Stick Structures

[Guest RayG]

So, Ray, you are agreeing with me then that there is no 'proven' correlation, then?

I'm saying there is no proven, affirmed, certified, substantiated, established, validated, verified, demonstrated, confirmed, documented, justified, determined, corroborated, supported, or witnessed correlation between bigfoot and stick structures.

In short, no matter what adjective you stick in front of it (nice pun, eh?), there is no correlation. Period.

RayG

[Guest vilnoori]

If sasquatches are out there, it would be logical that they manipulate trees and branches. Apes do. People do. Chimps and gorillas build night nests. People build shelters (what strange primates we be to feel so compelled to build ourselves flimsy caves of fabric or branches each night). Why wouldn't sasquatches manipulate them?

I do agree that taken by themselves stick sign is not conclusive evidence. But I think it can be used as indicators for people looking for likely research localities. People used to being in forests get a feel for the usual amount of naturally occurring stick structures and tree breaks out there due to wind and tree falls. But if you are in the habit of driving on forestry roads looking for sign, such as deer hunters do (looking for rutting deer antler tree scrapes etc.) you can get pretty good at finding a "hot" area to stop at and have a better look around. Often when you do, you find other things such as footprints, rocks piled up, kill sites, and hear sounds that are not common such as howls and hoots, get things thrown at you, and hear a lot of movement just out of range of sight. At night you will get eye shine and more of the same. All these things are not evidence by themselves but rather indicators of a good place to look.

After all in the end the only evidence that will be conclusive will be bones, a body, a DNA sample (flesh or blood?) that is very fresh and can be tested for very slight, specific indicators of difference between humans and their close kin. Or all of the above.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

I'm saying there is no proven, affirmed, certified, substantiated, established, validated, verified, demonstrated, confirmed, documented, justified, determined, corroborated, supported, or witnessed correlation between bigfoot and stick structures.

In short, no matter what adjective you stick in front of it (nice pun, eh?), there is no correlation. Period.

RayG

I'm sorry RayG but I must disagree with an absolute. Especially an absolute that is made without the benefit of and not based on any field research. There's just no plausible reason to accept an absolute assurance that the subjects are not or cannot be related. We'll have to agree to disagree. I prefer to keep an open mind when it comes to findings. I'm not sure what you base your opinion on, maybe all known reports or all known evidence as a collection, I would consider that likely there are several unknowns out there collecting info and keeping it quiet. Stick structures such as I have described are merely a place to consider looking for secondary evidence. If they are related to BF activity it's far from a groundbreaking discovery. It's kinda like if you're in the woods looking for deer tracks, you might wanna look at a game trail where the deer tracks would likely be concentrated. My feelings are simply to consider a questionable structure when searching for evidence of BF in the field, sometimes it may be found near or within them. Chris B.

[Guest]

Ray, have you been watching the Wizard of OZ lately?

[Guest]

*thumbs up* on the pun, Ray. I rarely see them used well!

I think Paul has a point though. I have seen other researcher's websites who show some of these formations as proof when things like the X's or other formations can occur naturally or are humans messing around. And not so much here in Texas with the cedars, but in other parts of the woods, it's amazing to me how many of these sticks seems to fall on each other to form odd looking tepees, etc. I must have passed a few dozen of them while out on the trip where that shelter was found.

[Guest RayG]

I'm sorry RayG but I must disagree with an absolute. Especially an absolute that is made without the benefit of and not based on any field research.

So what field research is showing a correlation between stick structures and bigfoot? If that info is being suppressed by the Bigfoot Secret Society, then it's of less value than the $1.72 I paid for my last cup of coffee.

RayG

[Guest FuriousGeorge]

Field schmeild. There is no tie. Nothing, unless someone is holding out. This is one of those "What else could it have been?" things. If the answer is humans, what's the more likely guess? (bold for a reason)

If you want to guess that is was a bf, that's cool too. I hope someone can prove it someday. That would be sweet. That day hasn't arrived yet.

[Guest River]

Where did that 'bangs head against wall' smilie go?

Must. Have. Or face will explode.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

If that info is being suppressed by the Bigfoot Secret Society,

RayG

As a member of the BSS i can say that info is privileged to members only, But ! membership is running kinda semi low to non existent so as a recruitment boost special we are running a yearly membership for the low cost of $12.00 that breaks down of $1.00 a month and includes a coupon for a Dunkin Dounuts large coffee and 2 donut combo ~

[Guest]

Maybe in your part of the country, but no one I know would let children wander in remote areas in my neck of the woods( deep south)for several reasons: hunting season, marijuana growers and meth labs, cougars/bears that move through seasonally/rattle snakes/water moccasins/alligators/ packs of wild dogs and I could go on. Some of these structures that folks are showing pics of are in very remote areas and my point was that in those cases you can at least rule out one possible culprit, that being kids, unless their parent's own the land and they are pretty sure about the safety issues.

