Update on Olympic Project nest sites

[BigTreeWalker]

The latest info... 

 

https://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogtalkradio.com%2Fmonsterxradio%2F2018%2F03%2F18%2Fbigfoot-research-science-and-nests-with-the-olympic-projects-derek-randles&h=ATOjNRjxckLnCTACByKpIyZyTCW_bdDLvlPVkjbvjabpa75eXd6BD63s4vyQX4-x7v-L6HboqXjQo0l6GoJ3xEc2LUrbV1ioKoHo4EDkg9Chhz0A_-uGaahnnjy7Aq7d__N2ey9IrNvN5A6dVzZwXtV95qfDDk6b2N0-Fx5pxASSmFE1cKgT8G3fx4Iul3mvF85KQWS4dVeQOkAKXMYd9xO3Cf-P0bCMNXUMN5btCCI5rSdIIff78DO7U69m0qUclGJQW-WVM--Z9UShqrBp0oaeKmth2h9s5kSNkKYlYgxHi9x5F6_J_IlvOhbVJ1vcnCWnnHgn6qjWi9A4S2UC35DcL-ANW9NMEj46UiaYR5KtxcCmQher67nt1Wch7anB2vdDJXdkYDMugZ-yqu5iPPakvoWp9vPf1OaADJDo2nMyUVrtcmp3VI9QXANmnXPJL5zm4KwlXXJfGqqnc_7jKqyvc38a3kXgaFZV71UhJk9v80dP-a2ZcfOmAYeL3TcL5NitYQmZKDRmJ48py9TOMXRd6kv0XOUSbrbNqbF-RE3IGgyFN2Ke477KmeMSR12O4lVe3PHhMjQOTa4pm9RLA_h522KxhqPrg_v8jAnufaO6pFHXL0LJEfNrF6hSuu1K-tlnj6x6fRAFhtyvTu31JpUACKyiI6DGUd4gVH1xIb-BTWI93v1kqYBYY-LO4rvwO1lz3apqgsB00i0UDrZ3Ws5j3JMCOF0mU5NNnZ1XsWcUwAsQX91qZyXq_Ls12jAgQz4uIZSewTJRafZP_-PgLg0I96s6T7ilWIoOf1guK2XZVesKdy5CdwjvBkKfJf_J-93e66XPZYWXIGiDx4UVpnS5x19P1pGHCaphTTmn4LKXabIre_pbkuzMQ2argCj7d9B7CTjQTA48drkAlLDP9oUaYjtlygvLJNNt9p_ZEoPnbBUiH1rnnOql15b9M6nlpzYxSMv0vmxX0Sd_0C002Dprch9aGGLseOStNv690U2g1p1klKnvK8G5&s=1

[SWWASAS]

Some of us dinosaurs do not have facebook and cannot look at this posting.     Given recent revelations about what Facebook does with your data I will never have it.     

[bipedalist]

It's a blogtalk link pass through facebook to the link

 

I ditched facebook for the very reason everybody else is doing it now but 5 months earlier than the average bear---uhh poor choice of animal,

fox I mean, trust me it wasn't no boo-boo

 

I'd encourage everybody else to drop it like a hot rock

Edited March 24, 2018 by bipedalist

[BigTreeWalker]

Here's a shorter link that doesn't take you by way of Facebook. 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/monsterxradio/2018/03/18/bigfoot-research-science-and-nests-with-the-olympic-projects-derek-randles

I have a Facebook account which I use seldom. Because of my research I am an admin on one group. But as far as getting any personal info, there isn't much there that I have given for them to use.

 

I've probably posted more about myself on this forum than on any other social media. 

[Explorer]

^ Thanks for the other link, Big Tree Walker.  Looking forward to see/hear about the OP updates and about these nests.

 

Like SWWASAS, I also have never had a Faceboock account and not planning to do anytime soon.

 

Kind of disappointed that BFRO got rid of their forum discussion site (similar to this) and now relies on local/regional Facebook pages from trip leaders.  Not a very efficient way of sharing information. Plus, it will exclude people who don't want to use FB.

 

[gigantor]

Thanks BigTree for the update.

 

I listened to the show this morning and it was very interesting.

 

I'm very interested in the fact that they're going to share their results about nests. They were apparently able to identify 21 nests in close proximity to each other. That is unheard of and very exciting if they were indeed created by Sasquatch

 

Apparently, they documented everything and have a technique for finding these nests. They're going to share the characteristics and general guidelines on what to look for.

 

I am also encouraged that they have recruited dr. Meldrum to obtain samples from the nests while following accepted scientific procedures. They said that the samples are going to be tested for DNA.

 

Great stuff!

 

[Explorer]

Good interview and good research being done by OP.

 

My key question is: How can you tell that what you are looking at is a BF nest?

Per the interview, no BF has been seen at the nest sites or been photographed close to the nests.

The answer to that question is not clear. We will have to wait for the paper to be published to see all their evidence and their induction logic.

 

From the interview, Derek explains that they are leaning toward the BF nests conclusion by eliminating other animals.

