Bigfoot caloric intake.

[jayjeti]

They eat a wide range of items including leaves off of trees and even tree bark.  The live bark right next to the wood is very nutritious and they sometimes eat the live bark off of limbs.  They are good swimmers and catch fish with their hands.  Maybe they eat more deer meat when other foods are not as available.  I once read that in a Native American legend.

 

Who knows, maybe they fatten up when food is plentiful and if food is not as plentiful loose some of those fat stores in the winter, but not hibernate.

 

They probably learn to go where the food is, and its said that if you do regular feedings and suddenly stop they can become aggressive.  I could see where if they've got someone pegged for a regular food source and it stops, leaving them hungry, this might lead to negative results.

Edited August 25, 2016 by jayjeti

[Guest WesT]

11 hours ago, Twist said:

Wood you say?  Alright I'm off to start my human/beaver Theory thread!!  Jk. 

 

I double dog dare ya..... lol

 

10 hours ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Can I recommend a fine birch bark spaghetti confetti?

 

Sounds yummy but I already have dinner planned.....  for the rest of my life. heee 

 

I think I read somewhere that pine bark is high in vitamin C. Bon appetit....

 

Edited August 25, 2016 by WesT
typo

[WSA]

On livestock predation. I'm sure it is happening. What probably distinguishes a BF killing a calf, from a cat, bear or wolf is most likely how far they are willing/able to drag the kill to consume it.  Too, there is a lot of blood spilled in the process, which gets noticed. If you can believe the accounts of witnesses on this point, BF kill by ambush and dead blows with the hands. As one witness said, "Like pounding on a table top with its fists."  This is not going to leave a blood trail at the kill site. The ability to pick up the kill and transport it over long distances to where others might share in the kill is also likely. This is the difference between a rancher seeing a greasy spot and bones where his calf or ewe used to be, and having that awareness of a predator, or just having to wonder why he is down -1 on his head count because it seems to have up and disappeared. Big difference.   

[MIB]

More than that, regarding livestock, they've probably watched us herd critters.   It would be easy enough for them to "cut" one from the herd and drive it to some remote place to be killed.   That's what I'd do if I went feral and decided to "poach" some rancher's beef.

 

MIB

[WSA]

And feral pigs? Have they been mentioned yet? In parts of the SE we're seeing them in pretty abundant numbers never seen before. Easy pickin's for a hungry BF. That description of a BF kill was one witnessed by a hunter from a tree stand, in TX, and the prey was a hog. He described how the BF tucked it under its arm and strolled off with it.  BBQ tonight, uh-huh. Well, actually probably not, because those Texicans have this bizarre idea that BBQ is beef. Never got that one.

[Guest DWA]

14 hours ago, WSA said:

On livestock predation. I'm sure it is happening. What probably distinguishes a BF killing a calf, from a cat, bear or wolf is most likely how far they are willing/able to drag the kill to consume it.  Too, there is a lot of blood spilled in the process, which gets noticed. If you can believe the accounts of witnesses on this point, BF kill by ambush and dead blows with the hands. As one witness said, "Like pounding on a table top with its fists."  This is not going to leave a blood trail at the kill site. The ability to pick up the kill and transport it over long distances to where others might share in the kill is also likely. This is the difference between a rancher seeing a greasy spot and bones where his calf or ewe used to be, and having that awareness of a predator, or just having to wonder why he is down -1 on his head count because it seems to have up and disappeared. Big difference.   

Of course, as Mionczynski can tell us, kills are found - large animals, elk and horses - that have an anomalous fracture in the region of the C1-C2.  With other features that appear to rule out 'likely' culprits.  One wonders how thoroughly kills that do get found are scanned for the whodunit.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Many kill stories do not seem that credible to me when I read them in detail and look into the background of the report.

Cervical fractures are commonly made by cougars as one of their techniques is to attack the throat or two snap the neck.

 

Once again the problem is that vegetable grinding teeth are not adapted for predation of a large animal carcass.

Great apes which would include BF have those type teeth.

 

A great ape did not suddenly jump evolutionary logic and develop a predator jaw.

