Campsite Destroyed

[Cisco]

Gum, I've done a fair amount of internet searches for everything from camp sight crime to camping vandalism. I'm fairly adept at Googling and have found nothing that is even close to what was described. Considering it has been very public, it's safe to say somebody, outside of the BF world, would have written something. There's nothing in local papers and I checked all major cities and towns up and down the Lone Star Trail.

 

I still enjoy SC but mostly as entertainment. There are some shows, with guests that are pretty knowledgeable and have good things to say. Will is good but he's also one of these guys that is very sure of what he says. In fact, he's the one that claimed there were for sure, 4 or 5 types of Bigfoot and he made it clear this was fact and not theory. Unless he knows something the rest of us don't, these kind of claims always put me off.

[Guest]

@Cisco ... Well then, I see what you’re saying. I heard those same comments relative to different types stated on that show too on a few separate occasions. I have no idea how many different types there are but it’s pretty clear to me he’s on the right track. Let’s see that was probably said more than once and repeated on both of their 2014 and 2015 podcast shows.

 

I just posted a 1970s BFRO report from Michigan on the Tree Manipulation thread. In that report, nearly 40 years old, the reporting person discusses in great length some of things he has learned about Bigfoot in Michigan. It’s quite lengthy but well worth the read. There is lots of information to be had and its very instructional so anyways he discusses two different types of Bigfoot and describes them exactly as I experienced last year. Keep in mind the age of the report and recall if you will the discussion on different types from the SC 2014 and 2015 podcast shows. Those people were not breaking any new headlines or breaching dangerous headwaters with that information, other people were discussing long before apparently.  

[Guest]

Gumshoe, where do you get the best sets of older reports? BFRO, or is there another log of reports out there? I want to look at what I would consider ''untainted'' reports, before the BF shows became so popular.

[Guest]

Hello Wag, Well, the biggest going on BFRO and GCBRO but there small individual sites like in in Texas and Oregon. Michigan has had one going on for several years. I think Pennsylvania has a site and a few others.  I notice some just don’t appear after being there for a spell.

[Guest]

Is the SC podcasts still going strong in spite of the dustup?

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Is the SC podcasts still going strong in spite of the dustup?

 

Episode 94 was posted yesterday according to their blogtalk site http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bigfoothotspot

 

I'm less inclined to a "government conspiracy" theory than I am to a "they're charging a membership fee for extended content" theory. I think people were upset that SC began charging a fee for extended content and were even more upset when that extended content didn't meet their expectations.

[coffee2go]

It only takes one disgruntled member to decide to do some fact checking and post a comment somewhere.  The internet is a powerful tool for both truth and fiction.

I am also not inclined to believe there is any kind of government conspiracy.  

 

I also do not discredit any of the people who call into their podcasts.  People need a place to talk about their experience for therapy and sharing with others who believe or know.  If their account is not true, it was a bad way to start a bf website exposing it to so many people (analytics).  They could have created their site and podcasts without all of the hoopla of dangerous, bloodthirsty Sasquatch roaming the woods. Although, that makes for better story telling.  Just my personal opinion.

[Guest]

•  

  Episode 94 was posted yesterday according to their blogtalk site http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bigfoothotspot

   

  I'm less inclined to a "government conspiracy" theory than I am to a "they're charging a membership fee for extended content" theory. I think people were upset that SC began charging a fee for extended content and were even more upset when that extended content didn't meet their expectations.

   

   

  It only takes one disgruntled member to decide to do some fact checking and post a comment somewhere.  The internet is a powerful tool for both truth and fiction.

  I am also not inclined to believe there is any kind of government conspiracy.  

   

  I also do not discredit any of the people who call into their podcasts.  People need a place to talk about their experience for therapy and sharing with others who believe or know.  If their account is not true, it was a bad way to start a bf website exposing it to so many people (analytics).  They could have created their site and podcasts without all of the hoopla of dangerous, bloodthirsty Sasquatch roaming the woods. Although, that makes for better story telling.  Just my personal opinion.

   

• They would probably be miles ahead with some marketing and promotion before their decision to go to paid membership but were more than likely working on a shoe string budget. In so far as the other point, all I could do was offer up my opinion and call it as I seen it.  

•  

[SWWASAS]

I don’t know if this has any impact on the debate about Wes and Woody’s encounter, but I have a few details Wes gave on episode 31.  The date loaded (Podcast load date or air date I can’t say) was May 18, 2014.  I believe he provided the information around 20 minutes before the end of the episode.

 

During the episode, Wes states this information about his encounter:

 

-It took place on top of Yacolt Mountain.

