SRN- The Sasquatch Research Network

[Huntster]

14 hours ago, hiflier said:

......In a perfect world?........

 

In a perfect sasquatch research world all organizations would coordinate and cooperate with the plan to send an immediate reaction team to a fresh report. Currently there are at least two dozen Bigfoot research organizations marching to their own music, and several are treating reports sent to them as their own personal treasure. Probably the largest and most well known in the country (BFRO) does this, and clearly states that many of the reports they receive do not even get published in their database. 

 

Thus unless you’re able to connect with a widely known regional reporting source, you’re unlikely to even get a fresh report to respond to. Creating yet another reporting source exacerbates the problem.

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

In a perfect sasquatch research world all organizations would coordinate and cooperate with the plan to send an immediate reaction team to a fresh report........ 

 

.........Thus unless you’re able to connect with a widely known regional reporting source, you’re unlikely to even get a fresh report to respond to. Creating yet another reporting source exacerbates the problem.

 

From the beginning I have said that populating the Network would take time and patience. If a widely known reporting source wants to be involved then great as long as the 'plan' or function of the Network is fully understood. The function being a blitz follow up to ANY Class A sighting. As far as the reporting of such an encounter? If the public was aware of a local phone number and Network of people, and that there could be boots on the ground doing a relatively immediate response to a sighting, then the Network would scoop any of the other organizations. 

 

So this is NOT another national or website reporting source- this is an extremely local effort by anyone wanting to be a part of an immediate search for a creature that was sighted locally. Each local group is on their own and do not report in to some larger organization because there IS no larger organization beyond their group. There would only be individual autonomous groups. In the 'olden days' each town or village had their own militia. If there was an incident the local militia was notified. It is like each police precinct works their own city or town. This network would be comprised of volunteers who would 'work' their own region. And they all know who each other is. There would be no reason for a group member to travel 200 miles to do a follow up because there COULD be already a group 200 miles away that would handle that encounter.

 

This is really much simpler than piping some report into say the BFRO and having the report either sat on, evaluated for a few weeks or months, and MAYBE having one of their state reps show up to discuss the matter with a witness in a few days or whatever. This is more a local, relatively lightning fast response team of people who actually live close to the encounter location. LOTS of different teams everywhere if the idea catches on and their function and purpose is understood fully in principal. 

 

I am currently working on establishing a group of around 6-8 people in my area. Someone else may want do the same thing in whatever area they are in following the same principals. It is wide open as far as who starts a group and where. There's probably a million Friday night card games out there. Very few members of a card game will know any members of other Friday night Card games. And it doesn't matter. Each game's group doesn't NEED the other card player groups to function. There is no National Friday Night Card Game Organization (NFNCGO). It isn't needed. The SRN is no different. How to get a local SRN group going and how it should function is all that is needed. There may be one already 100 miles away from me but I do not need to know that. I only need to be a member in good standing in whatever group I belong to. I ain't the boss. Don't WANT to be the boss. If there are eight people in the group everyone is on equal footing. The only thing that would separate one person out of the group would be in the area of who would actually be at the other end of the line when a witness calls so one phone number for each group/area must be determined.   

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

.......I am currently working on establishing a group of around 6-8 people in my area. Someone else may want do the same thing in whatever area they are in following the same principals. It is wide open as far as who starts a group and where.........

 

Currently in Alaska there are two major sasquatch researchers that I’m aware of; Rob Alley in Southeast Alaska and MichaelThompson in Tok, which is the interior on the Alaska Highway @ 100 miles from the Canadian border. It appears that they have a single internet site that advertises for reports operated by Thompson called Sasquatch Tracker. Alley has conducted extensive individual research in Southeast Alaska, has published a great book on the region ( Raincoast Sasquatch”). They apparently work together in the Alaska region. 

 

I intend to to contact them and offer my services in whatever way they see need, and especially stress my desire for field work, especially with regard to quick response. While I believe that the best habitat and highest density of sasquatches is right in the area that Alley operates, and that area is difficult to access (to say the least), I’m quite a distance from both of them, and my hope is that they would welcome my participation, especially in my region.

[hiflier]

Hunster, it never hurts to ask. Who knows, maybe you will get a call one day from them telling you they just received a call about a sighting closer to you and want you to do the follow up. It would save them time, gas, and lessen the risk of having the 'trail go cold' while increasing the chance of getting close to a creature nearer your area. My hat is off to you, man, for thinking seriously about taking some action on the matter  One more pair of boots on the ground is never too many.

Edited October 7, 2018 by hiflier

[SWWASAS]

Seems like some of us in BF research are self promoters and some are not.   I think that the self promoters are the ones that get the phone calls about sightings.    I have been reluctant to be public in the local area but that may not be the best idea.   I will have to think about this and develop methods of having people know who is out there that welcome sighting reports.    There are a few festivals etc that feature BF in the area and perhaps it is time to have a booth or table set up and start talking to people.    Certainly kids are very interested in BF.      The booth thing is very out of character for me but somehow the people in the local area need a contact should they have a sighting.    In this area the BFRO seems to have other objectives.    I cannot help but wonder if members use sighting reports to try to get their moment of fame.  

