Sasquatch As The Animal

[Guest Crowlogic]

Hello Crowlogic,

 

I'm not quite sure that I wouldn't want to be along on that expedition. Makes me wonder if I would have a chance to enter the realm of being a "knower". Could be worth the price of admission. It's been decades having that big carrot hanging in front, eh? I too wish FarArcher luck. I think that for him though he's going to be leaving little to chance. There's a lot more going on there to be as certain as FarArcher is on the matter and, as an animal anyway, there is some predictability that someone savvy can possibly make work in their favor. I will say one thing also, getting to the stage of pulling the trigger won't be nearly as critical as the methods and precise thinking involved afterwards. Somehow I think he already knows that.

 

Once again we have the knower in contact with scenario.  Each and every knower in contact with individual or group has delivered the same nothing that the seeker hopeful has.  I'm sure those who read the post that there's a claim of being in contact  with perked up.  If any of those situations were going to bear fruit they would have a long time ago.  It's about the brightest red flag that can be waved in this stuff.

[hiflier]

Hello Crowlogic,

 

Heaven knows we've had our share of red flags, carrots, bait and switches, pea under the shell, whatever one calls it. This particular story is unfolding gradually though and while I may sound gullible or even cryptic there are elements to this that may best be explained by FarArcher. We usually give folks a chance to tell a beginning, middle, and end to their side of things before we hang 'em so to speak, or they do it themselves. I don't think you'll see that happening here.

[ShadowBorn]

Can I go straight to a clan?  Yes.  Can I get them to do the things I want them to do, when I want them to do them?  No.  Nor can I rely on having them over for Thursday Night Poker.  But I can put myself right in the middle of where they get water, where they live, and where they hunt.

 

FarArcher

Now you come across as a big game hunter am I Right? You say that you can go directly to a clan and capture high resolution video, But yet you have not done so , what is it that is stopping you? it cannot be funding since cameras are not that expensive and it does not cost much for a throw away one where you can capture a clan in its natural element. You say that you have no motive behind you ,but you warn us of the dangers if we were to take one down.

 

Now I am not trying to chase you out of here like it has happen to some who have claimed the same. Everyone should be given a chance to provide their side of the story as to why they have chosen to come here and explain . What they know and how they came about to knowing it. All we know about you is of what you have spoken of here  like the rest of us. You have every right to claim what you know  and I for have no problem with it until my BS meter starts to peak. So far I am listening to and reading to what you have said .

 

Now I have gone to many water sources just to look for tracks and have found none near any water source. I have found deep holes where water is flowing through caves and it may be possible that they may be using a under the earth water system that we might not be familiar with. This could be the reason why I have not found tracks above ground on creek or rivers or even lakes. Now if they are in clans then we should be finding signs of it  where there would be beds in tall grass out in open field in deep forest. So far none have been found nor have there been found of heavy in printed trails of their presence. So either they do not exist or they do there best to hide their presence in the wild and every so often they get caught by some innocent by stander.

 

No in my mind they do exist and what I experience was real as though you and I were standing next to each and talking to each other , that is how real they are to me. I have said in the past that they are of some type of animal that we have no understanding and I will not go into the paranormal since this thread is not about that.

 

If you say that they are of a clan then I would have to ask you how many are with in a clan? What is their packing order if you are able to observe them? Are they like wolves where one is the alpha and lead the clan? like the elder of a tribe? See when you say clan you are saying that they are not animal like but more human like. If you were to say that they are of a pack then we could all assume that they are more animal then human. How observant are they of us humans when we enter their domain? How in control are they in their environment? If you have had up close observation then you should be able to answer these question with no doubt in your answers.

 

Crowlogic

My answer for you is forget about the knowers or what  ever and start new . Reboot your brain and start from new. Clear everything that you have learned about these creatures but put that a side and save it and see if you back with the same conclusion. If you don't then do it again and see if you still come back with the same conclusion . If your answer keeps coming back with the same answer then your answer must be right. Eliminate all possibilities  and conclude with the right answer.      

