Bf And Gravel Pits - Is There A Connection?

[Guest Coonbo]

I wanted to add that during the four nights that we camped in the area, we recorded many more vocalizations coming from the area of the quarry and it's immediate vicinity than from any other direction.  This is pretty consistent with our experience around quite a few other quarries and gravel pits over the decades.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I think such reports are just coincidences. Think about this...There are likely thousands of gravel pits, if not tens of thousands, spread across North America. Therefore there would have to be many more sightings around gravel pits than what we see in the data for me to think there is any correlation among a large population.

 

Then there is the fact that there are generally more people present to have sightings in some areas. This is likely why there seem to be many road sightings. There are just so many people driving on roads that sasquatch are more likely to be seen there than in most other places they happen to go.

[Guest Coonbo]

Jiggy, I beg to differ. You are correct that there are lots of pits and quarries around the country, but I, and quite a few other field researchers that I personally know, have found that they do hold some attraction for BF, probably for some of the reasons already mentioned in this thread. It is a normal part of our pre-scouting to search for old quarries and pits in our research areas. I'm telling you this from decades of on-the-ground field experience, not from speculation. The very first field research that I ever did, off of our family farm, 34 years ago, was about 7 miles from this location, near another old quarry.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Coonbo

[JDL]

Yeah but that aside JDL, and the shooting of a Bear and the multiple Grizzly's feeding on a carcass close to one found with a simple 5 second google search, where actually is this evidence that predators use these areas ?

 

That would be sighting reports of predators, but we have to remember that any such reports are anecdotal and thus cannot actually be used to establish the presence of predators where some may not want to believe they may be.  Now a dead bear or wolf would be more convincing, IF you can prove that the bear or wolf was actually in the gravel pit of its own free will at the time of its death and IF you can prove that it is there on a habitual basis.  Even so, the presence of the bear or wolf would need to be a repeatable phenomena, but don't bother trying because at some point it comes down to someone actually making an assertion along the way that the evidence, whatever its provenance, is, in fact true, which blows the whole thing out of the water because people can't be trusted to perceive fact and relate it in a manner that is not flawed.

 

Guess we're all screwed.

[Guest Coonbo]

.....but don't bother trying because at some point it comes down to someone actually making an assertion along the way that the evidence, whatever its provenance, is, in fact true, which blows the whole thing out of the water because people can't be trusted to perceive fact and relate it in a manner that is not flawed.

Guess we're all screwed.

Unfortunately, you are correct. And therein lies the rub. Sometimes evidence presented is incorrect, mistaken, misinterpreted, or otherwise bogus, even though the person presenting it is completely earnest, honest, has the best of intentions, and believes that he/she is presenting and defending something that is totally factual. It has happened to me on several occasions. I've been flat wrong and have had to be man enough to admit it when I realize it. BF research is, by its very nature, a very iffy subject.. Vocalizations is one area where I've been wrong. Over the years, I've kept researching this subject quite a lot. I can't tell you near everything that IS a BF vocalization, but I can sure tell you a lot that ISN'T, and that list continues to grow.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Coonbo

[hiflier]

Hello Coonbo,

 

That kind of honest candidness goes a long way around here and I commend you for it.

[dmaker]

^^ As do I. Plussed Coonbo.

[BobbyO]

Unfortunately, you are correct. And therein lies the rub. Sometimes evidence presented is incorrect, mistaken, misinterpreted, or otherwise bogus, even though the person presenting it is completely earnest, honest, has the best of intentions, and believes that he/she is presenting and defending something that is totally factual. It has happened to me on several occasions. I've been flat wrong and have had to be man enough to admit it when I realize it. BF research is, by its very nature, a very iffy subject.. Vocalizations is one area where I've been wrong. Over the years, I've kept researching this subject quite a lot. I can't tell you near everything that IS a BF vocalization, but I can sure tell you a lot that ISN'T, and that list continues to grow.

Yep you're absolutely right coonbo, but for every time any evidence that is presented in the manner you describe is wrong, we would naturally completely overlook and take for granted the amount that is right, which would grossly outweight the amount that its wrong of course.

Not sure how that would fair in specifically Sasquatch research though of course as, even as a witness and someone who the question of existence isn't even up for debate, there just appears to be soooo much wrong with current research practices and the "evidence" that is gained by it in my very honest opinion.

None more so than the recent Skykes program's in which even though certain North Aerican research teams submitted canine and bear hair to be tested, just seem to be elated to actually be on the TV no matter what the tesults said which to me is completely incomprehensible but it takes all sorts to make a world I guess.

[bipedalist]

bigfoot found in quarry gravel pit

https://www.google.com/search?q=bigfoot+found+in+quarry+gravel+pit&oq=bigfoot+found+in+quarry+gravel+pit&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i64.10593j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8#es_sm=122&espv=210&q=bigfoot+found+in+quarry+gravel+pit&start=0

 

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

 

^ Sounds like BF is the least of their worries up around this sighting.  

 

Thermal heat signatures of bare feet leaving the pit, hmmmmm.  

Edited November 21, 2013 by bipedalist

[Guest thermalman]

Quote from link: "MN1 and MN2 then appropriated the thermal imager and began a study of the area. It seemed obvious from the heat signature of its footprints the creature had come out of the low reproduction, crossed the road, walked over the low gravel berm separating the pit from the road and up to the ice chest where it had mightily relieved itself.

