Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[ShadowBorn]

 

If I was trying to protect something so amazing I wouldn't be running around saying, "Yeah, we got Sasquatches and we're not telling you where they are either". I would simply say nothing while providing avenues and ways that they could go about their usual reclusive business. In other words, simply give them a way to remain out of sight as they move around. Trying instead to channel them away from logging activities and Human habitat. Sure some will get seen and reported but the majority will not. Keep saying nothing and the public will just go about it's own business with an occasional news item here and there regarding a BF seen on some road or trail.

How is one going to push Bigfoot and tell it where it is going to walk? When it has the freedom to walk where it wants. There is just no way of saying that "hey let's see if we can channel bigfoot this way so it can live in peace". No, I see it that if there is a reason that there are clusters in certain areas it is because they have a reason of being there. Deforestation brings back new forest and this brings game. The Game comes from the new growth of what was detroyed. Nature always find a way to regrowth and has a way to prosper. The map that Bobby posted has some great info, and with you all talking ridges and corridors between fields. Well those are hunting words. Maybe they chase game like the cave men did and have never stopped.IMHO

[guyzonthropus]

Would the underbrush leafing out in spring not only provide greater cover, but also handy tasty snacks along the way?

While some plants do have toxins, bad tastes, or other deterrents, in their new growth, I'd imagine that wouldn't much thwart a hungry BF on the move.

Of course, the presence or stage of leaf development would also be elevation dependent, but would such a supplementary food source play a role in their movements? Or would they be more inclined to prey upon other critters feeding on the new growth? Perhaps both... just wondering what you folks think of the idea....

Edited June 16, 2016 by guyzonthropus

[hiflier]

How is one going to push Bigfoot and tell it where it is going to walk? When it has the freedom to walk where it wants. There is just no way of saying that "hey let's see if we can channel bigfoot this way so it can live in peace". No, I see it that if there is a reason that there are clusters in certain areas it is because they have a reason of being there. Deforestation brings back new forest and this brings game. The Game comes from the new growth of what was detroyed. Nature always find a way to regrowth and has a way to prosper. The map that Bobby posted has some great info, and with you all talking ridges and corridors between fields. Well those are hunting words. Maybe they chase game like the cave men did and have never stopped.IMHO

I agree. But WRT I-5 crossing whenever and where they want? that isn't happening or the sightings along that corridor would or should be more numerous. BobbyO's five year grouping shows little to nothing along that section of the corridor South of Toledo. Now there are two ways to look at that: one is that they are not there trying to cross the highway, or two, they are crossing but crossing unseen. I find it difficult to think that crossing unseen is occurring by crossing on the road surface itself. That leaves crossing unseen because they are crossing underneath the road surface. Other animals use those access points and they pretty much go wherever they wish as well right? BF being reclusive makes it likely that they would opt for a more hidden avenue given the choice. One could even say that after 50 years under-road crossings would or should be pretty routine by now.

[hiflier]

Would the underbrush leafing out in spring not only provide greater cover, but also handy tasty snacks along the way?

While some plants do have toxins, bad tastes, or other deterrents, in their new growth, I'd imagine that wouldn't much thwart a hungry BF on the move.

Of course, the presence or stage of leaf development would also be elevation dependent, but would such a supplementary food source play a role in their movements? Or would they be more inclined to prey upon other critters feeding on the new growth? Perhaps both... just wondering what you folks think of the idea....

I'd say both depending on how much edible vegetation is present. The energy spent on chasing down small critters would be tremendous and even moving down from the more temperate Olympics would require more in the way of plant material to sustain their bulk for the journey. Then too over the last few decades they may have learned that the man-made pinch points at the major highways might make it easier to set up ambushes? F&W must monitor the movement of animals through those accesses so if you get some time maybe some research along those lines would be informative

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Would the underbrush leafing out in spring not only provide greater cover, but also handy tasty snacks along the way?

While some plants do have toxins, bad tastes, or other deterrents, in their new growth, I'd imagine that wouldn't much thwart a hungry BF on the move.

Of course, the presence or stage of leaf development would also be elevation dependent, but would such a supplementary food source play a role in their movements? Or would they be more inclined to prey upon other critters feeding on the new growth? Perhaps both... just wondering what you folks think of the idea....

Sasquatch probably eat nuts, seeds, berries, roots (sweet nut grasses, etc,), young vegetation (has less toxins), carrion, small animals, fish, insects, grubs.