-It was next to the Lewis River.

-It was next to, also uses “nearâ€, a campground.

-As of the episode date, the area was set to be clear cut, with trees already marked for removal.  I believe this happened after the encounter as it is           insinuated the clear cutting is suspicious and possibly tied to his report.

 

It’s just another piece of the puzzle.  Maybe this means something to those familiar with the area.  Take care.

The top of Yacolt Mountain is 1.5 miles North of the Lewis River.    Access by road to the Yacolt Mountain area is from the West or from the East out of Yacolt not from the Lewis River.    No road runs from the river to Yacolt Mountain in that area.      The nearest campground to Yacolt Mountain is about 4 miles away.      That is Battle Ground State Park to the SW.    I would not even associate this with the Lewis River since it is not anywhere near it.      Sunset Falls campground on the Lewis River is  about 9 miles from Yacolt Mountain  nearer the coordinates they provided for the sighting location which is on FR 4205 about 2 miles from the campground.       The State Forest land in the area is being heavily logged but at the sighting coordinates there is no nearby clear cut.  (Sighting location pictures published previously in this thread.)   At this point, I can assume one of two things:    1.   It really happened and they had no idea where they were, and just started throwing out geographical names telling the story.   2.   It never happened and they made up the story using foggy recollections they had of the area.     In either case, the geographical problems with their story do nothing to give it any credibility.       I will add that they should never tell that story in my presence, it might be very embarrassing for them.  

Edited April 13, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

 

•  

   

   

   

• They would probably be miles ahead with some marketing and promotion before their decision to go to paid membership but were more than likely working on a shoe string budget. In so far as the other point, all I could do was offer up my opinion and call it as I seen it.  

•  

 

 

gum, I wouldn't put it past the government to hide or obscure information. I grew up with kids whose fathers worked for Forsyth Associates or were consultants for it. So I think it's plausible that the government could and does hide things smaller than an underground bunker beneath a hotel/resort. :-)

 

But I think the impetus in this case was more due to paying for content and dissatisfaction of that paid content. I listened to the podcasts before the paid content stuff was introduced-----you didn't have to be a MENSA member to figure out the amount of additional content wouldn't be an extra 120 hours worth of interviews per week. I think the SC group made it really clear that they had a wish list of things they wanted: more podcasts, a sightings database, etc. But I think people didn't realize these things were works in progress and expected them immediately. Caveat emptor.

 

Where these malcontents prodded on by others? Again, if the government could hide a bunker beneath a hotel, agitators wouldn't be out of the question, imo.

[Cisco]

I have now heard a fair amount of the pod casts from SC, as well as additional details from and about Bob Garret.

As has been pointed out, episode 68 is no longer available and this episode contains most of the details regarding the camp sight.

Regardless, Bob has really shared quite a bit of info, since that episode and for a man that's worried about government consequences, he does not appear to hold back on any details.

The more I hear, the more fantastic it sounds. What I find truly amazing is that Bob Garret has not thought of documenting ANY of the many different occasions that he's been harassed by the government. He has mentioned multiple incidents in which agents have shown up at his camp, flown over in "black helicopters"' pulled over his wife and hacked his computer and stole information. Never once did he set up a camera and record any of this. Even though there have been repeated incidents and apparently they continue to happen. In one story, Bob and his team capture amazing video of some Sasquatch, one a video camera and then download the video to Bobs computer. The government them hacks into Bobs computer and steals the video file, along with other information Bob had saved on his computer....

Hmmm... Ground breaking video and poof! It gets stolen and apparently there's no back up copy and the copy on the camera must have disappeared?

I'm sorry but how many times have we heard stories like this? This is straight from Rick Dyers hand book. I'm just not buying it and don't understand how anybody could swallow this story.

[Guest]

gum, I wouldn't put it past the government to hide or obscure information. I grew up with kids whose fathers worked for Forsyth Associates or were consultants for it. So I think it's plausible that the government could and does hide things smaller than an underground bunker beneath a hotel/resort. :-)

 

But I think the impetus in this case was more due to paying for content and dissatisfaction of that paid content. I listened to the podcasts before the paid content stuff was introduced-----you didn't have to be a MENSA member to figure out the amount of additional content wouldn't be an extra 120 hours worth of interviews per week. I think the SC group made it really clear that they had a wish list of things they wanted: more podcasts, a sightings database, etc. But I think people didn't realize these things were works in progress and expected them immediately. Caveat emptor.

 

Where these malcontents prodded on by others? Again, if the government could hide a bunker beneath a hotel, agitators wouldn't be out of the question, imo.