Now as for hunters, most hunters don't penetrate past 100 yards from their vehicle when hunting, so once again, I don't see why they would bother with a stick structure unless they got caught out at night. Wouldn't you see evidence of a camp fire, even after several months, if that were the case? I'm just looking at this from all angles, not discounting the possibility that you are right.

Here hunting season generally runs through October-December. That leaves the entire rest of the year. We have no alligators, moccasins, cougars, rattlesnakes, etc...

You would not believe the remote areas I have camped in. I can see how some of my structures could be mistaken for a suspicious "stick structure".

Here that rule is generally true for hunters in the southern part of the state. In the northern part where I hunt (and is also popular) I've been up to a mile from my truck. It is not unusual to be a quarter mile to half mile from where you left your truck. I know a guy who chased a wounded deer over two mountains and ended up 40 miles by road from his truck (But he got the **** deer!).

But I will say you do have a very good point with the camp fire. If I make a shelter I always have a fire and there would be evidence of that. These structures we seem to be talking about don't have evidence of fire around, which would only make sense if it was a hunter who made a day blind to keep the wind/rain off.

One thing that bothers me about these "stick strucures": You can't use them to take shelter in. There are no pine boughs or leaves piled on top of them to keep you dry. Unless it is a very, very old man-made structure that the leaves have rotted away and the camp fire has been buried by many years of leaves falling off the trees.

[indiefoot]

I haven't found any structures I would consider to be a shelter. I've found things that look more like art or a sign of some type. This thing was made by bending a limb down in a way that did not break it , then balancing a long crosspiece on the bend. It was very obvious that the whole thing was fashioned.

Could have been made by a person, but why.

[Guest BCCryptid]

Not a big fan either, because I've been on trips with nutters that claim every tree arch they see is artificial and some kind of sign.

I just laugh, call it the 'doorway to sasquatch countreee! yee ha!' and walk through it. I like to think they bring me good luck in the bush.

seriously, there's no limit to the weirdness mother nature and wind can pull with twisted branches, fallen trees, ect... it's chaos theory in practice.

[Guest]

One thing that bothers me about these "stick strucures": You can't use them to take shelter in. There are no pine boughs or leaves piled on top of them to keep you dry. Unless it is a very, very old man-made structure that the leaves have rotted away and the camp fire has been buried by many years of leaves falling off the trees.

It could be that some of these are very old blinds located out in remote areas. So I guess if you find one maybe it would be a good idea to look for signs of an old camp fire after photographing the structure.

I don't live in that remote of an area but have had my log perch I used for fishing on the river behind my condo moved overnight and piled up with other logs interwoven between two trees. Can you imagine finding that the next day? I'ld be surprised if a single man did that and can't imagine a group of men bothering with it. Anyway, when I find my cord that attaches to my camera I will download that pic for everyone to see. It's impressive. I didn't see bigfoot do it, but I have no idea what could have messed up my outdoor living room like that.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

It could be that some of these are very old blinds located out in remote areas. So I guess if you find one maybe it would be a good idea to look for signs of an old camp fire after photographing the structure.

I don't live in that remote of an area but have had my log perch I used for fishing on the river behind my condo moved overnight and piled up with other logs interwoven between two trees. Can you imagine finding that the next day? I'ld be surprised if a single man did that and can't imagine a group of men bothering with it. Anyway, when I find my cord that attaches to my camera I will download that pic for everyone to see. It's impressive. I didn't see bigfoot do it, but I have no idea what could have messed up my outdoor living room like that.

Jodie, that's an odd thing to have happen. (kinda funny too) But it does ring with some of my own observations that some of the questionable structures seem to have been assembled in just a day or two where previously there was nothing. BF related? Who knows. I think there may be a few that wish to turn this into a "Prove your findings and facts" thread, but it's not. It's just a discussion of thoughts and ideas about stick structures and what they might or might not be, like in this post. Thanks for sharing, Chris B.

[Guest Sean V]

I pretty much ignore the majority of tree breaks & limb formations. The only ones I give thought to are the ones that are located within the immediate area of a sighting/footprint find/vocalization report. These I will photograph, inspect, then move on to other tasks. If I photographed every one I came across, I would have several full 4GB camera cards & would have wasted time that I could have spent doing more productive things with. I am not one of the people that think all of these are created by Sasquatch, if they were then there are alot more of these creatures around than we think there are.

But...

To ignore them all is foolish, at least in my opinion. Just because we do not have definite proof that these creatures construct these things does not mean that they could not. A very good amount of the information we have on this creature is just done from guess work, so no one really has the authority to dismiss tree breaks & limb formations totally.