[hiflier]

Self promotion has always been difficult for me, truth be known. That's why I am trying hard to not make the SRN about me. It is about everyone really and the idea paces everyone on an equal footing. Does it make it easier to promote the ide? not really but what else other than beat the bushes, which has been fruitless, is there to do? I am hoping to have the wherewithal to get a meeting with the people who are interested in this maybe this weekend if I can get my act together and stifle my nervousness enough to pull it off. Not easy as, believe it or not, I am somewhat of an introvert.

 

Typing out those first few emails has taken some thought. Since I would prefer to keep this in as low a profile as possible I realize that it could very well include having the people shut their phones off before they arrive to the meeting? I have talked about idea here on the Forum of the probably necessity of becoming a digital ghost in any dealing regarding the Sasquatch subject. I am breaking that rule by even posting here on the BFF but I think it more important for folks to see how this idea plays out in the 'real' world.

 

If it wasn't for the fact that a Sasquatch discovery announcement carries at the very least such economic ramifications then I wouldn't care so much. But discovery WILL have a major impact, not only economically but also within the realm of science and so much more. The big question is whether or not anyone thinks it is a matter that is so important that they will throw everything at it- from BOTH sides, meaning the side that researchers are on as well as the side that government is on. So this is not, and cannot be, a one person effort.

 

It would take hundreds of these individual groups taking in calls from witnesses and deploying as quickly as possible. One group doesn't need to know about the rest. I mean lets face it, a Class A encounter is a very localized event and so should be handled as fast as possible at the local level. If left to a national organization then it will just be business as usual which has been proved to be too slow (maybe on purpose?) to effect ANYTHING in the way of discovery. As a proponent I consider this a very serious matter and so do not want to do anything wrong in getting the thing off the ground. I just hope I am up to the task. 

[SWWASAS]

When this concept was first proposed I was somewhat skeptical.    But rethinking the process has changed my mind.     I used decades old sighting reports to narrow down a research area and while that  probably did not work to find the exact  creature that was the origin of the reports, it did point me an area to do field work.    That worked even though the sighting reports were in some cases decades old.    If that worked then a report from a few days or weeks ago that is investigated should work even better.      In my experience they move around.   They have their reasons but seem to move and adapt to changes in their environment.     So if some witness report gets a researcher in the area of a recent sighting report.  that has to be a very good thing and greatly increase the likelyhood of  a researcher having contact.   . 

[hiflier]

8 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

.......and greatly increase the likelyhood of  a researcher having contact.

 

And could greatly increase the likelihood of getting a great video or photos- hopefully good enough to get science to take a serious look. And that's the whole point of it, the end goal. I have read that 20% of the newer, younger, generation of scientists are more open-minded and have more that that think the creature's existence is possible. With any luck the timing for this idea will be such that it just may meet those young scientists at just the right moment.

 

And BTW, I have appreciated your encouraging viewpoint. In actually when the concept came about last December I, too, went NAH! until I gave it more thought. That was almost a year ago. Like I have said, this will take time- especially in my case LOL. I am starting to appreciate what the word 'gumption' really means.

[Caenus]

On 10/9/2018 at 9:13 AM, SWWASAS said:

...In this area the BFRO seems to have other objectives.    I cannot help but wonder if members use sighting reports to try to get their moment of fame.  

 

Yes, I know they do. Filing my BFRO report was a big step for me I thought about for over a week. I was “flying under the radar” with my research since 2012.   My report has not shown up on the site and the researcher sent me some obviously questionable track photos and “tree structures”.  I will not collaborate with them, which has made it more difficult since I can only go on my evidence/sightings. I wonder how much good info is being sat on and lost. 

 

 

[hiflier]

16 minutes ago, Caenus said:

good info is being sat on and lost.

 

And I wonder WHY. Because with all of the reports they must have in their database that no one knows about, PLUS their supposed 'hot-spot' expeditions? I am amazed that disclosure of the creature has not happened yet. And why is that? I think it is time Matt Moneymaker told the truth about what the BFRO is all about, what it is really for, and who exactly has access to the info. But I won't be holding my breath waiting on that.

[SWWASAS]

23 hours ago, Caenus said:

 

Yes, I know they do. Filing my BFRO report was a big step for me I thought about for over a week. I was “flying under the radar” with my research since 2012.   My report has not shown up on the site and the researcher sent me some obviously questionable track photos and “tree structures”.  I will not collaborate with them, which has made it more difficult since I can only go on my evidence/sightings. I wonder how much good info is being sat on and lost. 

