Waiting Out Sasquatch's Extinction?

[BobbyO]

Hello georgerm,Nice way to approach this. So waiting out extinction doesn't seem to be a valid scenario and that's fine with me Sasquatch has been reported in groups. It also plays into my thinking that road crossings will be a repeat phenom which is why I've encouraged folks to drive them frequently. It also plays into the idea that the populations are low regardless of the number of sightings. It also tells me that if you've thought of it then there's probably a good chance that federal and state entities have as well.This too pushes home the idea of looking for them around the area of an early forest fire outbreak. IMO there are many opportunities to get closer to this; these are but a few.

Of the 761 Class A's we have locked and loaded across the Continent, 35% are with the witness driving.

In WA, we are looking at 36%.

Who needs a Tent..

[hiflier]

Hello BobbyO,

 

You have been looking deeper into the record for quite a while now and have much to offer, especially in the PacNW. Every time I look at the data you bring forth I'm humbled. John Green worked hard to produce his percentage summaries and in you I see no difference. We're lucky to have you. I almost could kick myself for asking but do you know if whether or not the road crossings are weighted more toward daytime? Obviously more drivers are around during those hours so it may not mean much but I was curious. It really would be great if folks saw what you're coming up with and were more confident that their efforts were not in vain. Whether numbers are declining or increasing, with what's been posted so far, I don't see the population as being all that large. Even so the sighting figures should tell us where they are. Someone already knows....we just have to coax that person to come forward somehow.  

[BobbyO]

I'd love to be able to tell you that but I can't currently as there is a problem with the "time of day" search parameter and I'm waiting for Gigantor to fix it, but as soon as he does........

[Guest]

Good Post -  I have to agree with Bobby O, how can anyone presume to know what the breeding population is of an animal that neither science nor government will acknowledge let alone Bigfoot enthusiasts? By the way, did the good doctor acknowledge the existence of Bigfoot? We can guess but nobody can say with authority but using reported sightings as a simple benchmark system of measure the reports seem to suggest five times the proposed figure 500-700, and those are just the ones reported. It would be reasonable to suggest they procreate so you do the math.   

Edited February 13, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Guest]

Gumshoe, With the sighting reports and people talking about their own sightings plus the millions of uninhabited acres of land within America, especially in the PNW, plus not to forget Canada; I believe BF has a very viable breeding population.

 

So my friend, a plus 1 because I totally agree with you:)

I haven't specifically looked at that yet to be honest H, but I know off the top of my head that there are numerous Class A's in WA State that are within a week of each other, in the same general area.

The closest way to even have a chance of doing this and having an indication of if some reports would be of the sane animal possibly would be by colour and general size but even then size can be badly misinterpreted as can colour.

The general location could also help but we don't know how far they move and when, or if they stay put, are nomadic, live in family groups etc etc.

Again, so many questions with virtually no definitive answers.

Anyone who genuinely thinks current research practices on this animal are adequate are a million miles away, no doubt about that for me.

We know so little, and it's actually quite sad.

It shouldn't be left to amateurs like us all to be asking these questions with little to no idea of the answers, it's wrong.

Bobby, I truly would not call you an amateur at all, it will be people such as you who can make a difference thanks to your research and the groups that do your research with. Those of you on the front lines can and will make a difference, you have the greatest opportunity of bringing home the defining specimen.

[Guest]

Orang-Utans are officially endangered and I think there's roughly sixty thousand of them? So even the most optimistic estimates of BF population size are probably enough to count them as endangered and, by extension, close to extinction. A more numerous population in the past makes sense, otherwise it seems unlikely that so many Native Americans had encounters- the two groups may never have really encountered one another otherwise, IMO.

 

IMO being the crucial part of that! I worry considerably when people talk in concrete absolutes around here. Nothing is certain!

