would make sense to me to extend that idea to logging roads and open power line routes too, as well as around clearings, and adjacent to open fields. As you already know many sightings are on roads both paved and otherwise where Bigfoot is seen along the side somewhere or, mostly it seems, crossing and then disappearing into the undergrowth or treeline.

 

How many time does a report say that a BF crossed a road, entered the underbrush or treeline, and disappeared. Well, perhaps it isn't just randomly disappearing at all- it may  know that after a short distance into the brush it will find a familiar path which will allow it to watch Humans from a small distance unseen and then move unseen along that road. My sense tells me that they ARE crossing open terrain and roads to access a network of parallel paths that they know well and use for stealth travel.

 

This notion that parallel trails are the way that SSQ gets around unseen is not so far off IMO. In other words to expand on the concept: Their success in hunting and evasion may very well be because of these trails. A SSQ is seen on a road...why? Because it is accessing it's territorial network of side trails. Looking for, and/or accessing such a side trail 10-20 yrds in on either side of a main one might be a better place to install some trail cams.

 

Maybe they go up one trail, cross a road and access the trail on the other side in a sort of recon loop back and forth. It's perhaps how they seem to get from place to place unseen and then pop out wherever they want. Hiking a team down an open access road with a couple of people sometimes peeling off and searching for these parallel trails once in a while could be revealing. The more I've thought about this the last few months the more sense it makes. Sasquatch may not be as stealthy as we think if it has learned to track game in this manner so as not to spook it with it's odor or visibility, including stalking Humans in order to observe them.

 

The reason I'm thinking this way is that animals including Man are creatures of habit and pattern and I truly think Sasquatch is no different. I would think that it knows it's terrain like the back of it's hand and does not go through it haphazardly but rather has routes that are not mainstream because it has learned the art of maneuvering unseen out of necessitity. Why? Simply put it's because of one thing. It's such a big animal it has learned that it has no choice in order to be successful in ambushing game. It's elusiveness may be because of this very honed characteristic which also succeeds in beating down a narrow path in order to maintain not only relative invisibility but to quiet it's footfalls as well.

 

My last point is to mention that if I were looking for Bigfoot in this manner (by looking first for any side trails) I would go at it as an animal on the hunt would go. I would access the parallel trail that was on the DOWNWIND side of a main trail. But do so with cautioun, Bigfoot may already be there!

 

IMHO it makes great sense for how the Sasquatch get around so invisibly, and then when you least expect it?....BOO!

 

 

[Guest DWA]

If these trails exist, they should be easy enough to find.  

 

Anyone finding them...?

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,

 

I'll find out for you unless you have a connection to ask that I don't. I know one person that I could possibly ask and I will. The main reason I posted the OP was for discussion of the idea. It may not warrant a discussion at all but, as in the past, I like to get this stuff out of my head somehow and the Forum presents a good outlet for doing just that.

 

To somewhat broaden the concept animals that are soley plant eaters have a certain dynamic in which their quarry is a kind of captive audience. Plants are seasonal for the most part and so the food they offer changes in state but not so much in location unless larger animals wipe out the plants in a region. In that case they will have to either change their diet or move further afield. Using the same trails for herbivores isn't such a big deal. But when omnivores have game animals in their diets the dynamic changes in a big way. Using the same trails won't work as well as animals sought for food get wise to the presence and routes of predators and their smells. A change in location but still within a region requires that routes for stalking and ambush also must change.

 

It could mean that a Bigfoot sighting in a southern area of a region might be followed by a sighting in a different region as opposed to going repeatedly to the same place where an ambush was hatched.

 

Just my two rocks....

Edited September 1, 2013 by hiflier

[Guest DWA]

Well, when the society thinks it doesn't exist, must be some reasons for that, huh?

 

I haven't really heard anything about this idea before.  Trails, sure.  Deer make them, bear make them.  SHREWS make them, and it appears that bonobos not only make them but put directional markers on them.

 

At the 2009 Texas Bigfoot Conference, Peter Matthiessen talked at dinner, at some length, about a trail he had found in CA that ...well, somebody would have to tell me what made it - and how - if a sasquatch didn't, and no, bear is a fail.  But, just like bones, this is something that only extensive research on the ground would uncover.  Over on the NAWAC thread I seem to remember a little "trail talk" in recent posts, but I'd have to go back there.

 

In the end, like all theories, this one awaits field testing.

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,

 

It would indeed need to be researched in the field. But something in favor of the idea is that I find it more unlikely than likely that Bigfoot bushwacks everywhere it goes. It would be hard going IMO and unless it's in a state of fleeing there would be no reason to not seek easier routes, as well as more profitable ones that would be successful in maintaining their large caloric intake. Especially if there is a "breadwinner" in a family group that has a year old youngster and mother to feed. IDK just putting stuff out there. Thanks for the responses. 

[Guest DWA]

Oh.  If they aren't making trails....well, that would be quite a bit more astonishing to me than that they exist.

 

But the purpose is something else again.  If theyr'e real they do it.  But how do they use them?  They sure wouldn't be the only animal that constructs things for multiple purposes. 

