Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[SWWASAS]

Ok what format do you want the photos in?   Video or stills?     Stills I can email but video has to be stored and transported on an SD or memory stick and mailed.   I would want to be renumerated for buying the SD card.        What would be your desired starting point North and what ending point to the South?.   In that area I could be as low as 500 ft AGL and be legal.    Anywhere a town is, I have to get up to 1000 AGL.  Like I said I cannot take any compensation.   The FAA considers fuel money compensation.     First of all my airplane is experimental and I cannot conduct anything remotely commercial in nature using it.    (BTW could have been considered brave by some flying in it since I made it)    Secondly I no longer keep a second or first class medical that allows me to do commercial flying.       If some area is interesting and you want feet on the ground,  BTW is closer to the area than I am but it is really not that far away.   

 

Given the title and spirit of this thread,   I am willing to help out to push BF science forward.      We need a lot more cooperation and sharing.      

[SWWASAS]

Looking at Google Earth,   I see at least one bridge over a creek that either has a culvert or bridge.     46 22' 19.14" N   122 54' 23.93" W.     The approach and west side have a lot of cover.  

[BigTreeWalker]

I also wanted to thank BobbyO for the work you have done. Not just for this discussion but for some other insight it has given me into some of my other research areas.

Randy, they can call me brave but I would do it again.

Since I am only 20 miles from that area I will probably make a run up that way just to check out accessibility. That may be the beauty of these areas though for bigfoot or any other large animal passing through. If access is over private property or gated that would mean very little disturbance and not much likelihood of anything being seen going through the areas. The problem would come in crossing the roads to the west. But traffic at night in those areas would be very light so an unnoticed road crossing could easily be accomplished I'm thinking.

[hiflier]

Very kind of you to ask regarding the format. I'll be honest with you Randy your observational skills are something I trust so I don't think photos would be necessary. Then too, other members might like or want to see any evidence for an East/West access point so I may reconsider in which case photos would be fine. Also if you are flying 500 ft. AGL I would feel better about the whole thing if you would just concentrate on flying and using your eyes.

Start/end points I would leave up to you depending on where your intersect is. Either way from what I've been able to determine there are some West side slopes that are quite steep immediately along the highway so the areas of interest would be between those ridges where the terrain drops to what looks like possible stream or creek beds though the may be only vernal drainage channels that dry up in Summer? I only saw two that appeared to be deep enough to allow large animals t utilize. I can give you GPS points if it's helpful. And yes reimbursement for an SD card is a given but you should then keep it for uploading images. The reason being that this idea may be expanded by others and yourself for possible future investigative research locations for the same purposes: crossing major highways without having to be exposed walking on their surfaces.

Edited June 14, 2016 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Looking at Google Earth,   I see at least one bridge over a creek that either has a culvert or bridge.     46 22' 19.14" N   122 54' 23.93" W.     The approach and west side have a lot of cover.

Yes, that was the primary spot. There are options for crossing the river after that and getting into the hills toward Vader and Ryderwood once there it's pretty much a straight secluded shot to Gray's Harbor or North by keeping East of Hwy 101.

Edited June 14, 2016 by hiflier

[guyzonthropus]

In regards to crossing I-5, I always thought the area around the Nisqually delta might work for them, what with the expanse of Fort Lewis right there a well as the preserve/wetlands deterring humans to a point.

Just a thought...

[hiflier]

Good thought too. And maybe that kind of approach is what is needed. Of course there's a fly in the ointment about all of this which is the assumption that there is movement at all. The premise of pursuing this avenue of research while interesting to think about falls apart if the Olympic Sasquatch never goes to the Cascades and vice versa. In fact the I-5 barrier may be just that- a barrier. If that is the case then the Southern Cascade region has a dynamic that the Olympic region does not.

That dynamic is the likelihood that if BF exists then the Southern Cascade population took a real hit in the 1980 volcanic eruption. A female bear might have ten offspring in her lifetime of around 35 years but there's thousands of female bears so the bounce back from a severe widespread natural disaster will be more successful and quicker. We don't know the length of time a female Sasquatch has when it comes to producing offspring. Even at thirty five years old it may not produce twins or triplets like bears do.

It's been 36 years since Mt. St. Helens erupted. It might be safe to say only two generating have been added to whatever population was left after the explosion. It would seem certain any anything South of the caldera in Washington was probably wiped out. So the northern remnant learned new routes of travel or always had them in the first place. Some may have even left and never went back but went West or North for good. These are the things that need consideration because ancient habits and routines took as much of a hit as the populations that lived by those habits and routines. Some may have been forced to deal with I-5 the best way they could and that's part of my thinking in this.

If you don't mind I would like very much to follow your thinking in regards to the base to see if there's some feasibility. If you can plug this idea into the picture and maybe add some thoughts to expand on it then please do. This is a topic I think we are all primed and ready for.

