Encounters That Are Never Reported...

[1980squatch]

Indeed, very crazy.  Did happen though!

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I don't think I've ever mentioned the fact that I never filed a report after my sighting. On the one hand I knew how important the sighting record is, at least in my opinion, and on the other hand I knew that by filing a report there was the potential for some type of blowback. I wouldn't have filed without my name or anything like that, because I didn't think they would publish a report without corroborating it, which is a good thing. But I didn't want some strange guy I didn't know doing what happened to a witness I interviewed once. He played me a voicemail that was left on one of his relative's answering machines...They were trying to track the guy who had the sighting down, because he did not give them his phone number. So they, and I won't mention which group it was, attempted to track him down by going through the phonebook and calling people with his last name. It was a relatively unique last name, but they basically were leaving messages for people with that last name saying "they wanted to talk to so and so about his BIGFOOT ENCOUNTER." I mean give me a break. Is that not a breach of trust in a major way?

 

So basically it is just easier to avoid any potential blowback, whatever that may be, by just keeping your mouth shut. It is one thing to share anonymously, or with people you trust, or even with anyone if you know that they aren't going to go and breach your confidence. But you cannot know with a bigfoot research group, whose aim is to extract as much information from you as possible. And then you will always have to deal with the fact that some researchers are going to try and discredit your encounter the entire way. I understand the need to be objective, but I have a hard time believing that all researchers doing interviews will be tactful. So why put yourself through all of these unknowns? I will continue to believe that the sighting record is invaluable, and I thank those who have filed reports, and I hope that the majority of them did not have to deal with any unexpected surprises throughout the process.

 

Anyway, I definitely believe that there are a large number of people who don't file reports. I mean when you have people like myself and others on these forums who did not file reports, then you can bet there are a large number of those who know nothing about bigfoot who would not file a report. I imagine the numbers are in the tens of thousands over the last two or three decades. A number that is just as difficult to pin down is the number of people who file false reports. What you have to consider however is that there are not going to be as many people who will carry such a joke or hoax to its conclusion, people who will use their real information and go through the investigative process. Many of the reports are vetted, at least by the BFRO, to my knowledge anyway. That is completely different from filling out a form and then never having to worry about it again. And if the hoaxer used false information so they couldn't be contacted, then I don't think the sighting report would have been used. But again, not sure. At the end of the day I think we can trust in the numbers. A large majority of the sighting reports were likely filed by people who had a sighting of something they couldn't explain, and which they obviously thought was bigfoot if they filed a report on a bigfoot site. Some will be misidentifications, but a point I have made in the past is that humans are pretty good when it comes to perceiving certain kinds of differences as opposed to others. Smaller differences are harder to determine.

 

So that likely means a human is not going to confuse a bigfoot and a dog. They would be more apt to confuse a bigfoot and a gorilla. What many witnesses describe is something hairy, tall, and bipedal, which does not really fit for any other animal. Something like a stump would not be said to walk away, or walk on two legs, etc...And many sightings occur with a good visual corridor, before the animal retreats. And most people are not going to be fooled to the point that they file a sighting report. And the last thing I want to mention is that many witnesses mention how they initially thought they were looking at one thing, only to realize that what they were seeing could not be explained via conventional means. So people do not look to bigfoot as the first explanation, which is very telling. They are not fooling themselves into thinking they've seen a bigfoot, but are more apt to fool themselves into thinking they've seen something that can be conventionally explained. Most people don't like having their world-view challenged, and some cannot handle it. This is why you have people who refuse to go back in the woods after a sighting. Hard to imagine that happening over a stump or something similar.

[Guest DWA]

Good OP. Not crazy, at all. That's pretty much it on why one can expect people with an encounter not to report it.

For me personally, I don't worry about them, because I can't; for one thing only who knows how many there are? But one can bet there are a lot of them. The lifeblood of the bigfoot websites, for decades, was reports of encounters years and sometimes decades before the report was made. "Finding Bigfoot" changed that, one of its few positive impacts on the field. There isn't any reason to believe that the upsurge in reports made almost immediately, a phenomenon that demonstrably began with FB, is copycatting or any other form of engineered falsehood. The reports are of a piece with those made before, in subtle hard to discredit ways that only one who makes a study of them can understand.

