Shrinking Bigfoot Habitat........can We Stop The Trend?

[Sasfooty]

It looks like they still have plenty of places to hide during the daytime, & they can still go wherever they want to at night. It doesn't take a very large overgrown area for them to hole up in during the day. People rarely go poking around every little thicket & cane break along all the creeks & rivers, & if it looked like someone was about to, they are experts at slipping away unnoticed.

 

The farmland provides them with crops that they can harvest fresh, or find spilled near silos during the winter. The crops also attract & feed deer & wild hogs, making their main meat animals healthier & more abundant. The farmers lose cattle & hogs during the winter & they are dragged off & left to the scavengers. Bf would probably get first pickings if he was around.

 

Actually, I don't think they would appreciate us stopping the trend.

[georgerm]

You make some points Sasfooty..............kind of.........sort of........ and I'm sure a small percentage of bigfoots can adapt but not many imho. Where there are roads, homes, and people there are those who shoot and disturb bigfoot and its family.

 

Your point Incor. is obvious and of course once bigfoot is proven, more measures can be taken to protect its habitat...................not too hard to connect the dots here. You seem hung up on saving unicorn habitat.  Is it better to start now and have great dreams or lie down in defeat during the preliminary phases of this political effort to protect bigfoot's habitat and other creatures.

 

We don't need 400 million Americans catching every last fish, shooting the last grizzly bear, or chasing bigfoot to the last corner of the land.............do we? We now have about 318 million people and growing due to out of control reproduction and immigration. 

 

Edited August 4, 2014 by georgerm

[Incorrigible1]

Great luck with those "preliminary phases of your political effort to protect bigfoot habitat."

[norseman]

Should we preserve unicorn grazing areas? I don't mean to ridicule, but instead point out nothing can or will be done until proof of existence is delivered, in the case of bigfoot.

Edit: How would you go about proposing any remedial steps for a will-'o-the-wisp? The creature is a myth, in authority's eyes.

More importantly? How do you manage lands based on a myth? I posted up that Griz study to illustrate that different species have different requirements. A wild place may not be wild enough......

With Sasquatch? We have no idea.

[BobbyO]

 

 

We don't need 400 million Americans catching every last fish, shooting the last grizzly bear, or chasing bigfoot to the last corner of the land.............do we? 

 

 

Two very different examples, but you've done it already where the Grizzly is concerned.

 

Alaska contains over 95% of the entire population of Brown Bears in the USA.

 

You've blasted the rest out of the lower 48 and pushed them to the very tip of the Continent..

[JDL]

The OP is based on faulty assumptions.

 

There are more deer and other food sources in these suburban developments than in undisturbed forest.  Looking at reports, Bigfoot don't have trouble living in these areas under a nocturnal activity cycle so long as there are intermittent undisturbed areas where they can hole up.

 

Apparently, some actually do this by choice.  They are not restricted to specialized diets or habitat, and I have personally encountered them in arid terrain where they seemed to be doing just fine.  In arid areas, their most limited resource and most needed requirement is water, which generally drives them nearer to human development.

[norseman]

If we have tens of thousands of Biqfeets all living and hunting in suburbia? Stop and think of what that would look like......

There is nothing nocturnal in surburbia, street lamps keep darkness at bay every day of the year. So a night predator is losing it's greatest asset. On top of that could you imagine the number of dead deer parts littering parks and sidewalks? A large predator hunting in surburbia will not go unnoticed. Sightings and security camera videos would be through the roof!

Iam not buying it.

[hiflier]

Hello All, 

 

....It doesn't take a very large overgrown area for them to hole up in during the day........

 
 

......intermittent undisturbed areas where they can hole up.......

 

Is this what the habitat is being reduced to? Is this an acceptable lifestype for such a magnificent Creature? Forced adaptation? It's a bit on the blaise side. Can Creatures adapt? For the most part yes but that isn't a license to keep cutting up the land. In other words I think the OP to be more than a fair argument for at least wanting to get ahead of the planners and developers. It's a fine reason to get into at least the offices to see what IS five years down the road. For those riding the wave and knowing what's ahead then the chance to make money on selling and buying land becomes a pretty good reason to keep things on the QT. 

 

At the very least if any designs would affect one's property value it would be nice to be able to make some decisions or attend town council meetings ahead of time in one's own interest in protecting their mortgage investments. Folks do like to complain when a new developement springs up but few know that it's been in the planning stages for some time and is public knowledge even if the info never leaves the planning board offices..