[HOLDMYBEER]

I've maintained that they went extinct shortly after Roger Patterson shot his film.  I recall a show in the 1980's where they estimated about 200-300 existed in the PNW.  The numbers we hear today are ridiculous.  Any population in the 10's of thousands would have been found out long ago assuming they existed at all.  

 

Crow,  I agree with you based on the reporting behavior we have been seeing since the '90s. Entirely different these last decades. 

 

Edited to add: I think it is pretty clear we have no DNA, and that says a lot. Wildlife managers can pick up DNA of very rare species when their numbers are in single digits.

Edited February 14, 2015 by HOLDMYBEER

[Guest]

The environment is a DNA soup, fragments of this and that, like pages and passages from books, if you compare those fragments to the books you have, you can figure out what they came from. If you don't have the book, simple DNA techniques will not identify it. If say the Sasquatch book to the Sapiens book is like the difference between the 15th and 20th editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, then a large number of fragments will look like Sapiens DNA. 

 

In some regards, it's like googling passages from a book, if you google passages from a particular book, you will find that book, it will not identify a totally different book.

 

In other regards, the experiments and procedures are designed to find things thought likely to be there, there is pre-selection bias in the way the analysis is performed.

 

When finally we have a fully sequenced Sasquatch genome, then we can tell where they live by DNA sampling streams etc.

 

 

In regards to the original topic however, I think it's inevitable that the population has increased. Their potential habitat has increased tenfold, their food supply in large game has increased a thousandfold since ~1930s, they began the rebound in 50s and 60s and have been breeding like rabbits until present day. When we see a sharp decline in cervid numbers across the continent, we may then infer, as in the classic "rabbits and foxes" ecology models, that Sasquatch population is peaking soon also, and will follow that decline. If we came close to wiping them out it was between 1850 and 1950 when we hunted the hell out of everything else, clearcut everything, depriving them of food and habitat. However, there was likely a crash in the 1650s onwards due to European diseases. They probably barely recovered from that before hunting began to take a toll. 

 

I believe that reports are an unreliable indicator, of current/recent activity, BFRO for one doesn't publish everything immediately, so there can be a 1-2 year lag there. Also many witness are somewhat traumatised and may not be ready to talk about experience for several years. Given an anticipated 10% reporting rate, as has been documented for subjects such as UFOs, we may see that go to 12-15% in times where media coverage of the topic is high, whether it's hoaxy crap or not, and in times of media disinterest, may see it sink to 7%. Thus plus or minus 30% in reports from an area means practically nothing. Also human activity varies, you need two things for a report, a Sas and a human, if the human is not there, it doesn't mean the Sas wasn't. We had a bit of a crappy summer up here last year, knew several people who went camping played cards and board games in the tent or camper 70% of the time they were away, due to wet weather, it probably put off a lot of people from even going. So that alone would have been a 70% reduction in eyeballs in the woods hours over that period. 

 

Also, have you noticed, that only reports from "new" non-bigfooters seem to "count", it's completely backwards from ornithology, where observations from birdwatchers are probably likely to be taken more seriously than general public "I thunk I saw a Spotted Owl", in determining population and distribution of rare species. Then if you're in any way scientific about it, i.e. repeatability, you go back to same area and see if you see/hear them again, and you do, ooops, you've seen one too many now, your veracity is now more in question that if you'd seen just one.

[Terry]

With an estimated population of 500-750 individuals it may not be long for a creature who may only live 40-50 years (or less depending on conditions) will just quietly fade out of existence. 

 

 

Heck, there's that many bf on Sasfooty's property alone!

 

t.

[Guest]

The environment is a DNA soup, fragments of this and that, like pages and passages from books, if you compare those fragments to the books you have, you can figure out what they came from. If you don't have the book, simple DNA techniques will not identify it. If say the Sasquatch book to the Sapiens book is like the difference between the 15th and 20th editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, then a large number of fragments will look like Sapiens DNA. 

 

In some regards, it's like googling passages from a book, if you google passages from a particular book, you will find that book, it will not identify a totally different book.