I look at the pile, large and consistent such as is true of only proven phenomena...other than this one. And I think: there are thousands more out there that we may someday read...or may not.

There is more than enough though to garner the concerted attention of the scientific community.

[beerhunter]

They just say no to negative publicity. Certain people on weekly TV doing dumb things in the woods makes the average person think Bigfooters are goofy just because there is no finding bigfoot there.

[Doc Holliday]

not sure of the % reported vs not.... but I know of a couple sightings and a few more "maybes" with  BF suspected activity that probably will not see  the light of day publicly.

 

and  those from areas not exactly considered BF central like the PNW....  one guy told me about a random knocking occurrence that he thought odd that did sound interesting, yet publicly he scoffs at the idea of BF.

 

point is, yeah the bs factor combined with the tongue in cheek media treatment BF gets is enough to keep folks quiet so as not to be labeled a loonie tune.

[Trogluddite]

Hmmm, yea, I wonder if all BF reports to BFRO are within 'normalcy' guidlines, as even on this message board, Psycic and Habituation Sasquatch have been transferred to the Crypto section.

There is at least one "psychic" report near Levittown (sp?) PA; that's a suburb of Philly, but I can't remember the county off the top of my head.  There is also a habituation report from West Virginia - don't recall the area, but to summarize: "We kids growing up always thought 'Bob' was a bit slow and hairy. Years later I returned to my hometown and went mushroom hunting (I think it was mushrooms) and 'Bob' introduced me to his wife and kid - Shazam!! 'Bob' was REALLY A BIGFOOT!!"

 

I kid you not.  It's one of the West Virginia encounters. 

[bipedalist]

L'town is in Bucks Co, PA, nice place and a great playhouse.  

 

 

West Virginia has got it going.  If there are habituations there they have been universally played close to the vest.   My impression is they are very fast and very aggressive in that locale.

Edited December 14, 2014 by bipedalist

[WV FOOTER]

FWIW, The encounter that gigantor and myself had was not reported, and I have no other explanation of what was following us. It wasn't an animal or human. If I were to get a visual, I wouldn't report it, just self satisfaction that " They are Real!"

[gigantor]

If we had a visual, I had my phone camera ready...  and also my dorky helmet cam ready, but no cigar that one and only time we thought a BF was around. It just wouldn't show itself... even though it followed us for a while. Smart, it would stop moving when we stopped and tried looking for it. Clever *******, never gave us a chance to spot it.

 

I would post the pic and details no question. But we have nothing other than a story.

Edited December 14, 2014 by gigantor

[Guest lightheart]

WV

Was your possible encounter in West Virginia? In what county?

The state is so rural and forested I would think there would be a sizeable population. I had one really crazy encounter with my dad and at least 3 other people that mentioned the "wild men" to me. One account was my grandmother who grew up in Randolph county, one was a college friend who was from Mingo county, the other was a family that lived adjacent to Kanawha State Forest. My dad's cabin was next to Watoga on the Grenbrier River. I am pretty sure that is right where the BFRO had some experiences during an expedition. I can't remember exactly where my dad took me that morning that they screamed at us but I think it was either the Williams River or the Cherry River.

[WV FOOTER]

Our encounter was in WV, in Tucker County. It is in an area of reported sightings. BFRO Reports. The Williams River area is some wild country, and a great place for a Squatch. There have been reported sightings in this region as well. I am a believer that Bigfoot travel to areas of opportunity to obtain food. Traveling throughout the Allegheny Mountains, the surroundings look like a Squatch could appear at anytime.I am unwaivered by funny looks and giggles, by sharing our encounter with local people, because I know what I heard, and it was huge. To hear footfalls, heavy footfalls, in the wet conditions still baffles me to this day.

[Trogluddite]

^^^^^^

(Edited to remove unnecessary quotes of posts immediately above)

 

To Gigantor, WVFooter, and Lightheart - if I PM you would you be willing to share details?  It's been awhile since I've worked on my West Virginia data, but you can't connect the dots if you don't have all the dots to connect....

Edited December 14, 2014 by Trogluddite

[WV FOOTER]

I will share anything that you may find of interest.

[Guest lightheart]

Yes Trog I am happy to share what I know but I have not lived there for many years, so I don't have any contacts.