[Guest]

 

hilifier - I've wondered if Bigfoot is self-aware, too. Everyone knows of the giant genetic leap between apes and humans, the idea that we are self-aware and have insight into our existence. Apes do not. On which side of this line does Bigfoot fall? Do they seem themselves as conscious beings who recognize their own uniques reflections in the water? If Bigfoot is self-aware, most of the BF community has been underestimating the creatures as being more apelike than manlike, and if people continue to do that, he'll always have the tactical advantage. "Know thy enemy"...and maybe we need to stop assuming our "enemy" thinks like a gorilla.

 

According to 2012 Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness, non-human animals are "conscious" (self-aware).

 

Scientists drive me nuts, and I don't trust them much (even though my 26yr old son has a Masters in Nanoengineering and currently has a grant to pursue his PhD in Material Science.) I trust science, just not those who say they're scientists. What qualifies one as a "scientist" anyway? I don't necessarily buy that study the way it was presented. To me, they don't adequately define what "consciousness" is, but instead say they animals do "suffer" and that the researchers who signed the study say that actually some animals have a consciousness but others probably don't. I think I was getting more at the idea of whether or not Bigfoots reason and have the cognitive ability to understand things such as: knowing the world continues without them when they die. 

 

I'd think Bigfoots would learn from watching campers how to use fire. But, they don't seem to miss fire or have any use for it, or don't have the ability to learn it, but instead are only entertained by it. Do they speak to one another in a language? Many reports say they do, with voices. Do they have morals? I'd say not. Do they have the cognitive ability of a 3-year-old? Do they experience emotions such as sadness? They obviously teach their young to avoid humans at all costs. Do they bury their dead? 

 

I have so many questions, and if we could answer these questions and anticipate their behavior, we could capture them. I'm kind of rambling on at this point, I know! But I'm only allowed 2 posts per day so I've got to babble to get it all out!

[hiflier]

Hello All,

OK. In going through some previous threads There are things that collectively show some traits that might be helpful in getting a good picture of how this creature operates. Not everything I went through is from me as lots of good threads and ideas exist from many members. Where to begin this wasn't all that simple so the order may not be all that great but organizing details could be something member input could help with? Please bear in mind that this is only a broad outline.

A lot of this is pretty basic but in the next post there will be things to watch for and signs to "read" that are more specific and detailed.

WINTER:
Keep watch along roads for signs of trackways crossing from woody areas on one side of a road where flowing water is the other side.

Look at frozen ponds that have broken surfaces along the edges to see any sign of a trackway.

Keep an eye out along snow banks from plows for places where the bank has been broken down.

Observe the sunny side of a road where solar gain can warm rock outcropings and rock faces on East facing hills in the morning, South facing hills around midday, and West facing hills in the aftrnoon. Cool air will collect at the bottoms of these hills so around half way up is a good place to scope out. Some roads along bogs may be warmer at night than woody habitat.

Wood knocks may be due to trees cracking from the cold and not Bigfoot.

SPRING:
Know what animals and birds are legally hunted and when.

Wear ORANGE if hiking during hunting season.

Skunk cabbage is one of the earliest food sources for bears. Some estimates for bears coming out of hibernation earlier because of a short winter are that skunk cabbage can be up to 90% of their diet. It's also a powerful cathartic which aids in helping them expel the leaf "plug" in their digestive tract from leaves consumed in the fall just for that purpose. Skunk cabbage also maintains a natural internal temperature of around 70 degrees which will actually melt the snow around the plant. It primarily a wetland plant and a large patch of them will be warmer than surrounding areas.

Check for footprints in the soft wet earth if hiking.

Keep watch for dead animals once the snows begin to melt and bare areas are exposed. If there are bones check for breaks, neat piles, heads separated especially at the C1-C2 vertebrae, crushed or damaged nasal areas and chew or bite marks, especially on ribs.

Keep eyes and ears open for any changes around you.

SUMMER:
Look for sign at water locations like along brooks and around ponds with inlets and outlets where the water will be freshest.