 

This is what ancient forms such as Australopithecus ate (mostly seeds, nuts, and nut grass rhizomes), you could add in a bit of hunting (if closer to Homo Erectus) but maybe the type that does not need knives, tools, weapons, or cutting and seizing teeth and claws like a bear or cat.

 

You can only eat so much big game since flesh is tough and requires the appropriate evolutionary adaptation or tool kit, (even fire).

 

For instance bears kill and bury deer and elk but just so they can eat the maggot larva. Probably can eat the meat once it has rotted some (same as us).

 

We need weapons, knives, rotting, cooking, and tenderizing to make meat palatable as we did not evolve as meat eaters and it is a recent adaptation to our diet. Although we were always carrion eaters.

 

If looking for a primitive man carcass exploitation you would look for a predator kill or natural death and then a stone flake was used to hack of a limb at the joint. Maybe smack with a rock to soften it up for chewing and stone flake to cut of small bits to chew with the molars. 

 

In fact our evolutionary advantage was to crack open the long marrow bones the predators did not know how to exploit an we could get a lot of high quality marrow fat without expending energy in a kill scenario or needing predator adaptations and let the predator do the work. This is why we needed bigger brains, to think of strategies like this and communicate them to each other

Edited June 16, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

As far as traveling, they seem to travel along ridgelines when they migrate within territories or shift territories over time (perhaps due to mating, seasonal availability, new social groups, maturing offspring or human pressure).

 

On a regular cycle they travel from the tree line down deep valleys to river systems or water,springs, etc and then back up.

 

So in the morning or the spring look to the tree lines at the heads of valleys that intersect with ridgetops, in summer and in the evenings and early morning look to drainages near shorelines and feeder creeks.

 

For instance Patty was moving in late afternoon up a valley along water toward a ridgeline in the fall and had a child and a mate somewhere in the area.

[georgerm]

The discussion has been quite interesting and I just caught up with the reading. We are traveling and moving to Roseburg, Oregon. Keep pushing the dial of science ahead.

 

Realizing  there are ‘pinch points’ where animals are forced to traverse a narrow area during migrations, drives us to find these points. A hypothesis can be presented claiming  bigfoots move through this or that pinch point so what comes next? The low voice of science can be heard saying prove it.

 

So we need proof such as foot prints, hair, broken trees, scat, witness reports, report maps, and trail camera pictures. Maybe BF doesn’t want to migrate to the areas discussed since it has what is needed within a 5 mile radius of a den.  Long distance seasonal migration around obstacles can be risky. Unless they have been driven from their homes by vast fires, why risk it?

 

While reading the great discussions, I could not form a mental map since my home grounds are south and west of Crater Lake. Imagine amateur and professional scientist such as ourselves from other places trying to follow. We need to see maps and photographs of pinch points. Someone should copy and paste a Google Map to Paint then show the pinch points, and draw migration routes. Then take sighting reports and put them on the map. Science can be fun, tedious, and necessary. Keep up the fine work and thoughts that gives us plenty to read.

[BigTreeWalker]

Interesting scenerio CM. Definitely possibilities. And I and others have found the bones broken and the marrow scooped out with something. Very good source of protein and fats.

Here's a very interesting chapter on hominid carnivory.

http://www.stoneageinstitute.org/pdfs/breathing-fossils-ch16-white-toth.pdf

Hi Georgerm, wondered if you've been keeping up. BobbyO posted the sighting maps you requested. In another thread he also posted a link to a paper about the possible wildlife corridors. There's really no need to give specific coordinates. I would rather those that plan to do some boots on the ground do their own research on the possible locations. Why make it easy for those that would create problems in those areas. And believe me there are people that would. So why display location specifics simply for the sake of our discussion? The research has to be done 1st before any of those physical items you listed can even be presented.

Edited June 16, 2016 by BigTreeWalker

[BobbyO]

Off the top of my head and without the SSR I know that winter equates to around 5% of all South Cascades reports, and around the 20% mark where the Olympic Peninsula is concerned.

I'd have to confirm that when I have access again of course.

[BigTreeWalker]

BobbyO, I know those are off the top of your head numbers, but that's a 400% difference. I do think that bigfoot moves to lower elevations with the snow. But, in your opinion, could some of that difference be accounted for because of winter inaccessibility in some portions of the Cascades? A combination of locked gates and snow. Not just a decrease as a result of migration but a decrease of possible observers (people).

Although the fact that food sources would be a lot more available on the Olympic Peninsula during the winter is a good selling point for the increase in sightings there.

[hiflier]

It does seem that whenever an idea crops up and gets discussed then several other ideas follow once the concept has sunk in. Pretty normal really. In this case the question is how much information is already publicly available so no one wastes time in the field. Time that would be better utilized if enough good information could be had ahead of time.