 

 

I reported my chest thumping response  to urinating in front of a BF to the BFRO.     My description as to the location was precise enough that anyone could have found the exact location.    Not only was I never contacted but on a subsequent visit to the same site I found indications of markings that indicated some sort of surveying had been done.  Some paint marks on trees that are not typical of logging.    The area is designated as Special Forest Management area and logging prohibited.   This was the same location where a deer carcass had been placed by the drivers side door of my truck.    It is at the South end of my former research area that has now gone inactive.       The most likely reason is extensive clear cutting but for all I know the BFRO hit the area hot and heavy as the result of my report and drove BF out of the area.   The timing for that certainly makes that possible.      

[MIB]

On 10/10/2018 at 9:53 AM, hiflier said:

Because with all of the reports they must have in their database that no one knows about

 

I think you misread Caenus' post.   He says:

 

On 10/10/2018 at 9:23 AM, Caenus said:

I will not collaborate with them, which has made it more difficult since I can only go on my evidence/sightings. I wonder how much good info is being sat on and lost. 

 

Which suggests he's not accusing BFRO of sitting on the evidence, he's talking about witnesses who sit on their own evidence and never report it.

 

But even if not ..

 

I've mentioned doing followup work for bigfoot groups, investigating reports and the like.   There simply are not enough people to do the work.   Opening the floodgates would be even worse because without vetting the vetters, you will have many more reports but no consistency at all in the data.   You'll have one person happily certifying all the woo reports, another who won't certify anything without a body to test, and many more across the spectrum.   With no filter, no matter what you put in it will be garbage out.

 

Moneymaker, love him or hate him, runs the BFRO with standards that would be impossible to replicate without a fair bit of control which a loose-nit group is not going to have.    I'm not a fan by any means but he's earned a grudging respect from me despite some issues.

 

I've spent a little time in the field with some of the BFRO researchers for the OR/WA/CA area.  They're pretty good folks.   Volunteers, just like our SSR volunteers.    You seem to expect a lot from those BFRO volunteers yet you're not contributing anything of comparable value.   Perhaps you should get off your butt and go on a few of their expeditions, then maybe they'll invite you to join in the effort and you can do something of real value towards getting the information you want.   You would also likely learn just what it is BFRO knows, what their motives are, and who has access to what.   Rather than whining and innuendo, you might actually learn something and be able to speak truth.   ... just a thought, though.

 

MIB

 

 

[hiflier]

What an incredibly outrageous and unwarranted slam from you, MIB. And I resent every word of it.

[SWWASAS]

I thought he was talking to me hiflier.      I do know and respect some WA BFRO investigators and have paid for an expedition.   I find their methods so different than mine that I think it very unlikely their large groups could ever have contact.   I expect BF thinks large groups of humans very dangerous.     Certainly I have been a vocal critic of call blasting,  tree knocking,   and vocal calls.   I will stick with what field methods work for me.     I do resent evidence that they use reports for some undisclosed agenda then never include them in their database.    Some sort of disclosure on their part would certainly give them some transparency.   But one can hardly expect that from an organization that has you sign a non-disclosure agreement before you attend their expeditions.    I really wonder who would get the credit if someone made a modern P/G video during a BFRO expedition.     You might find yourself in court fighting Mat Moneymaker for rights to the video.  

[Caenus]

3 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

I thought he was talking to me hiflier.      I do know and respect some WA BFRO investigators and have paid for an expedition.   I find their methods so different than mine that I think it very unlikely their large groups could ever have contact.   I expect BF thinks large groups of humans very dangerous.     Certainly I have been a vocal critic of call blasting,  tree knocking,   and vocal calls.   I will stick with what field methods work for me.     I do resent evidence that they use reports for some undisclosed agenda then never include them in their database.    Some sort of disclosure on their part would certainly give them some transparency.   But one can hardly expect that from an organization that has you sign a non-disclosure agreement before you attend their expeditions.    I really wonder who would get the credit if someone made a modern P/G video during a BFRO expedition.     You might find yourself in court fighting Mat Moneymaker for rights to the video.  

 

I can say that my experiences have been solo. Groups of people tend to make them keep their distance. Just my experience and $0.02. 

 

To me me it is like the telephone game. Even my own experiences get skewed in my mind which is why I write everything down and document it clearly and objectively as it was perceived to have happened in the moment.  I cannot overstate the difficultly of verifying anything after some time goes by...especially someone else’s recounting. 

 

I think that that is why I like the SRN idea, small independent groups with quick follow up. Just getting the group together is the first obstacle...that seems pretty significant at this point. 

 

I am am working on consolidating my work so it will be available to anyone that wants it. I know the Mogollon is not the PNW and likely nobody will be interested, but the squatching pressure seems very low here and that may be beneficial. 

Edited October 12, 2018 by Caenus