Know when the different berries are in season in the area and where the nearest ones are.

Learn to identify the trees in the area that are nut bearing by looking at bark and leaves.

Keep eyes and ears open for any changes around you.

AUTUMN:
Know what the hunting seasons are in your area.

Wear ORANGE if out in hunting season.

Know when nut trees in the region drop their crop .

Watch for nut cracking stations if hiking.

Keep ears and eyes open to any changes around you.

Edited September 11, 2015 by hiflier

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

 

 

hilifier - I've wondered if Bigfoot is self-aware, too. Everyone knows of the giant genetic leap between apes and humans, the idea that we are self-aware and have insight into our existence. Apes do not. On which side of this line does Bigfoot fall? Do they seem themselves as conscious beings who recognize their own uniques reflections in the water? If Bigfoot is self-aware, most of the BF community has been underestimating the creatures as being more apelike than manlike, and if people continue to do that, he'll always have the tactical advantage. "Know thy enemy"...and maybe we need to stop assuming our "enemy" thinks like a gorilla.

 

According to 2012 Cambridge Declaration of Consciousness, non-human animals are "conscious" (self-aware).

 

Scientists drive me nuts, and I don't trust them much (even though my 26yr old son has a Masters in Nanoengineering and currently has a grant to pursue his PhD in Material Science.) I trust science, just not those who say they're scientists. What qualifies one as a "scientist" anyway? I don't necessarily buy that study the way it was presented. To me, they don't adequately define what "consciousness" is, but instead say they animals do "suffer" and that the researchers who signed the study say that actually some animals have a consciousness but others probably don't. I think I was getting more at the idea of whether or not Bigfoots reason and have the cognitive ability to understand things such as: knowing the world continues without them when they die. 

 

I'd think Bigfoots would learn from watching campers how to use fire. But, they don't seem to miss fire or have any use for it, or don't have the ability to learn it, but instead are only entertained by it. Do they speak to one another in a language? Many reports say they do, with voices. Do they have morals? I'd say not. Do they have the cognitive ability of a 3-year-old? Do they experience emotions such as sadness? They obviously teach their young to avoid humans at all costs. Do they bury their dead? 

 

I have so many questions, and if we could answer these questions and anticipate their behavior, we could capture them. I'm kind of rambling on at this point, I know! But I'm only allowed 2 posts per day so I've got to babble to get it all out!

 

 

I'm not defending the Cambridge Declaration. I posted it because it's good to know that something like that exists and that at least some scientists have enough evidence for them to believe that humans aren't the only animals that have consciousness/emotions/suffering. Seeing other opinions is beneficial to forming our own, imo.

 

Neuroscience is an active research field. As more knowledge is accumulated through neuroscience research, our current ideas of brain function has the potential to change or remain the same. I'm looking forward to it.

 

:-)

[hiflier]

Hello All,

As far as Sasquatch the Animal is concerned, like Human the Animal, predictability in all probability will be the most valuable lesson we can learn. Many animals including birds and fish have met their demise because of predictability. That predictability in many cases involves knowing about things like basic instincts. Animals need water, animals mate, animals compete, animals eat, and animals are individually limited or not by their physical form.

Sasquatch would be no different no matter how smart or intelligent. But a lot of their predictability is shrouded in their reclusiveness. Nonetheless there is information that can aid in capturing one. The difficulty lies in their physical form and mental prowess. So a better understanding of their stealth techniques will place them at a greater disadvantage. Humans other than perhaps hunters do NOT use stealth techniques. Few of us even have a grasp of such things other than what we learn playing hide-and-go-seek growing up. Other than tip toeing in the woods, something that is NEVER a good idea, We pretty much act normally. In staying on trails and in campsites we're pretty predictable really.