 

In fact if you look at the nut cracker skull of Patty that adaptation is described in the  literature of fossil hominids archaeologists and is a known adaptation for plant chewing muscles such a grinding nut, nut grasses, seeds, vegetable matter.

 

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and this case the extraordinary claim is not mine.

[WSA]

Hmm...I am going to hesitate to say what kind of teeth a BF has, and I don't know anyone who would be able to tell you.  They might resemble an ape's, or a man's, something in between, or something completely different.  I don't think it is as speculative to extrapolate from the many, many witness accounts of BF predation.  That cumulative body of evidence establishes pretty conclusively they do hunt, kill and eat animal flesh.

 

I'm adding to the list also: Armadillos, skunks, opossums, raccoons and rabbits.  Lots of protein scurrying around out there, if you're not too particular.

[Guest DWA]

I'm down with ^^^this.  No one's examined a bigfoot jaw full of teeth yet; all we have are eyewitness reports that describe a variety of things.  This is one area in which one needs to be cautious with the eyewitness testimony; animals don't give humans a dentist's view of their teeth under normal encounter circumstances, observations are not taxonomy, and this is one place I'd be waiting for a specimen.  The encounter reports are as clear on the ambush hunting of big game as they are on the general omnivory.  But not so much on the dentition, which is way understandable.

 

"A great ape did not suddenly jump evolutionary logic and develop a predator jaw."

(Um...chimps do pretty good.  Bushbuck, bush pig, young baboon, bushbabies - which they hunt with spears - monkeys...)  There isn't any such thing as evolutionary logic.  Mutations are random; if one confers selective advantage, it's happening.  A great ape did not suddenly jump evolutionary logic and develop excellent night vision either.  Except, one at least appears to have done that.

[Guest DWA]

10 hours ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Many kill stories do not seem that credible to me when I read them in detail and look into the background of the report.

Cervical fractures are commonly made by cougars as one of their techniques is to attack the throat or two snap the neck.

 

 

I should add here that Mionczynski has effectively tackled this objection...and that sasquatch kills have been observed in which the technique was used.

 

And of course there's no reason to doubt the observations.

[JKH]

Yes, and they've been observed using rocks and logs to kill. They're not constrained by having to kill with teeth and claws. They have HANDS and large brains.

I seem to remember also that they prefer the organ meats, as do the other apex predators.

[Guest DWA]

The liver has been purported - and evidence supports this - to be the big score in winter-killed deer with which they don't even bother with the rest of the carcass.

 

Organ meat is easy to chew.  And, again, *chimps are predators.*

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

1 hour ago, DWA said:

 

I should add here that Mionczynski has effectively tackled this objection...and that sasquatch kills have been observed in which the technique was used.

 

And of course there's no reason to doubt the observations.

That was an opinion stated as fact.

 

No reason to or not to from a purely philosophical perspective.

 

Perhaps you are just being obtuse to provoke argumentation, however.

 

A buffalo can kill you but it can't eat you.

 

So killing is not the key behavior relevant to an analysis of Bigfoot killing to eat, but eating itself with hands and a ape mouth.

 

Because apes can't consume raw kills of large animals like an elk, you are a great ape so you can test that yourself.

 

Cheating is not allowed, no knives or forks.

 

Word.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

The first problem is the toughness of the hide, try chewing your shoe.

 

The second problem chewing through the outer fascia and membranes and connective tissues,

 

The third problem is the toughness of uncooked wild meat and getting it in chewable pieces.

 

It sound easy to you because you do it in your kitchen.

 

There almost couldn't be any credible evidence of a large ape eating a fresh elk because it is not possible.

 

If Bigfoot can do it a Gorilla can do it.

 

And yet Gorillas and other great apes don't.

 

Humans with tools do, so we are an exception that proves the rule.

 

A word to the wise is sufficient as my Dad used to say.

[SWWASAS]

To conclude at this point that BF is a large ape and would have a limited diet as the result is making a lot of assumptions with little data.      We have multiple witness reports of BF being seen carrying deer and elk and a few of them running the same down.     I say we should go with the anecdotal data until we can examine a BF mouth and determine what diet one would expect from the teeth.    Just because known great apes do not eat meat may have nothing to do with BF who may be from a completely different ancestral line.