Edited August 4, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest LarryP]

 

This is one of the greatest myths I love to debunk. Just 'cause a local town is experiencing this issue doesn't mean the whole country is. It is the equivalent of an anecdotal account in BF reports.

 

According to the US Department of Agriculture, who we taxpayers pay a lot of money to keep track of these things, the land use inventory is as follows:

 

 

 

Notice that developed land is 6% of the total land mass.

 

 

You beat me to it, gigantor.

 

Every time I fly across the continent in the daytime I'm always astounded at the vast amounts of virtually uninhabited forest land in this country. 

[JDL]

Nobody's forcing bigfoot to do anything, but we see them in places we assume they normally wouldn't be.  Ergo, assumption that they keep to the forest of necessity is questionable.

 

Heck, they didn't just crop up in 1959.  They've been around for millennia, and for millennia we have competed with them for prime habitat, sometimes violently if certain lore is indicative.  There have even been times when we deforested far more of the continent than is now deforested. 

 

We haven't done them in yet, and I don't think we're about to.

[hiflier]

Hello JDL,

 

I respectfully counter that there are now over 350,000,000 people in the U.S. and by all accounts growing. The habitat situation is under tremenous pressure and not just from towns, cities, farms, and roads. More and more go into the wild forested areas as well with everything from condominium sized motorhomes down to soloists in hammocks. Millions visit each state park every year. 3,000,000 in the Olympic park alone. This is not a static situation where people remain in the developed areas. There's logging too. There's always been logging though right? There's fracking, Forest fires that creep up to Human inhabited areas.etc. So what's left is really taking a hit.

 

Before 1600 it is estimated that there were 7-10 million Native Americans in the lower 48. Now there's a diverse population of well over 3 HUNDRED million. The pollution, the smog, the jets over head, the lights, the noise. Nah, there's no impact that I can see so BF will just normally continue. I know this because as you say they've yet to become extinct. It would be nice if someday science wouldn't turn such a blind eye to this.

 

Of course, truth be known, I haven't been doing much of anything the change things either so I really haven't much room to gripe. I'm guilty of the apathy and roll-over mentality that allows the steamrollers to roll on. Guilty as charged.

Edited August 5, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest Crowlogic]

We should have Bigfoot coming out of our ears by now.  The trend towards deforestation should be giving us areas where heathy populations are in small places to be seen and proven with ease.  Bears are becoming back yard pests becoming part of the suburban landscape.  An animal smart like BF can make due wherever.  But we should be rubbing elbows often now and we are not.  Points in only one direction.

[norseman]

There are places left in the US and Canada that a large nocturnal bipedal whatever could still exist without much conflict with humans.

But that's if numbers are low, it moves around a lot with a low impact approach and holes up in day light hours. There certainly could be high risk areas like a freeway or a populated valley that must be overcome. But I just cannot fathom them basically living in our backyards, coming out tonight to hunt and holing up in a park or empty lot during the day.

In my mind numbers must be very low, like wolverine low with giant ranges, add nocturnal? Very hard to find.

[Wingman1]

I don't think that our forests are being destroyed at the rate that some folks seem to think

they are.There is still plenty of forest land out there to sustain them. Now whatever happens

in the future is anybody's guess, but Sasquatches  appear to be semi-nomadic and are extremely

skilled an adapting to a new environment. My question is what exactly is Sasquatch habitat. No

research can be done to determine what kind of habitat they require, we don't know how many

there are, so that leaves us with very little to expand on, and lets not forget that we haven't even

proven their existence yet! It is definitely a noble cause to try and help them, but they have been

doing a good job of taking care of themselves for hundreds of years, and more than likely do not

want our help. I don't see anything out there that would confirm they are living on the fringes of our

suburbs, but I can easily see one or two from time to time that will come close to our neighborhoods

to forage without being seen, but I think that is an extremely rare occurrence though! There is a

huge abundance of forest, piney woods, and swamps from east Texas to Louisiana that is roughly

the same size as the state of Delaware. That area is so dense and uninhabited that a group of T-Rex's

could go about their business without being seen. I just don't feel they are being pushed/forced I still

believe that exposing them would be the worst thing for them. They seem to be peaceful enough and

for the most part just want to be left alone! and we should leave them alone! The old saying "Don't fix

it if it ain't broke" definitely applies here! Bottom line -- Can't prove existence / Can't determine habitat.

[JDL]

Deer increasing, bear increasing, cougar increasing, wolves increasing, but assume Squatch threatened?