 

One can't just go into the woods, even knowing Sasquatch predictability, and expect to see one. We first must be totally familiar with the area we are in. Know where the water is, know where the berry patches are, know where the nut trees are, know where the caves are, the hills, the ravines.....you get the idea. In doing so the next post will break down some of the things people have reported and whether or not they would help in a quest to either just see a Bigfoot, or increase one's odds in planning the capture. These are only my own conclusions based on all that I have read in reports and across Forums. There are no guarantees; this is oly to help increase the odds for an encounter and so trust me- it's probably not for everyone.

[ShadowBorn]

hiflier

I think that you are right on with the qeust.I call it the Holy grail if you would like cause that is what it would be for us man in a way. A animal that has the ability to hide from us when it wants when it wants yet capable to observeus from a distance. A animal that is capable to let its presence known to whom ever it wants to when it wants to.  A animal that understands its enviorment and knows how to use it to its advantage so that it can live among us if it exist for those who have not seen one.

 

My favorite part of hunting is stalking, I love doing this cause it is hard . It takes time to learn how to walk up on deer with in 10 yards  of them in deep forest when they are at their most alert. I have walked up on bucks on ridges and they have never spotted me where we have almost collided. Yet not have been able to do this to a bigfoot. The only way I know that they around me is that the forest goes silent. Nothing moves not even the birds or the squerrels or chip monks. Usually the chip monks would be barking all day while sitting in the tree. Nope they just go silent and hide.

 

There smell is not all the time either and it was just last year I think that I smelt a new smell that was sweet. But the other smells were always real bad orders and some how they new how to play the wind. The spot that I found where they were hunting deer was up on a hill kinda like on a cliff and there was a bottle neck where the deer were moving through to a pine tree bedding area around a lake.The deer would move around the edge of the lake and the creatures would walk the ridge over looking the lake edge. I would find prints  up in that area  and on this little bench where i think the creaturer would hide to kill a deer. Right by this bottle neck I would find good size rocks, fist size. I have thought about hunting this place like how this creature would with my bow. Had another reseacher stand down in this place and i would hide up in there and he said that he could not see me.( perfect ambush place) So by nature they are hunters and I believe that they plan their hunts when they need too.

 

What surprizes me is that they do not eat the whole deer like for a big family unit. You figure if there alot of these creatures running around we would see alot more deer carcuses. But then again you cannot count all dead deer as done in by bigfoot. There are other wild animals out there that has to be concidered. The dead deer that would have to be concidered would have be the ones killed in a area where there are no dangerous animals. Well I will stop here for now.

[hiflier]

Hello ShadowBorn,

Thank you, and thank you for your input and sharing your experiences. Bottlenecks is part of this and I will be touching on that as I try to get things into proper order for consideration.

Maybe taking it from here would be better in small doses. There's one thing to cover first though IMO. The position of an apex animal in it's region. It think it pretty apparent that a dominant animal in an area understands it's own dominance. The reaction and body language of those other creatures around it will reinforce that to the top creature in the area. This would be valid for an individual whether it naturally operates in solo or in a group.

In a group the dominate creature is propped up almost be default with the more subordinate postures and responses of it's pack mates. This would be in the areas of mating, hunting, and security for and within the group. In the case of Sasquatch one has to wonder in an encounter if the one seen is in fact the dominant one. In the animal kingdom there is a range willing or unwilling confrontation with either Humans or other members of a group.

One of the characteristics of Sasquatch that is reported is swaying. Because it hasn't seemed to result in attack it is considered to indicate a non-aggressive motion. The motion itself goes against the principle of stealth entirely as motion, even slight motion is easily detected. Standing still would be the preferred stealth method of operations. Being in the open AND swaying to me says, look at me. Even in the open one would expect something I've called the defensive freeze. Swaying goes completely against any idea of defense. So, would one be looking at the dominate Sasquatch in the area? I think so. Would others then be close by? Perhaps, but maybe not so close as to have it think it's dominance is being challenged.

[hiflier]

Hello All,

Continuing the thought regarding an apex animal one should consider two things. The first is an easy one- animals learn by the example set by the dominate of the species either in a small group or a large one. That example is taylored by what the dominate individual was taught AND, more importantly perhaps, what it learned on it's own along the way when conducting itself by those examples it was taught.

