Sasquatch Soup - What Does It Take To Bring Hairy In?

[AaronD]

LOL, good for you!!! ^^

[Guest]

Congrats hammertime!

[NathanFooter]

 At this point my field operations, report work and possible interactions in the state of Michigan { as well as some fellow researchers within my state } seem to point to consistent operation within a area that is suitable for habitation at least through out the warmer months. 

 

 I might add that I am planning a few winter projects in few new areas to try and get a better view of winter month movement or a lack there of.

 

 In the case of finding a zone of consistent habitation I have found it almost completely based on the four factors of area size, forest composition, consistent food resources and the inability of human movement within the select area.

 

 I am of the mind to believe the reason that past and most current efforts have failed or where/are not effective long enough to produce good evidence is because the underestimation of and lack of consideration of how the sasquatch may view us.

 

 For instance, many researchers wear camo and stalk around through the forest trying to get that photo or track them to a bedding site, this s a rather predatory behavior we exhibit and is probably makes most researchers something to avoid.

 

 My mix for sasquatch soup is to get deep into an area with all 4 factors I mentioned above and camp , sit around the fire with no other lights and make some odd noises like blow on a kazoo, bang on a metal washtub, bust up fire wood without an axe, make funny friendly sounding voices or anything strange.  Be different than the average hunter or camper and be as considerate and nonthreatening as possible.  We rarely do vocalizations and night hikes, we do most of out trekking in the day time looking for tracks and other passage evidence.

 

 I think that to them we are a bore or a pain most of the time for them so we have to break that mold to get their attention and hold their curiosity. Through my own experience I am convinced this methodology works.

[Guest DWA]

I think that what is working for NAWAC is long(ish)-term immersion in habitat.

 

I think animals shun any *new* human activity.  We're viewed, correctly, with suspicion.  Animals only start sidling up to our business when first, there is something they want that we have and second, the intrusion has been there a (relatively) long time, with nothing happening warranting flight or avoidance.

 

Animals being individuals, comfort zones of course will differ.  Just like bears/chimps/gorillas vary in aggressiveness/human tolerance, other animals do too.

[JDL]

 At this point my field operations, report work and possible interactions in the state of Michigan { as well as some fellow researchers within my state } seem to point to consistent operation within a area that is suitable for habitation at least through out the warmer months. 

 

 I might add that I am planning a few winter projects in few new areas to try and get a better view of winter month movement or a lack there of.

 

 In the case of finding a zone of consistent habitation I have found it almost completely based on the four factors of area size, forest composition, consistent food resources and the inability of human movement within the select area.

 

 I am of the mind to believe the reason that past and most current efforts have failed or where/are not effective long enough to produce good evidence is because the underestimation of and lack of consideration of how the sasquatch may view us.

 

 For instance, many researchers wear camo and stalk around through the forest trying to get that photo or track them to a bedding site, this s a rather predatory behavior we exhibit and is probably makes most researchers something to avoid.

 

 My mix for sasquatch soup is to get deep into an area with all 4 factors I mentioned above and camp , sit around the fire with no other lights and make some odd noises like blow on a kazoo, bang on a metal washtub, bust up fire wood without an axe, make funny friendly sounding voices or anything strange.  Be different than the average hunter or camper and be as considerate and nonthreatening as possible.  We rarely do vocalizations and night hikes, we do most of out trekking in the day time looking for tracks and other passage evidence.

 

 I think that to them we are a bore or a pain most of the time for them so we have to break that mold to get their attention and hold their curiosity. Through my own experience I am convinced this methodology works.

 

You're right.  They are stalkers and they understand and recognize stalking behavior.  Heck, their young probably play-stalk each other for years growing up, just like any other predator.  They outclass us in this respect and all they have to do is sidestep us as we go by.

 

But there are a couple of products out there that may increase the chance of an encounter.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2013/11/21/bacon-deodorant-and-fried-chicken-scented-candles-reek-genius/

Edited November 21, 2013 by JDL

[AaronD]

I have to wonder if one were to stay in the wilderness for years with no consideretion for hygiene, if their smell blended in with the environment (basically if they stunk like an animal), if they wouldn't have better luck(???)

[JDL]

All I know is that nine weeks in the field were easier when everybody was required to wear charcoal lined chem warfare pants and jackets all the time.  Heck, they even cut down on troop flatulence complaints.

[AaronD]

LOL  JDL

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,

 

I think that what is working for NAWAC is long(ish)-term........Animals being individuals, comfort zones of course will differ.  Just like bears/chimps/gorillas vary in aggressiveness/human tolerance, other animals do too.

One can count Humans in that concept as well. We are wary of strangers in our midst, or the new kid in school or the neighborhood until we change when we see there is nothing coming from the newcomer to worry about. Perfectly normal reaction and behavior. The curiosity factor is always there during the process though, eh?

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Nathanfooter, I like your style, but DWA has a point as well.  If we can condition the creature to our presence over time, perhaps

add to that conditioning some positive feedback, perhaps food that becomes reliable, then long term habituation is possible, and

I still feel that is our best chance.  Anyone reading the NAWAC will realize I have taken some issue with their shooting practices.

I have suggested them to regulate themselves to know what constitutes a kill shot, and have offered some suggestions along those

lines, while I myself disagree with shooting to obtain a specimen, I far more detest inept methods that risk needless maiming and

wounding of the creature without the ability to collect the specimen.  To all those in the Humanish camp I offer my apologies, ,

so I am suggesting if you plan to fire upon a Sasquatch that you darn well be sure you can kill it in one or two shots, and be able

to quickly transport the body to document it.

Edited November 22, 2013 by AaronD
religious material removed, inappropriate language

[hiflier]

 ^^ Hello Lake County Bigfooot,
 

A deep and an amazingly remarkable statement.

Edited November 22, 2013 by AaronD
to remove quote of preceding posr

[Hammer102492]

Thanks AaronD ans Kezra! It's going well and ill be there a long time I hope.

[AaronD]

No problem Hammer

[norseman]

Nathanfooter, I like your style, but DWA has a point as well. If we can condition the creature to our presence over time, perhaps

add to that conditioning some positive feedback, perhaps food that becomes reliable, then long term habituation is possible, and

I still feel that is our best chance. Anyone reading the NAWAC will realize I have taken some issue with their shooting practices.

I have suggested them to regulate themselves to know what constitutes a kill shot, and have offered some suggestions along those

lines, while I myself disagree with shooting to obtain a specimen, I far more detest inept methods that risk needless maiming and

wounding of the creature without the ability to collect the specimen. To all those in the Humanish camp I offer my apologies, ,

so I am suggesting if you plan to fire upon a Sasquatch that you darn well be sure you can kill it in one or two shots, and be able

to quickly transport the body to document it.

While its a noble cause to dispatch game quickly? It doesn't always happen that way with the best of intentions. Certain variables can be controlled while others cannot. In the case of Justin Smeja? He was using a .25-06, which is well on the small side of a 800 lbs animal. Proper caliber selection is paramount. A small tree branch, on the other hand, that deflects a shot is a much harder variable to account for.

Also we don't need to harvest and transport the whole body for scientific classification. Just a portion there of will suffice.

And lastly this is our best option for species recognition. I've heard some very strong habituation claims in the past that would make it very easy to obtain a hair, saliva or stool sample and yet nothing has materialized.

Besides watching the Sykes report has convinced me that a positive DNA sample is going to be disputed and fought over for a very long time. Nobody can argue with a body part.......it's cut and dried.

[Guest]

I agree norseman: a body part would be fantastic evidence.