 

In other regards, the experiments and procedures are designed to find things thought likely to be there, there is pre-selection bias in the way the analysis is performed.

 

When finally we have a fully sequenced Sasquatch genome, then we can tell where they live by DNA sampling streams etc.

 

 

In regards to the original topic however, I think it's inevitable that the population has increased. Their potential habitat has increased tenfold, their food supply in large game has increased a thousandfold since ~1930s, they began the rebound in 50s and 60s and have been breeding like rabbits until present day. When we see a sharp decline in cervid numbers across the continent, we may then infer, as in the classic "rabbits and foxes" ecology models, that Sasquatch population is peaking soon also, and will follow that decline. If we came close to wiping them out it was between 1850 and 1950 when we hunted the hell out of everything else, clearcut everything, depriving them of food and habitat. However, there was likely a crash in the 1650s onwards due to European diseases. They probably barely recovered from that before hunting began to take a toll. 

 

I believe that reports are an unreliable indicator, of current/recent activity, BFRO for one doesn't publish everything immediately, so there can be a 1-2 year lag there. Also many witness are somewhat traumatised and may not be ready to talk about experience for several years. Given an anticipated 10% reporting rate, as has been documented for subjects such as UFOs, we may see that go to 12-15% in times where media coverage of the topic is high, whether it's hoaxy crap or not, and in times of media disinterest, may see it sink to 7%. Thus plus or minus 30% in reports from an area means practically nothing. Also human activity varies, you need two things for a report, a Sas and a human, if the human is not there, it doesn't mean the Sas wasn't. We had a bit of a crappy summer up here last year, knew several people who went camping played cards and board games in the tent or camper 70% of the time they were away, due to wet weather, it probably put off a lot of people from even going. So that alone would have been a 70% reduction in eyeballs in the woods hours over that period. 

 

Also, have you noticed, that only reports from "new" non-bigfooters seem to "count", it's completely backwards from ornithology, where observations from birdwatchers are probably likely to be taken more seriously than general public "I thunk I saw a Spotted Owl", in determining population and distribution of rare species. Then if you're in any way scientific about it, i.e. repeatability, you go back to same area and see if you see/hear them again, and you do, ooops, you've seen one too many now, your veracity is now more in question that if you'd seen just one.

 

Let us remember that human population has grown exceedingly fast since 1930s and with it an abundance of food for consumption that has by all accounts fed Sasquatch for a very long time. I’m speaking of everything from harvested crop in the fields to domestic farm animals to food scraps from community refuse and restaurant eateries.  Obviously that isn’t logical to suggest it would apply to animals residing deep inside the more remote parts of the U.S. or Canada, but it seems reasonable to suggest that a fair number have learn to sustain their diet, largely undetected, very close to human existence.    

 

I agree to a point Flashman, the BFRO group appears to be sole preeminent clearinghouse for Bigfoots at the present, and until such time that a competing source of equal or greater steps up, that is all we have to rely on. I share the stated view of that same organization withholding reports before releasing them. What we see and what I suspect they view are two entirely sides of the same enchilada with exception.

[Guest mariner]

_{Re BFRO, it would be no surprise to learn  that not all reports are posted straight away. It would be in BFRO's interest to pick and choose which ones to release, and when.}

[Guest]

_{Re BFRO, it would be no surprise to learn  that not all reports are posted straight away. It would be in BFRO's interest to pick and choose which ones to release, and when.}

 

 

Good post Mariner, why do you think that is? I ask not as an expert but as somebody interested in what you have to say. :-)

[Cisco]

I have no doubt their population has increased and increased substantlially over the past 100 years. My reasons for this view have been listed already in this thread but I'll sum up some of the more important ones.