The second concerns Sasquatch's regional history so it would be extremely important to have some knowledge of that history, or the history of the region in general that one is targeting going back say 200 years or more. I think this to be extremely important is gainging some possible insight into what kind of conduct might be expect when in the habitat of a certain area. If the history is one where the animal in acting like iteslf was at some time in the past seen as aggressive, expecially when Humans began to settle the area then Sasquat's history may be one of violence.

Attitudes toward Humans therefore may be not so good. As a result aggression mat be something that was learned very early in the history of the clan if that's what one wants to call the group. If the attitiude towards Humans is not good or even dangerous there is no reason to think that it would not become part of the make up of what gets passed on from a dominate individual to it's successors. By the same token if historically Sasqautch was in an area where it was never shot or otherwise molested then it's approach to Humans may be more passive or timidity. Tose creature may be more of the type that show themselves and sway out in the open and then move passively into the brush.

The other end of this are the ones whose history is not so peacful. These might be see as the rock throwers, the building slappers, the tree twisters and shakers and other performances that are a lot more unnerving. both ends of these types of examples would be taught by example to other members of the group.

Honobia in this line of thinking is a situation that therefore is not something new. It's a situation that is being perpetuated by a long history of aggression by both sides and is therefore learned and passed on the Sasquatch generations. Like in the thread discussing whether or not to consider Sasquatch as an enemy but I think more needs to be looked at before that opinion can even be formed.

Edited September 11, 2015 by hiflier

[FarArcher]

This is not directed to any one person.  Just a few observations and comments to clarify a few things.

 

1.  Some may assume I'm a professional hunter, or that I hunt Bigfoot.  Nope.  To see one?  Saw one.  See his face?  Saw it.  Up close?  I'd have to sit in his lap to get any closer.  Interact?  Done that, didn't enjoy it.  To learn?  I learned I didn't like them.

 

2.  I'm not a Bigfoot enthusiast, I'm not a Bigfoot researcher, I'm not a Bigfoot investigator, I'm not a field biologist, nor an anthropologist.  I have, however, been the keynote speaker of multiple Special Operations functions.  Read into it what you will.

 

3.  Some may assume that one (I) can/would go to this clan on the cheap and just get video or photos.  That won't work.  If you don't understand why, you don't understand why.

 

4.  I once mentioned that if someone shoots one, they may find themselves in a fight.  Take it, leave it, or forget it.

 

5.  Some may assume I'm supposed to share what I know and how I know it.  My apologies, but everything I know has been hard-earned, irritating, difficult, very expensive, and I'm going to use that myself.  For my own purposes, in my own time, my own way.  They've been living on that mountain for centuries, and they'll be there when I get around to it, and it will be approached as just another job.

 

6.  Some may assume that approach is pretty harsh and self-serving.  Agreed.  I've shared some things, but from the feedback here, sharing seems counterproductive.  Most folks today want immediate gratification, bred through a misplaced sense of entitlement.  I don't have time for that.

 

7.  Some may assume the behavior of these critters should match their own expectations - or that if Sasquatches are present or active, they should provide you with multiples of evidence to match your expectations, and do so in the places you've determined are ideal to look.  That's incorrect, in my opinion.

 

8.  Some may try to define these critters by your own personal terminologies, or personal perceptions, or rationale, and you may or may not be mistaken.  My suggestion is to minimize your assumptions.  Mine were all wrong.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

hil

 

(snip)

Attitudes toward Humans therefore may be not so good. As a result aggression mat be something that was learned very early in the history of the clan if that's what one wants to call the group. If the attitiude towards Humans is not good or even dangerous there is no reason to think that it would not become part of the make up of what gets passed on from a dominate individual to it's successors. By the same token if historically Sasqautch was in an area where it was never shot or otherwise molested then it's approach to Humans may be more passive or timidity. Tose creature may be more of the type that show themselves and sway out in the open and then move passively into the brush.