 

@Chasing Rabbits everything is on the table. Much could be placed at the feet of a paid for membership bid or it very well is something else; my money is on the something else horse.

I have now heard a fair amount of the pod casts from SC, as well as additional details from and about Bob Garret.

As has been pointed out, episode 68 is no longer available and this episode contains most of the details regarding the camp sight.

Regardless, Bob has really shared quite a bit of info, since that episode and for a man that's worried about government consequences, he does not appear to hold back on any details.

The more I hear, the more fantastic it sounds. What I find truly amazing is that Bob Garret has not thought of documenting ANY of the many different occasions that he's been harassed by the government. He has mentioned multiple incidents in which agents have shown up at his camp, flown over in "black helicopters"' pulled over his wife and hacked his computer and stole information. Never once did he set up a camera and record any of this. Even though there have been repeated incidents and apparently they continue to happen. In one story, Bob and his team capture amazing video of some Sasquatch, one a video camera and then download the video to Bobs computer. The government them hacks into Bobs computer and steals the video file, along with other information Bob had saved on his computer....

Hmmm... Ground breaking video and poof! It gets stolen and apparently there's no back up copy and the copy on the camera must have disappeared?

I'm sorry but how many times have we heard stories like this? This is straight from Rick Dyers hand book. I'm just not buying it and don't understand how anybody could swallow this story.

 

@Cisco, Please pardon my ignorance but wasn’t episode#68 online or on You Tube at one point? I may be incorrect and it might be a presumption on my part but I thought that particular episode was posted online at one time. If the proprietor was ordered to take it down and it disappeared doesn't that appear to be a bit draconian in this day age?  - Just asking

[MarkGlasgow]

On the money Cisco. The more I read the more incredible it becomes.

Bob seemed to have a good rep a while back but just wonder why he went off the rails so wildly with this conspiracy story?

So wild are his claims I would be inclined to worry about his wellbeing at the moment.

[Explorer]

I don’t know if this has any impact on the debate about Wes and Woody’s encounter, but I have a few details Wes gave on episode 31.  The date loaded (Podcast load date or air date I can’t say) was May 18, 2014.  I believe he provided the information around 20 minutes before the end of the episode.

 

During the episode, Wes states this information about his encounter:

 

-It took place on top of Yacolt Mountain.

-It was next to the Lewis River.

-It was next to, also uses “nearâ€, a campground.

-As of the episode date, the area was set to be clear cut, with trees already marked for removal.  I believe this happened after the encounter as it is           insinuated the clear cutting is suspicious and possibly tied to his report.

 

It’s just another piece of the puzzle.  Maybe this means something to those familiar with the area.  Take care.

 

Johnny G,

 

Thanks for finding the reference source for Wes and Woody's original location claim.

 

I remembered that he said it happened on Yacolt Mountain but could not find the reference source.

 

BTW, if you look for Episode #31 in their Facebook page with all the past blog recordings, you will notice that that episode is mysteriously missing.

 

https://www.facebook.com/BigfootHotspotRadio

 

Thus, I could not go back and check on your reference. But I believe you, because I heard it and even visited Yacolt Mtn. based on his claim.

[Cisco]

Gum, I have not looked for episode 68 on Youtube but it's not on the menu for SC pod casts. I can't remember why they removed it but it was removed by Wes/ Woody. I do remember somebody saying it was removed because a lot of the info on that episode was contradictory. I can't really attest to this but it rings a bell.

 

The stories told by Bob Garret actually pale in comparison to the stories related by Wes, Woody, Will and the retired deputy "Jack", about the mysterious government operatives that often show up when there's been a Bigfoot related incident. There are two of these government operatives, and although they always show up, nobody EVER asks them for ID's or badges? I suppose they must be very intimidating? One of the operatives is very clean cut and friendly, while the other one looks like he could be a "biker."

 

The retired deputy, Jack, has a wide array of stories related to the government showing up when a Bigfoot makes an appearance. Of course, Jack himself is comical in what he says, although he does not mean to be. He portrays himself as the "lone wolf" law enforcement officer that does not put up with the "Feds." On one episode, he referred to his town's black population as "coloreds." I thought I'd misheard it so I had to rewind and listen to it again. Wes and Will just ignored the comment but it made my jaw drop.

 

Where do they find these guys? I'm already looking forward to the shows with the enigmatic Mr. Black!

 

Bob Garret is an amateur compared to some of the other guests. Which may be why he's stepped up with wilder and more insane stories. There's some tough competition on SC and you'd better have some good stories if you want to stay in the game...