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,

Oh.  If they aren't making trails....well, that would be quite a bit more astonishing to me than that they exist.

 

But the purpose is something else again.  If theyr'e real they do it.  But how do they use them?  They sure wouldn't be the only animal that constructs things for multiple purposes. 

 

As far as purpose? Hoo boy, there's a lot of room for conjecture there. Staking out territory for food and mating is the first thing that comes to mind. Like nearly everyone else I am keenly aware of the lack of proof for their existence and even though most of my posts speak as if it were a given I know better, just so you know. But on the subject of usage starting off with the fact that Humans have made many inroads into their habitat through developement, and logging is one aspect. Nature too has natural obstacles like creeks, rivers and lakes not to mention ridges and valleys. These features add to the trail dynamic of where they go plus whatever unnatural features like roads present. The recent forest fires will alter greatly whatever Sasquatch has "built" for boundaries but for the sake of discussion they won't be included as a factor.

 

That leaves family size. The core would be three. siblings growing up to stay around as "aunts" and "uncles" could expand the troop (?) two or threefold up to say nine minimum if three siblings a year or two apart each found a partner and had an offspring. Toss in the still living parents and the number becomes eleven or so. At what point is it determined that the group must split up? Do they in fact split up before mating and establish their own territory first?

 

In either case it wouldn't be beyond thinking that siblings would have a common boundary in each others territory that they both use but will not stray off of it into another siblings domain. So two or three Sasquach could know each other and be sociably tolerant but still bark if there is encroachment. I can see it getting tricky if a core family becomes "landlocked" and somewhat trapped by the others so the areas under each one's control would have to be quite large. Juveniles might even come and go anywhere as they please- to a point. If Sasquatch lives to be only say 30 like bears and gorillas it still leaves plenty of time for several generations.

 

I'm wondering now whether or not the "web" contains the elders at the center who, if they die, will never be found by a Human?

Edited September 1, 2013 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Hello All,

Is this a territorial sibling dispute?

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/367

Or this one? :

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/stories/okanogan_cnty07.htm

Edited September 1, 2013 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Hello All,

I've been looking a little deeper into this trait:

http://sasquatchresearchers.org/behavior/

"Sasquatches do not always form groomed trails. Many groups of them seem content to use human paths; however, we often find trails that have been used for a long time in sasquatch areas. A sasquatch trail bed is concave in cross-section from the pounding of large, flat feet. They will typically be free of clutter such as sticks, dry leaves, and deer tracks. The most telling feature though is that the trail has been groomed for a tall creature. Most branches crossing the trail up to 8 to 10 feet up are broken away from the trail. If a 6 foot tall person cannot easily walk down the trail without doing more than brushing a few supple branches aside once in a while, it is not likely a sasquatch trail (or at least not a well maintained one).

We often find these trails paralleling frequently used human trails and other game trails, just out of sight behind brush. The groomed nature of these trails allows the sasquatches to follow game and people in nearly complete silence."

Interesting.....

Edited September 1, 2013 by hiflier

[Branco]

They absolutely use "trails", but to get to and from bedding areas - which may be separated by several miles - they use man-made "trails" when available. In the mountains where I prowl around there is an old railway bed (circa 1912-1915) that is now one of their superhighways. The RR bed is perfect for their travels; hard, relatively smooth and difficult for anyone to see their tracks except soon after the leaves fall. There are many old abandoned railroads in the state that they use. The two BF that were seen in Clark County a month or so ago that drew the attention of the press and the writer were using a fairly recently abandoned RR bed routinely. The rails,  hardware and cross ties had been removed and the bed of crushed quarry rock plainly showed where three different BF had been walking on it. (A side note: Where the tracks were seen is just a very few miles from the location on that railroad where the "famous" Gurdon Spook Lights have been seen and reported for many years. A web search will find the info on the lights.)

 

The Ouachita Mts in AR were formed by compression forces from the south, so the main mountains trend east/west. The main NF roads, especially the "scenic drive" routes generally follow alongside of or on the crests. The two groups of BF that I messed with up there for over two years a while back used one of those roads, but they walked the duff along side the road. The tracks of the two big males that are described in the link above (http://woodape.org/r...port/detail/367) have been seen many times in the duff along a road that leads to the mountain top directly above where they were seen fighting by the muzzle loader hunter. (Another side note: The hollow in which the two were seen fighting contains an old wagon/logging road that also goes around the mountain and tops out in a low gap. They use this old road as well. It was a few yards off this road road that I called in and got a good daylight view of a young, teen-aged male BF on July 27, 2010.)

 

They also use active RRs when it is convenient for them to do so. In the river/creek bottoms of AR & AL their muddy track have been found after they left waterways and began following the RRs toward their destination.

 

They also follow gas, oil and electric power right-of ways, but unless the ROWs are in the mountains, they walk in the edge of the woods beside them.

 

I have only seen a very few well defined trails in the woods that were made and used by them. All of those few trails were in remote areas of swamp lands or in forests separating large tracts of farm or ranch land.