The other end of this are the ones whose history is not so peacful. These might be see as the rock throwers, the building slappers, the tree twisters and shakers and other performances that are a lot more unnerving. both ends of these types of examples would be taught by example to other members of the group.

Honobia in this line of thinking is a situation that therefore is not something new. It's a situation that is being perpetuated by a long history of aggression by both sides and is therefore learned and passed on the Sasquatch generations. Like in the thread discussing whether or not to consider Sasquatch as an enemy but I think more needs to be looked at before that opinion can even be formed.

 

I agree if BF avoid H. sapien sapien it's due to a bad interactions in the past (very distant and not so distant). Once bitten twice shy, if you will. Or BFs just want to be left alone and are happy to be left alone.

 

As for Honobia, based upon what I've read, I think the former property owners had some kind of treaty with the neighborhood BFs, such as giving them food or giving them access to food. When the new property owners moved in and didn't continue whatever the former owners allowed, I think the BFs got upset at that.

[FarArcher]

 

Hello Crowlogic,

 

I'm not quite sure that I wouldn't want to be along on that expedition. Makes me wonder if I would have a chance to enter the realm of being a "knower". Could be worth the price of admission. It's been decades having that big carrot hanging in front, eh? I too wish FarArcher luck. I think that for him though he's going to be leaving little to chance. There's a lot more going on there to be as certain as FarArcher is on the matter and, as an animal anyway, there is some predictability that someone savvy can possibly make work in their favor. I will say one thing also, getting to the stage of pulling the trigger won't be nearly as critical as the methods and precise thinking involved afterwards. Somehow I think he already knows that.

 

Once again we have the knower in contact with scenario.  Each and every knower in contact with individual or group has delivered the same nothing that the seeker hopeful has.  I'm sure those who read the post that there's a claim of being in contact  with perked up.  If any of those situations were going to bear fruit they would have a long time ago.  It's about the brightest red flag that can be waved in this stuff.

 

 

Crowlogic, I do understand your doubts and frustrations.  Over the years, there's been a lot of piecemeal information shared, and I fear some inaccurate determinations have been made from some of these observations.

 

There's been a lot of enthusiasts, with few field skills or knowing ways, but due to commercial success alone, have been elevated to authoritative spokesmen. 

 

Some of these so-called expedition leaders, in my opinion, are outright incompetent.  I don't think Matt Moneymaker could find his sitting companion in a two-hole outhouse. 

 

Some so-called spokesmen may be a tad fraudulent, but they're certainly self-promoting - to the detriment of the real search.

 

Then we have Bigfoot enthusiasts who would discuss how many angels could dance on the hair tip of a Bigfoot - postulation after postulation - on relatively meaningless, unknowable diversions.  In my opinion.

 

Yes - I did open a can of worms I did not expect, nor desire.  To return - honestly - I rather eat a bug.

 

I'll return when I'm outfitted specifically to the task.  After all, extraordinary proof takes extraordinary means and extraordinary details.  If you don't have the basics right, if you can't get the details right, then any grand scheme will fail. 

 

Extraordinary opportunities come maybe once or twice in a lifetime, meaning you can leave little to chance.

 

Which is why so many continue to fail.

[hiflier]

Hello ChasingRabbits,

Aggression always begins somewhere, somehow. Oklahoma does not generally have a good Sasquatch history. The creatures' reactions at Honobia IMO were over the top even when food wasn't not available from the new owners. It tells me there's something else going on with that particular group. Just my opinion on that.

I think you and others can probably see where all this is going? It's basically a sociology study. Science makes it a point to not only study animals, us included, but to study the social aspects of animals as well. All animals have a sociological environment under which they live. But with Sasqautch there's a difference. That difference is lies in it's larger brain case. That by itself raises the stakes when it comes to any search for the creature. But it also helps in other areas too. Couple that with it's physical attributes and one can readily see the magnitude of any endeavors to discover it in the wild.

