Alaskan Bigfoot Haven?

[Guest StevieStrangeGlove94]

As of latley ive been toying with the idea that parts of alaska could be some sort of safe haven for sasquatches if indeed they exist. Being one of the last truley wild places in america it seems to me there could be plenty of places in the rainforests/mountains that humans simply cant reach or they rarley visit. That could sound utterly stupid, but still i think it makes a little sence. Whats everybody think? Anyother wild places in the states that could provide some sort of "bigfoot haven"?

[BobbyO]

Alaska has 127m acres of forested habitat.

 

That's more than California, Washington, Oregon, Georgia, Colorado and Alabama put together.

[hiflier]

Hello StevieStrangeGlove94,

 

There's been discussion about whether the population of Sasquatch is too small to sustain itself even given the habitat and food abundance in the Lower 48. You bring up a good point. I'll add to it by saying that if the U.S. populations are constantly being resupplied by Sasquatch originating in Alaska then with such a large territory the supply of Sasquatch in the Lower 48 could be constantly replenished. If the Alaskan Sasquatch learn behavior from bears like the Browns and Kodiaks then they will be naturally suited for other areas.  

[Guest StevieStrangeGlove94]

Thats a ton of forest bobby o! Plenty of places for a massive creature to loose itself. And hiflier, what you said is pretty much what ive been thinking.!

[BobbyO]

Hello StevieStrangeGlove94,

 

There's been discussion about whether the population of Sasquatch is too small to sustain itself even given the habitat and food abundance in the Lower 48. You bring up a good point. I'll add to it by saying that if the U.S. populations are constantly being resupplied by Sasquatch originating in Alaska then with such a large territory the supply of Sasquatch in the Lower 48 could be constantly replenished. If the Alaskan Sasquatch learn behavior from bears like the Browns and Kodiaks then they will be naturally suited for other areas.  

 

That's interesting Hiflier you know, and not at all out of the question where at least the PNW is concerned, if not beyond. 

[hiflier]

Hello BobbyO,

 

The OP does bring up a thoughtful concept. I would be interested to know if the Brown and Kodiak bear populations are on the rise even if it's a slow rise. The Kodiaks are enormous and ferocious and it could spell out a new or ongoing Sasquatch migration south resulting in an increase in sightings and activity in the PacNW.

 

Just my two rocks.

Edited January 24, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest]

Sasquatch breeding program?

All jokes a side I think Alaska has to maintain multiple bigfoot populations due to its abundance of forested land and solidarity. I also really like Les Stroud's encounter while filming Survivorman as I feel it is very credible. With 23 reports on BFRO majority of them being class A sightings and only a populationof 750 000 I feel that Bigfoots could easily thrive in Alaska.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

If you are referring to Alaska alone as having enough forested land to hide a population of sasquatch, then I would say that the majority of states on the continent also have enough forest-land as well. But if you were just saying that there is enough forested land in general, then I agree with you. But you are right about Alaska likely having a large population of sasquatch, and this could be more of a safe haven for them than other places, simply because even in the remote areas of other states there is always the possibility of running into humans. While this may still be true for Alaska, the odds are, on average, against seeing people in general.

 

But I would think that the farther north the sasquatch go, the tougher it will be for them to survive the winter months. Winters can still get bad in the continuous US, but I imagine things are worse in Alaska, being that it is farther north. But then again, then this would have to be true for Canada as well.

 

Maybe, and this is just a possibility, part of the sasquatch population move farther north during the summer, while moving south when winter hits. This would allow them the benefits of more seclusion during the summer, while not taxing them so much during the hasher winters. But I don't know if that is even remotely accurate.

[Guest]

I can confirm alasksa is teeming with bigfoot

[JDL]

I don't get the perception that there is a dearth of bigfoot in the lower 48, or that they can't maintain or increase population levels in the lower 48.  If the lower 48 were so hostile to the species, why would they come here at all from Alaska, if Alaska is the only place that they can thrive?

[Guest]

This "Alaska" concept is strangely similar to Canada...

 

The answer to this would probably be yes, although Im sure there are just as many or more residing in the PNW of Canada.

[BobbyO]

Absolutely Sam and many would argue that large parts of British Columbia and the western side of Alberta would be better suited to Sasquatches than large parts of Alaska.

I've been looking at Alaska sightings recently though, they're pretty well spread if not abundant in volume.

[dudeman]

As a Florida boy, if the skunk ape is anything like I am. They would want nothing to do with Alaska, too cold.

[indiefoot]

Now we know why they have been reportedly seen hitching rides on railroads. They are on their way to their assigned territory.

[dmaker]

I can confirm alasksa is teeming with bigfoot

How?  I am sure many here would be interested, to say the least, in confirming evidence. Or by " confirm" did you mean simply "say".  People can say lots of things.