[hiflier]

Hello Branco,

Thank you for your input. So it would seem that the RR and such might be used by ATV's or snowmobiles more than on foot unless they are private, or forbidden by the owners whether corporate, state or otherwise? In any case one would think that if there is much in the way of Human traffic that SSQ might choose a side route instead. Question: the Sasquatch Research Assn. mentioned that arched saplings up to say 3 inches in dia. and held down by rocks or logs formed a kind of entrance connector between main accesses and SSQ trails. Also that broken saplings or branches are indicators for these entrances. Have you seen anything like that?

Edited September 2, 2013 by hiflier

[Branco]

hiflier: I have seen many trees - mostly red cedar, pine and sweet and black gum - broken and pointing in their direction of travel where they left man-made roads, ROWs or RRs. I believe those trees were used by them to mark particular, newly selected foraging sites for use by the BF that did it and for others in his group or hunting party.

 

I investigated one very unusual case in which a hunter found fresh markers pointed in one direction, but met (and shot) a large BF that was behind him and in the opposite direction of the way the trees were broken and pointed. 

 

You can see that report which is still on Ms. Short's abandoned "Bigfoot Encounters" site. Click the left-side title link "Stories, Sightings, Encounters, Letters." Scroll down to the Arkansas Reports to, "Johnson County 2002, Shooting".

 

(That BF, or another one his size, gave a camp of hunters in that hollow the devil after that event.)

[hiflier]

Hello Branco,

Thank you, I'll read that report. In your opinion, and this is a finer point I was bringing out earlier in the thread, if a Sasquatch were to be on a parallel run does it make some sense that the trail would be more likey to be occupied if it were downwind of the main run? What I'm getting at is if a type specimen were to be actively sought, would it be logical to utilize a weather forecast to help embed a team. Let's say a RR bed runs East to West. By the same token it was known that a Sasquatch trail ran along side in the same general direction, East to West but on the North side of the RR. If it was forecast that the wind was going to be from the North then it would be blowing from the trail onto the RR bed.

IMO that would be the time to embed a small team from the RR access. If later in the day it was known that the wind would then be shifting to out of the South then the conditions would be good for Sasquatch to be on that trail sniffing the RR for game or just to scout for intruders undetected as it's own odor would not be wafting to the RR. BUT it would then be on the same trail as the newly embedded team. Follow me?

P.S. Glad I wasn't in that camp!

Edited September 2, 2013 by hiflier

[Sunflower]

hiflier,

 

Small or large team, it doesn't matter, they probably watched the team as they settled in.  You have no idea how stealthy they are....cruise over to the NAWAC and read the entire thread. 

 

It's a waste of time and energy to set up an embedded team.  Besides how long a time can the team be there?  How would they get food?  It's impossible for the team to be absolutely quiet and stay in one spot for any length of time.    Or you could try it and let us know how that worked?

 

Just camp like a camper, they'll get curious and if not, well that wasn't your day to see one............try again later.

[Branco]

I think I understand what you mean, but let's just talk about the best chance of SEEING one in the situation you described. They have a very good sense of smell, so to be up-wind of them would not be good. They have been seen detecting the scent of a man's trail that was left hours before.

 

But they depend much, much more on their hearing and sight to know what's going on around them. When you couple that with their uncanny ability to blend in with their surroundings and remain motionless for such long periods of time that they seem to disappear, it is no surprise to me that so few people actually get to see them in the woods. Normal hunters now-days hunt from blinds or tree stands of one kind or another. Even if the blinds replicate natural surroundings the hunters will move around to some degree. While hunting, or trying to evade hunters, BF follow the same protocol and advice as was pounded into my thick head at an early age by the best hunter and woodsman I ever knew: "Walk a little, look a lot and act like a rock or tree stump". A person, or animal of any kind, cannot detect slight movements around him while walking continuously. (In the same way, a person driving on the interstate at normal speeds cannot tell that moderate winds are blowing the tree tops along the edge of the ROW.) When a person - or BF or other animals - are standing dead still, they can see the slightest movement ahead of and beside them on a still day. BF has that down to a science.

 

They go spastic at night when bright lights or continuous noises suddenly and unexpectedly confront them. They just can't handle it. That is why, when they are hunting at night, they have a habit of stomping and flattening armadillos that approach them while noisily scratching in the leaves. Their patience at walking a few steps and watching a long time before moving is well documented. One very good example is detailed in a report from a hunter in AL. 

 

What most BF specimen hunters don't realize is a fact that took me years to discover. A human is very seldom ever going to enter an area where BF is bedding or foraging without the BF knowing it. It is their responsibility and natural habit to know what an encroaching human is up to. And they take their job seriously until they know you mean them no harm. After that, seeing one becomes a little easier.

 

About their trails or travel routes. There is a very simple and fairly quick way to tell if they are actually using them routinely. It works, and even wider areas of possible travel routes can be evaluated with little expense or time. Another trick or two if you find an actual travel route and want to double check yourself. Those are a little messy and costs a little more.