But there are elements that can be relied upon. Curiosity for one. Thet curiosity is a common element in most creatures. The need to know about intruders or suspected intruders is an inherent quality that is closely linked to the survival of all animal species. Deer perk up when something is seen, heard, or smelled. Often it's things so subtle that we Humans would never react to. But in a habitat where not having these qualities can mean death these senses are extremely fine tuned.

Sasquatch is no different in it's habitat. Changes are registered that would need to be right in front of us for us to notice. We are generally then no match for just about every apex predator in the wild. But our other abilities alow us to domate our envirnnment- which extends into the wild. We lose that edge quickly though and sometimes with disastrous results if we do not prepare ourselves adequately.

What that means when chasing down something with Sasquatch's description means different things to different people and from my last post may very well need adjustung according Sasquatch's history. The creature learns differently what it needs to understand to survive according to the region that it lives in. But from here on I think it safe to pursue those things which may be genericly common to all of them. each of the followng point should be elaborated on:

1) What KIND of stealth technique works for the condition?

2) Does prey migrate to and from the area?

The next post will talk about things reported, as well as what has been brought to this Forum, on the subject of high intelligence stealth and maneuvering in mostly a large area of forested habitat.

Edited September 11, 2015 by hiflier

[ShadowBorn]

hil

 

(snip)

Attitudes toward Humans therefore may be not so good. As a result aggression mat be something that was learned very early in the history of the clan if that's what one wants to call the group. If the attitiude towards Humans is not good or even dangerous there is no reason to think that it would not become part of the make up of what gets passed on from a dominate individual to it's successors. By the same token if historically Sasqautch was in an area where it was never shot or otherwise molested then it's approach to Humans may be more passive or timidity. Tose creature may be more of the type that show themselves and sway out in the open and then move passively into the brush.

The other end of this are the ones whose history is not so peacful. These might be see as the rock throwers, the building slappers, the tree twisters and shakers and other performances that are a lot more unnerving. both ends of these types of examples would be taught by example to other members of the group.

Honobia in this line of thinking is a situation that therefore is not something new. It's a situation that is being perpetuated by a long history of aggression by both sides and is therefore learned and passed on the Sasquatch generations. Like in the thread discussing whether or not to consider Sasquatch as an enemy but I think more needs to be looked at before that opinion can even be formed.

 

I agree if BF avoid H. sapien sapien it's due to a bad interactions in the past (very distant and not so distant). Once bitten twice shy, if you will. Or BFs just want to be left alone and are happy to be left alone.

 

As for Honobia, based upon what I've read, I think the former property owners had some kind of treaty with the neighborhood BFs, such as giving them food or giving them access to food. When the new property owners moved in and didn't continue whatever the former owners allowed, I think the BFs got upset at that.

ChassingRabbits

I agree but once you start feeding a wild animal like a bigfoot you cannot stop feeding. The creatures did not understand that the property owners had changed since to them there is no property lines. As far as they concern they were getting fed and that was the only understanding they had. They had no idea of the owners and I am not sure about that since I am not familiar with this case. But if the owner had changed and they were being fed by the old owners which you say that some deal was made by them. Then the old owners should have informed the new owners of the encounters so that some thing could have been done.

 

If they are wild humans or animals then they have no understanding of borders or property lines. To them all land is theirs no matter where they are so they feel free to roam where ever they want. If there is corn in that field it is not just yours but theirs as well just like a buck that roams freely in our lands. See I cannot see how a treaty was made with them. It is not like you sit down at a table and scribble your name at the bottom of a piece a paper. The treaty had to have been made where you do not shoot at me and I will leave your home stead alone if you allow us to take food from your land. At the same time we will protect your land from any predators and make sure that you will have a good crop. 

 

If this is what is happening then this could explain the silence of witnesses that own farms who have made treaties like this. Only when new owners who move in is when cases like this come out into the open happen. They way to calm the owners would be to provide them with the proper info so that they can live in a peace full environment. This also shows that we are dealing with a animal that can be dealt with food when violence is involved. It also shows that this creature can use violence or tactics as a tool to provide a need for a want. Talk about neuro science try to get into the mind of one of these creatures and what they are thinking.