[BigTreeWalker]

The Nisqually is a good thought since it's pretty wild right up to the Sound. I just have one thought about it though. Unless they are swimming the Sound, and they could very well be, where do they go from there? It comes out between Olympia and Tacoma.

Hifler, not sure how the Mt St Helen's blast affected the bf population in that area. I know there's unconfirmed reports of bodies. But, there's still evidence they are there. One of my research areas is within sight of the east side of the mountain, within a half mile of the edge of the blast zone. Also if the snow was heavy that spring in 1980, and I seem to remember it was, they may have been down in the river valleys to the north and south of the mountain. Of course anything in the Toutle river drainage was a goner.

[BobbyO]

When I get the SSR back and functional I'll do a time lapse map on reports from a 10 year period from 75 > 85 to see what we have.

We haven't looked at that specific data on maps yet.

I do know off the top of my head that there was a correlation in spikes in these two areas (Olympics and South Cascades) during the 90's and 00's, again I'll have to go back over the SSR to get it however.

Just to clarify the definition of data when we are talking "South Cascades", I have this zone going from the Columbia, out west to the I-5, east to dry stuff and north to the I-90 so whenever we are talking "South Cascades" in these circumstances, we're good.

I do think they swim in Puget Sound too due to certain reports of them doing so and some of the islands that reports have come from.

Harstine and another nearby Island have had reports from them throughout the year. Both islands have an abundance of deer as well as shellfish options.

I really need the SSR back, it's the key to everything IMO, especially where this type of stuff is concerned.

Edited June 15, 2016 by BobbyO

[Bodhi]

Has sasquatch science stalled? Look at the threads, how few of them have new posts and how those which have posts are from the same few people. The answer is yes, in fact there is little to no science being done and general interest in waning. Even the age old arguments over the PGF are grinding to a halt.

[hiflier]

Hi Bodhi, I know slowing down is an annual summer event and not just on the BFF but I've not seen it this slow this early. I first joined about this time of year and it was fairly busy until around August which is to be expected with vacationing members. It's hard to get science- even citizen science- when members don't post.

On another subject I hope georgerm isn't too upset about where this thread has gone. I don't think the OP has run its course either even though what is being talked over is only citizen science. But in deference to the OP I would like to say that this discussion about possible crossing pinch points on I-5 could be something science already knows about? At least in the area of known animal herds needing to perhaps get from one side of the highway to the other. I would put out to BTW and SWWA that if that's the case then science may know more than us by far.

It has often happened that animal crossing signs have had to be installed on roads new and old where animals are apparently following centuries old routes. But even that can be altered by road structures massive enough to upset the normal pahways. Science knows this and so provide access points along these larger roads and the smaller ones too with bridges and culverts large enough to allow tall animals through underneath. Animals get used to vehicle noise but many are still struck and killed along with the occupants of these vehicles.

Let's face it too that as long as there are covert ways for Sasquatch to get from here to there then it would also serve to keep the number of sightings by motorists on the low side. I would think without such access allowances that the number of BF sightings would be way more than what we have now. Citizen science at work

Edited June 15, 2016 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Strange about these links, sorry Guys.

 

This is the 5 year period clusters with all seasons included - https://squatchermetrics.cartodb.com/viz/9648ce96-8888-11e5-aa20-0e98b61680bf/map

I have to say on first viewing for a few seconds that it seems like a lot of sightings for only a 5 year period. I did notice some on the North side of the Toutle River but nothing from there all the way to I-5. Nor was there any apparent sightings West of I-5 at what I thought would be a good pinch point route to the West. But you know what that tells me? It tells me that the visual representation is in a way verifying that it is a viable covert route. In other words? what I'm seeing on the map could be showing the opposite of what the map suggests. It's suggesting that the route isn't used where I'm seeing that the route is actually being shown to be successful for stealth movement. Does that make sense to anyone?

The map is showing us one thing but it could very well be showing us something else worthy of note. Is what we are seeing then the opposite of what is actually taking place? What I am saying is are areas of non sightings holding some of the key to it? If it is then someone already knows and that someone is science. It may then be telling georgerm that science hasn't stalled at all?

Edited June 15, 2016 by hiflier

[Guest DWA]

Has sasquatch science stalled? Look at the threads, how few of them have new posts and how those which have posts are from the same few people. The answer is yes, in fact there is little to no science being done and general interest in waning. Even the age old arguments over the PGF are grinding to a halt.

And whose fault is that?  People who style themselves "scientists," but aren't following up on a body of evidence that, every time science has encountered anything like it, that thing has turned out to be pretty much what the evidence said it was.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Here is a earth science trick that is helpful for analysing your hike planning. or to get more info from the topography.

It's how to add a topographic layer to Google Earth, very handy.

http://equipped.outdoors.org/2012/12/how-to-add-usgs-topographic-maps-to.html

[hiflier]

DWA, my contention is that science has followed up just fine- but they aren't talking. This isn't being said out of rank suspicion but out of knowing how science operates. They announce nothing that is sensitive and you know it. Time to get realistic about this.