The local people know they are there.....The people of WVA are very honest, good-hearted, and keep information close. That is why the BFRO database doesn't show as many reports as some states. They talk about these things only with people they trust...

[Guest]

I have been thinking a lot lately about this as I've tried to read BFRO and other reports.

I know from my experience in law enforcement that there are lots of crimes that never get reported. It is human nature that we place a high priority on the impact making a crime report might have on one's family, one's friends and social relationships, one's job...you name it if a person can think of a way making a report will impact their life in a negative way they absolutely weigh that impact against the perceived value of making the report. They then weigh it against any moral foundation, or compass (if they have one, believe me when I tell you some folks don't) before making a decision to step up and call the cops.

 

I think that people use the same process to decide whether or not to report a Bigfoot, or any other experience that is outside of the accepted mainstream of life experience.

People will be people, after all.

Because they know the impact on their lives will be very real, and as the power and reach of the media has grown they have seen, right before their eyes, the result of making such a report on the lives of ordinary people.

Step out of line with the mainstream and get clobbered.

 

So, when someone does step forward with a report of a Bigfoot, and does so publicly, they have only a few motivations.

-They are seeking their fifteen minutes of fame, and the report is a fabrication.

-They are seeking their fifteen minutes of fame, and the report is a fabrication, and their motivation is money. (huge problem here, obviously)

-They are actively engaged in subterfuge and an effort to discredit the field of study for a variety of reasons.

-They are mentally ill. (seen this a lot)

-They were hallucinating due to narcotic ingestion.    (seen this a lot)

-They have weighed all of the risks, and balanced them against their moral compass, and make the report anyway, but they've made an honest mistake.

-They have weighed all the risks, and balanced them against their moral compass, and made the report, fully aware of the impact, and the report is true.

And they live with the impact.

 

I think the fact that the BFRO and other organizations allow for people to report encounters and remain out of the public eye is critical, most folks wouldn't step forward with out that shield of anonymity...inversely, you have to weigh the fact that this shield is in place would make it easier for someone to fabricate a report without major consequences.

A conundrum.

(As a retired cop, with training in the art form of interview and interrogation it can be really frustrating to read an interesting statement in a BF report that has a big impact on a case and not have the opportunity to go through the statement with the witness in a one on one basis...and come to my own conclusions.

It drives me nuts, actually. As I have tried to bring myself up to speed on all of the reports on line and even to get connected to this site and the reports folks like Gumshoe have shared it really drive me nuts.

My problem, not yours.)

And I digress.

 

The last category.

-They have had a legitimate encounter and they have good documentation of it.They have weighed all the risks, and balanced them against their moral compass, and as much as it goes against their grain, they cannot bring themselves to report it.

 

They may have unimpeachable evidence to back their claim, or excellent photos, or something we can't imagine...but they simply will not subject themselves and the people they love to the blowback that they know will come.

 

These are the reports I wonder about.

I can see it happening very easily.

 

The recent hullabaloo Todd Standing has ignited with his most recent adventures bugs the heck out of me for all of the normal reasons...and another.

What if there is a witness out there, a guy in the last category; just "Joe Average", who was out in the woods and had an experience that generated REAL evidence of an encounter on that level, and he has been agonizing about releasing and/or reporting it?

And he got on the interwebz, surfed around and saw the kerfuffle that Messrs. Standing and others have generated with there "stuff".

And he has come to the exact same conclusion that a huge percentage of Joe Average types would come to. The internal conversation that old Joe Average has with himself goes something like this...

 

"Holy crap, I don't know who this guy is or why he did that but LOOK at what they  put him through. I can't imagine what they are going to do to me if I come forward with this, and they find out it is real. I know it's real, heck I'd take a lie detector or any other test, they can go out there themselves, I'd show 'em...but is it really gonna be worth it for me to come forward...what's gonna happen to my wife..to my kids?

What kind of crap am I gonna get at work? Could the boss mess with me or overlook me for that promotion?

Do I have the right to do that to my family?

No...no way. Screw it. I will...I will just wait. I'll keep an eye on this and if somebody else comes forward with a story from up there and gets a bunch of heat then maybe then I will back him up...depending on what he's got...maybe...but I am not going to go this alone...no way. It just isn't worth it".

 

These are the Joe Average reports I wonder about.

