Cascades Carnivore Project - How Do They Miss The Bigfoots?

[BigTreeWalker]

I also agree with Triton that there just aren't enough cameras out there to cover bigfoot territory. Even the very best cams don't cover much area. 

[Guest DWA]

Cams may be a part of an effort, but odds are overwhelming that they won't get us where we want to go.  We underrate how camera placements work for so many other species because we accept their existence and thus know where to find them.

[Twist]

I'd agree DWA, when we start getting a grasp on where/what they are cams may become a useful tool.  

[norseman]

On 1/13/2017 at 0:28 AM, BigTreeWalker said:

I also agree with Triton that there just aren't enough cameras out there to cover bigfoot territory. Even the very best cams don't cover much area. 

 

And more importantly there is no obligation for private citizens to share their footage with anyone! We have anomalies on camera traps already. And we know about them because owners came forward.

 

How many government cameras are out there? In which they are obligated to share their findings with the public. Assuming they don't sweep it under the rug as a hoax? A lot less than private ones......

 

 

[hiflier]

Agencies monitor animal movement. Especially where roads and highways are concerned. There have been studies about animals and herds get from one side of a highway to the other. Over-road crossings can be disastrous as we all know and when roads go down they bisect long used animal pathways so sometimes there are allowances for that via large culverts for animals to use- and they do use them according to what those agencies get on their cameras. In your area for instance Norseman the crossover of I-90 is a big topic. Culvert sizes are being increased as well as large naturally planted overpasses. Pretty serious money spent there.

[Guest Dkeeng]

This is one of the best topics I've ever read on the bigfoot subject.  Crazy the hoops some guys will jump through, and the amount of speculation and attributes that are assigned to a creature that even if it's real, we'd know almost nothing about.

[dmaker]

I agree with Dkeeng. This thread is an excellent example of where the proponent special pleading engine gets put into high gear. A scientific study, smack dab in the middle of reportedly bigfoot country, turns up zero evidence of any bigfoots. Yet that same study succeeds in producing convincing and unambiguous evidence of even some highly rare animals in that study area. Why no bigfoot evidence? That is the question this study raises. Answers to that question invariably involve all the time worn special pleading excuses that proponents have been leaning on for years upon years. 

 

Even in the face of studies such as this, the proponent belief meter nudges not one bit in the other direction. Belief is unwavering. I am positive that there is no number of similar studies that could ever be published that could ever put a dent in the armor of belief. If something like this does not make a proponent stop and wonder, to question somewhat their belief, then nothing ever will. It remains interesting, however, to observe how belief remains steadfast even in the face of objective science. 

Edited April 20, 2017 by dmaker

[scottv]

There's also an NGO called "Citizen Wildlife Monitoring Project" in the central cascades of Washington state. I just downloaded their 2015 field season report. Really well done. They have been operating for over 10 years and document rare species; lynx, grizzly bear, wolves, and wolverines in addition to whatever else goes by their cameras; elk, deer, rabbits, people etc. It's mostly volunteers that maintain the cameras. And no, no bigfoot yet. I'm sure there are more projects like this going on. I was just doing a google search and this popped up. Might be something that people here could emulate.

[gigantor]

WVFooter and I do have our WV Trailcam project.

 

This is year four and no bigfoot. Yet, it happens there is a theorem which posits the impossibility of proving a negative...  so there's that piece of scientific principle that keeps us going (plus its a lot of fun going out in the woods looking for evidence).

 

Quote

Why no bigfoot evidence?

 

I suggest to my fellow skeptics to check your first principles before foolishly thundering forward with a fallacy.

 

 

[scottv]

Gigantor, how many cameras do you run? what animals have you documented? I definitely agree on the fun part of it.

[gigantor]

We have about five cameras and a couple of sound recorders. No big deal. We've captured most of the animals known to exist in the area.

 

 

 

 

C1-Coyote.mp4

 

bobcat.mp4

[dmaker]

21 hours ago, gigantor said:

I suggest to my fellow skeptics to check your first principles before foolishly thundering forward with a fallacy.

 

 

Care to elaborate?