 

• Organized/ Industrial agriculture: Large farming operation provide food for many animals. If BF really do exist, they would learn to utlize the abundant resources offered by small and large scale agricultural operations. *its interesting to note there are not a lot of reports that reference BF raiding farms or orchards. There are some of course, but not as many as I would expect.
• Lack of natural predators: There are no natural predators that are capable of taking down a full grown BF male. Perhaps a full grown grizzly but that would be it. I assume gestation for a female is close to a human gestation period and they likely only have one child every few years. I also assume they would keep that child close and well protected. In short, its unlikely that a coyote is going to run off with a BF baby. Of course, that's not to say they don't die of disease or exposure.
• Large game population: The white tail deer population has exploded over the past 100 years. In Texas, hunters barely make a dent in the population and I assume its true for every state. BF have plenty of deer to eat, not to mention, hogs and other potential prey animals.
• Human refuse: In this country we waste a tremendous amount of food and many wild animals have learned to forage in dumpsters and garbage cans. There are many reports of BF "shopping" in people's garbage.
• Giant habitat: Our national forests are very large and more than adequate to sustain and hide a large breeding population of anything, including BF.

[Guest]

Good post. I’m in agreement with each and every point. I do read and see lot's references to these things eating corn on the cob and other vegetables and grain seed.

 

2004 July

Jackson County, Michigan

Man working around property sees a top of a head of a Bigfoot animal watching him and the blueberries while standing in the brush

 

2003 July

Isabella County, Michigan

A delivery trucker driver stops alongside road to eat, steps out to stretch and sees large dark dirty manlike creature storming out of corn field five feet in front of him. He scrambles to truck speeds away without looking back.

 

2002 November

Jackson County, Michigan

Family in farm house say they have been terrorized by Bigfoot animals screaming killed and ripped apart a deer near the house leaving the carcass in the yard

 

2002 November

Jackson County, Michigan

Woman says her property has been terrorized by Bigfoot animals scaring the family back in the house after it pushed on a car causing one resident to speed off

 

2001

Livingston County, Michigan

Three men on farm picking corn detect horrible smell and see tall creature after the corn at woods edge in Pinckney

 

1999

Tuscola County, Michigan

Pole barn contractor reports his brother-in-law saw a big pitch black hairy ape going under some under brush on all fours while he was hunting deer and was ridiculed into silence

 

1999 June

Washtenaw County, Michigan

Farming family reports hearing screams and growls in a corn field

1997 June

Washtenaw County, Michigan

Man getting bags out of car reports hearing strange jabbering and medium high pitched mumbling in corn field next to house after midnight that resembles Bigfoot “Sierra Sounds†

 

1997

Iosco County, Michigan

Resident in newly built home in a very isolated site surrounded by dense forest awoke to find their three strand wire electrical fence destroyed by their apple orchard and blackberry bushes

 

1997

Lapeer County, Michigan

Man riding with his dad in their truck when a skinny 7-foot tall human faced dirty almost wolf like creature running on two legs leaped over the hood with a bloody stomach hit road and ran into corn field on all fours

 

1995

Washtenaw County, Michigan

Woman says she returning home from grocery shopping heard strangest jabbering noises and high pitched mumbling from inside the corn field

 

1993

Sanilac County, Michigan

Three Bigfoot type creatures near a farm were seen leaving a field of tall corn east of Marlette

 

1993

Sanilac County, Michigan

A couple walking dog in corn field at dark runs into Bigfoot creature who then picks her up and drops her and three creatures were then seen leaving the scene through a field of tall corn

 

1981 September

St. Clair County, Michigan

Yale area family reports repeated encounters on their farm with big 7 foot Bigfoot with red glowing eyes tearing down fences and ripping doors off hinges and grain barrel have eaten

 

1978 October

Ingham County, Michigan

Ingham County Sheriff’s deputy and two other men smell odor and give chase to a large howling Bigfoot creature they spot running through orchard near M36 and Walker Roads

 

 

[Guest]

Heck, there's that many bf on Sasfooty's property alone!

t.

just dont break any rules t !!