I wonder how many there are.

I wonder.

 

Am I crazy?

What do you think?

What can we do about it?

 

The Monroe Monster, conditioned by years of sanctioned ridicule as lesson to all.

 

The Monroe controversy that caught authorities and public by surprise took place during the evening of August 13, 1965, and still reverberates in my memory. It occurred on a dark remote road ringed by waist high weeds on the northeast fringes of Monroe County in Frenchtown Township.  Deep ditches carved on either side were common in the once sparsely populated site steeped with wild game and crop fields, thick woods, farmlands and narrow gravel back roads. Over the years since the infamous “Monroe Monster,†the story broke; a lot of its geography has changed making way for a century of progress. Roads are now paved and wider, the once vast fields of heavy over growth are gone, replaced by pockets of modern development visible in every direction, and home to light industry and sub-divisions and many named as principles spotlighted during the height of the action have long since passed, fading further into memories, but the story lives on. In the debate over whether or not the 1965 Monroe Monster was real or a hoax, many lose sight of the facts and background of Bigfoot or Sasquatch history.

 

1965 Monroe, Michigan Experience  

 

It all began when Christine Van Acker, 17, and her mother Ruth Owens of Monroe, say the huge beast appeared out of the woods and ran alongside of their car before it stalled, grabbed the girl causing injury.  Throughout my search, I found no such evidence that anyone of the above listed names had a flair for closet Bigfoot impersonation. I did however, locate some scant information at least one some predilection for paranormal activities. Moreover, I am not even certain the word "Bigfoot" was even a household name and yet, people found the reports as curious and those reporting such strangeness were roundly ridiculed for reporting their experiences.

 

Some say the creature leapt over the vehicle after brushed by the passing car. Others say the young girl panicked and stalled the vehicle and it reached in the window and grabbed her. Nobody knows for certain though some accounts say Bigfoot flees the area but not before taking the time to reach in the window and pull the girls hair knocking her out cold, and attempts to drag the girl into the underbrush. Though truth is told, decades later research unveiled points to a second female motorist encounter with a similar creature that smashed the windshield. That report was made a week earlier than the now infamous Monroe Monster sensation.

 

Remarkably enough, a state police officer told a local news reporter in 1965, that efforts to keep the incident "secret" failed. More details pieced together from an array of news clippings have authorities admitting to as many as 16 such incidents in weeks leading up to the Van Acker/ Owens Monroe Monster story many they say came from the same family.

 

Coincidental massive summer storm and drenching rains soaked the region in the hours following the “Monroe Monster†incident; no prints are found that I could verify however, there were hundreds of angry folks stomping dirt fields smooth in the area and a hard rain that night drenched the soil possibly destroying what little evidence might have been there. The fact of the matter is very few people ever steal a glimpse of the illusive creature that by all accounts has roamed these parts for hundreds of years despite growing human population and development.

 

A sheriff claimed it might have been a wayward bear. It was reportedly nearly  in height to a Brown Grizzly but much larger than the American (Ursus Americanus) black bear native to upper Michigan and not in Southern Michigan, (Monroe County) and yet, neither are found in this region. From the onset, it became apparent great efforts were underway to choreograph pieces as a means of establishing public plausible deniability all part of a prime axiom of spin. Decades later, you read between the lines and see through the spin. If all else fails then resort to name-calling and label the witness a hoax or crazy and the public will follow. Keeping the incident under control was crucial in dampening fears and public hysteria as news spread in this quiet community appears to have been the goal from the onset.

 

We then have to assume authorities in Monroe closely monitored the reports, and years later, it becomes obvious they apparently sat on reports choosing instead to roll their eyes and write off the entire incident as a “figment of someone’s imagination, a lie, and a hoax.† It was only after rumblings threatened to reach fever pitch that reporters and authorities were forced to confront it head-on and did so by leaking additional details in bits and pieces.  There were no crime scene tape, no investigation at the scene. When authorities did react it was after neighbors and curiosity seekers turned out by the hundreds. By then any foot prints were trampled over by hordes of people and washed away  by rain and hair clinging to chrome trim was collected hours later not at the scene but at a home.

 

It simply fails to resonate with common logic, so why would good folk place themselves in a situation of great ridicule and attention for a hoax?