[BobbyO]

On 20 April 2017 at 11:58 PM, dmaker said:

I agree with Dkeeng. This thread is an excellent example of where the proponent special pleading engine gets put into high gear. A scientific study, smack dab in the middle of reportedly bigfoot country, turns up zero evidence of any bigfoots. Yet that same study succeeds in producing convincing and unambiguous evidence of even some highly rare animals in that study area. Why no bigfoot evidence? That is the question this study raises. Answers to that question invariably involve all the time worn special pleading excuses that proponents have been leaning on for years upon years. 

 

Even in the face of studies such as this, the proponent belief meter nudges not one bit in the other direction. Belief is unwavering. I am positive that there is no number of similar studies that could ever be published that could ever put a dent in the armor of belief. If something like this does not make a proponent stop and wonder, to question somewhat their belief, then nothing ever will. It remains interesting, however, to observe how belief remains steadfast even in the face of objective science. 

 

I agree in the main, belief isn't my cup of tea whatsoever and I struggle to understand it to be honest, in many walks of life in its many way, shapes and forms..

 

A sighting on the other hand is a different ball game altogether though and knocks belief in to orbit.

[ShadowBorn]

17 hours ago, BobbyO said:

A sighting on the other hand is a different ball game altogether though and knocks belief in to orbit.

 I agree with this statement only that it has a lot of truth to it according to belief.  I agree due to the definition of belief which states :

 

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

So if people are seeing these creatures and reporting them and we are finding evidence of their presence. Then who are we to deny their belief in what they or even I seem to understand that we have seen these creatures in real life.

 

Let's not say that they have not been captured on camera. Since doing so denies those who have encountered them and have tried to captured them on film. All though these pictures may not be clear as Patty they are attempts at capturing one on film.  Imagine how hard it is to get an up close encounter and now with a camera. A creature that rather would want to hide and show it self when it feels right. I in my opinion feel like most encounters are either chosen, accidental or were done on purpose.

 

The one that freaks me out is the chosen one since it is more predator. It is where it gets you to a vulnerable stage. A weak moment in your emotions . That's when it gets scary in a way. The camera part of them is like a tease when you do get them on a shot. But the chase is where we open ourselves to our vulnerabilities. Maybe remaining unseen is their way of security with man. Who knows and I am just speculating but recalling back to incidents I have had with these creatures and am still having.

 

 

 

 

[kitakaze]

 

Quote

 

7.18.2016

2nd wolverine detected is southern Washington

 

Following up on some great detections of Cascade red foxes east of Mt Rainier from our collaboration the USFS Naches Ranger District, we were thrilled to also detect a wolverine. First on May 16, then again on May 24 and 28, a single individual visited two of our camera stations.

 

This is only our second wolverine in the eight years since the project's inception. There was a wolverine roaming an area comprising Mt Adams and the Goat Rocks Wilderness, which we detected on 12 occasions between 2009 and 2012. This wolverine was first detected on the east side of Mt Adams in 2006 when it was photographed by a remote camera of the Yakama Nation. We presume it was a lone, dispersing male, and that it may have died now, or perhaps moved on, which is less likely as it stuck around the study area for several years. There was a compelling anecdote that it had found a mate but no concrete evidence was collected.

In the contiguous United States, the wolverine roams the high mountains of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho; and west into Washington's North Cascades. Their status in southern Washington is somewhat murky. The population in the North Cascades has been moving southward, expanding geographically though probably not in abundance. But despite this expansion, they are very rarely detected south of Interstate 90. A wolverine photographed south of I90 near Manastash Ridge by a citizen's remote camera may be the same wolverine as the one we just detected east of Mt Rainier. The Manastash photograph does not show the unique markings of a wolverine, which are along the chest and under the chin, and neither do our photos provide great detail. We will continue monitoring for wolverines this coming winter and hope to shed more light on their presence and genetic origins in southern Washington.

 

 

 

http://cascadescarnivoreproject.blogspot.jp

 

Mt. Ranier, Mt. Adams, Goat Rocks WIlderness where Roger Patterson was said to have photographed Bigfoot.

 

Where are the Bigfoots?

Edited April 23, 2017 by kitakaze