There are some lines I've been researching along but since some of the info maybe more readily researched locally I thought I could list some of the avenues of research. I figured too why not target BobbyO's maps as a starting point and work to the present? Anyway, one avenue is the history of fires in the area that may force movement East or West. Spring rains and/or snow melt could cause high water and force movement to safer accesses. So a history of flooding in the drainage basins could be looked at. Local photos from F&W of animals using those points of access. I've seen some but they seem to be more wrapped around the I-90 thing and not I-5. Obviously trying so sell the idea to the public by overloading the internet with repeat mention of it. Only because the photos will indicate the animal movement monitoring I've mentioned. Just some suggestions as follow ups to think about.

When doing this kind of research the trade off for the time and effort is learning about things we never knew about. That's where the enjoyment comes in. Plus Humans have impacted the habitats and it's always good to see what we are doing about it- even if it IS after the fact....which it usually is.

Edited June 16, 2016 by hiflier

[SWWASAS]

BTW and I are both waiting for a gate to be unlocked to get into some areas East of Mt St Helens.     They begrudgingly eventually open up some areas when the snow is completely melted off the road.   The other factor in sighting reports is the rain.   I don't do field work in pouring rain and most people who regularly get in the woods don't either unless they have a good reason.     The combination of limited access and weather has to skew data for all sighting reports.  

[hiflier]

Yes, good point. It does seem that it all comes down to three things- luck, Human presence, and monitoring with luck probably being the leading factor. An too, I've recently been wondering if road closings also allow monitoring stations to be set up without being observed along with the other more obvious reasons of course. I mean in this day and age monitoring makes good sense as it saves man hours in the field and that translates into the money on a limited budget to be better used elsewhere.

[ShadowBorn]

 

even if it IS after the fact

Even though that it might be after the fact it does not mean that they might not pass through there again. There might be some thing intresting there that they like that might make them past through there again. But it takes ground work to figure that out as to why they might pass through there. How see it with them is that they do not do things with out reason. So there must be a reason why they do the movements that they do, after all they live in the wild. Just like deer and elk and even bears, they all have reasons for what they do in the wild. So if they are on a move then there must be a reason why. I am not that much of a believer of migration, or we would be seeing more evidence of this. They either move to a place and stay there for a while and then they move, or the family unit stay in one place. I am much more of a believer that the family unit stays in one place while the males seem to hunt. It seems that most sightings are all solo sightings and I am sure are all close to game trails. Again theory.

 

If these males do travel solo then they are capable of traveling long distances alone. They have the stride to do so and may be able to cover land quickly alone with having to worry about family. ( now this if they have any part human in them) At least this is how our thought process would be, and if they have chimp in them then they would do patrols in male groups. Which brings up another theory. Theory's that need to be proven in the field. 

 

The other thing is that we need to think about is if they claim land? If they disputed with Native Americans over hunting areas and there were battle lines drawn over prime hunting. Then is this still going on today? Do they herd animals as their personal food source too and could there be proof of this? which this is also theory that needs to be looked into. I have some idea's but would like input from others. These ideas do not seem that far fetch since these creatures are so hard to discover. But in areas where these creatures are I have seen that the game in those areas are less frequent. There are forest where one can walk and you can jump game every so often and that would be normal. It is when you go into a forest and you talk to other hunters and they tell you that the deer are not just around like they use to be a long time ago. You ask them when , and then you figure out that it was before there was any Bigfoot in that area.

[hiflier]

All good there SB with what you are saying. When I think of migration I think of 10 or 20 degrees of latitude. In this I think the distance from the Olympics to the Cascades to not be true migration though technically it probably could be called that. IMHO it's still fairly regional and for BF could be covered in a few days and not weeks. I cannot say it isn't migration but I see it more as relocating as I'm sure not all BF's make the journey. It's not like Robins who clear out before winter sets in. And even though the seasons in the two locations may be different then changes in elevation could help serve to even things out so that BF's aren't subject to environmental differences that are too drastic.

There's quite a bit to do here just to determine the creature's existence and habits. Now I know there are those who say they have seen them and so none of this is probably much more than a passing interest but for the rest of us me included this kind of research may be important. There are many that think science already knows about Sasquatch and to me it's fine if they do; I have no issues with that. But it still doesn't remove the desire to know for certain myself that the creatures are out there. Sure, I can rely on someone's word and in a sense I do but there's nothing like truly knowing personally that they exist.

Edited June 16, 2016 by hiflier