Then it strode below my pickup, and using shorter steps, walked up along side my pickup bed. There was a large heat sink from the creature's footprints where it stopped to look me over as I was “sleeping†in the back of the truck.

Then, it walked 50'-60' up the trail and veered right into the old growth along the creek. That is where we saw the tall thermal image.

Since there wasn't a heat image in the forest, we walked down to the road and scanned from the road with no luck. The creature had vanished. "

Why they didn't continue to follow the fresh thermal footprints or grab a DNA sample from around the cooler is baffling?

Edited November 21, 2013 by thermalman

[Guest DWA]

Now of course, it could simply be that people that work outdoors have a high percentage of the sightings, just what one would expect of course if the animal were real.

 

I was recently in a stone dumping area in Shenandoah National Park, a gravel pit, more or less, although a lot of storage of stuff like picnic tables and bear-proof garbage cans happens there too.  The walk from the road I was on seemed worthwhile for two reasons:  first, it was pretty quiet and I expected it to get even quieter at a place I'm sure not many walkers frequent; and second, places like this create automatic "edge" habitat, much more productive for wildlife in general than the open or wooland environments that meet to form it.  Sure enough, I flushed several deer and about half a dozen turkeys.  Didn't see "edge" mentioned in the other posts; if I missed it, well, just making sure.

Edited November 21, 2013 by DWA

[Lake County Bigfooot]

Here is a report where one apparently ducked into part of a gravel pit area, and I have observed some activity near a gravel pit near my home, including a bear print (covering the big game angle), and some tree structures, tree twists, and strange placement of rocks, all just abutting that gravel pit.   This was nicely located near the stream, but ridiculously close to a large population center.

 

 

Report # 32400 (Class A)
Submitted by witness on Friday, January 20, 2012.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jogger has daylight sighting on Prairie Trail near Algonquin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Show Printer-friendly Version)
YEAR: 2008

SEASON: Fall

MONTH: September

STATE: Illinois

COUNTY: McHenry County

LOCATION DETAILS: It was the prairie path next to the Algonquin postoffice. if you were coming from rt. 31 going to Randall road, it would be on the left side about mile marker 2 or 2 and a half.

NEAREST TOWN: Algonquin, Illinois

NEAREST ROAD: route 62 / West Algonquin Road

OBSERVED: I was jogging on the prairie path I have been jogging on for years. i can show you the place, I was crossing the bridge over Algonquin road heading north. Mile marker 1 i just came from and before i get to 2 I park my car up on hill there, so I come down to the trail run over the bridege to mile marker 1, turn around and then run all the way to mile marker 3, then back to my car, so 6 miles. Anyway i was heading to the 2 mile mark (or kilometer mark, can't recall) and i was coming around the bend and i can see more than a half, maybe 2 thirds mile down the path, not sure, and i see a big guy weasring a coat. walking in the way i'm running. As i got closer It looked furry and i thought why would someone be wearing a coat it's 65 degrees or more out! As i jogged closer, the thing got bigger (it had it's back toward me) and I stopped, got the chivvers and thought...that is a bigfoot...then the thing went around the bend ahead where there's a small stream and retention pond. It was still daylight and i kept running thinking it couldn't have been...but i ran another mile and there was no one there...where did it go? On the way back i stopped at a whole in a fence by a stream and small pond and lookeed in there. it was pitch black and then i got the chills and thought that thing might be in there...i went back to my car and have not run on that trail since! Finding Bigfoot show reminded me of this.

ALSO NOTICED: Yeah, theres a big sand or rock factory, i don't know what you call it but rocks go on a conveyor belt to a big mill and they're ground to sand. i saw the bog foot on the path alongside this.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot

[JanV]

Jiggy, I beg to differ. You are correct that there are lots of pits and quarries around the country, but I, and quite a few other field researchers that I personally know, have found that they do hold some attraction for BF, probably for some of the reasons already mentioned in this thread. It is a normal part of our pre-scouting to search for old quarries and pits in our research areas. I'm telling you this from decades of on-the-ground field experience, not from speculation. The very first field research that I ever did, off of our family farm, 34 years ago, was about 7 miles from this location, near another old quarry.

Hi Coonbo,

Do you have any insight on reasons BF might be found in old quarry operations that we haven't hit upon yet? Could salt deposits be one? Thanks for sharing!

Edited November 22, 2013 by JanV

[Squatchy McSquatch]

I'll be heading to the Ole Rock Quarry as soon as the sun comes up to pick up a load of 3/4" crusher run gravel.

 

I will definitely keep my eyes open for bigfoot.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

You very well may be correct Coonbo, but I just think that anywhere people tend to be present, when the area is in or around a forest where sasquatch live, is going to be an area where sightings occur more frequently. But, since not all gravel pits are in the forest, and since there are not always people present at these gravel pits, maybe the explanation is that the sasquatch are going there for some reason.

 

Personally, I can see either explanation as being viable. I will also admit that those who are on the ground investigating reports of gravel pit sightings are in a much better position to make a determination, considering they are there to notice any subtle details that could be useful.