He mentioned that they eliminated bears, porcupines, and other animals as potential sources.

He also mentioned the additional supporting evidence - BF tracks close to the sites, history of sightings in that general area, and a long hair sample (that I believe they are sending for testing).

He also mentioned, that Dr. Meldrum collected 4 core samples (of the 21 sites) using scientific protocols and that Dr. Disotell's lab is going to do some environmental DNA testing.

Not sure what environmental DNA means, but apparently it is some new technique they are using to determine what animal is bedding in those nests?

 

Look forward for their paper to be published and to learn more.

[BigTreeWalker]

A friend of mine was able to accompany them into the area around the 1st of the year. He was amazed how hard it was to access the area due to terrain and thick vegetation. Plus it rains a lot in the Olympics. 

They have gotten some of the hair analysis back and some came back as unknown as he mentions. 

I believe the process of the environmental DNA has been discussed in some of the threads here. Basically they take a core sample, such as the floor of a cave. Then run tests. The results are supposed to show all the various organisms that have used the cave. In this case though, as usual, it could come back as unknown, which is still good. But you are looking for everything that used the area. That would include humans. With this test contamination isn't really an option because the point is you want to know everything that was there. I assume the test is more in depth than a simple DNA test because you have to go far enough to actually identify what organism you're looking at without any idea what you are going to find. Of course the problem still exists, how close is BF DNA to human DNA. 

[BobbyO]

22 hours ago, gigantor said:

 

 

Apparently, they documented everything and have a technique for finding these nests. They're going to share the characteristics and general guidelines on what to look for.

 

 

 

I'm doing a project for them on PNW Watershed and am maybe 40 or so pages in so far. I'm finding extraordinary a high % of reports in very close proximity to stream/creek/river headwaters, why that is i have no idea.

 

Doing the Klamath basin first but i boo-booed there as we don't have much current activity in that area and may switch focus up to them and Puget Sound where there is lots of current activity, and that may yield genuine results on more nests hopefully.

 

It's incredibly time consuming but i feel, beneficial if done right..

[Explorer]

7 hours ago, BobbyO said:

I'm doing a project for them on PNW Watershed and am maybe 40 or so pages in so far. 

 

 BobbyO, what do you mean by 40 pages?  Is that a report your are writing on your findings or 40 pages of data or reports that you have analyzed?  Just curious. Is that going to be shared in Premium section or just for private consumption of OP?

 

BTW, I saw your Klamath watershed map in the Squatchermetrics page and it was very interesting.  I have camped in that area several times during last 5 years and was planning to go back this summer again.  Problem last year was lots of fires in the Siskiyou wilderness, Six Rivers NF, and Klamath NF in Aug./Sept. 

[BobbyO]

It's a report Explorer yeah but i'm no scientist, it's inclusive of maps and data of geographically split areas (as per USDA/USGS ).

 

It will absolutely be shared of course when finished, but i just seem to get less and less Sasquatch related time with each passing year right now unfortunately as work just consumes everything.

 

Obviously the OP have certain thoery's as explained by DR in that recent interview  and you all know where my head is on this whole subject (too incorporate the data) so when i went out last year i decided to look into what was spoken about, did so, found some initial trends in different areas in the PNW that coincided with their ideas, and then decide to move forward with this.

 

There appears to be a clear correlation with the location of reports, and creek/stream headwaters, within the Klamath Watershed at least.

 

I have no idea why there is, but there is.

 

I see it now as to then see if these initial numbers can be replicated in other ares of the PNW.

 

Whether this then will help find more nests i don't know but that's any my/our job, i see my/our job as giving the guys on the ground the best possible chance of finding more nests and evidence of this ridiculously elusive animal.

[SWWASAS]

As I understand the location description of these nests they are places where humans would not ordinarily go into.  In dense thickets of brush with limited entry.   No wonder that they are rarely found.  Even at that there are indications that they are only temporarily occupied on a seasonal basis.   Most likely theory would be fishing, hunting or gathering.   Determine the reason for that temporary occupation and one should be able to extrapolate to find others in other areas.    The methodology would likely involve examining scat found in the area of nests for diet, determine when that diet is plentiful, and look in that and other areas for nests when those food sources are plentiful.   At times science is a slow and tedious process.  

[hiflier]

SWWASAS, you do bring up a good point on a possible seasonal aspect. Something temporary then? Until the foraging no longer efficiently supports a group? Maybe the nesting area is only occupied until the young are old enough to be more independent? Seems like a lot of effort to not return there for the last three] years unless sensitivity to intrusion is extremely high or the nests simply are needed anymore as new juveniles become more mobile. Most animals are like that.

 

Your efforts make good sense BobbyO on several levels. One is that headwaters tend to be in remote, rugged areas that are steep, well grown over, quiet in Human the area of Human intrusion, narrow in geography and so enhance sounds from below. The flow of water also has it's own dynamic in which air currents follow the flow of faster moving water and therefore provide better opportunities for smells to come from uphill which may alert someone or something of an approach as well as carry sound toward the water flow for the same reason. Strategically it probably the best position in which an animal can sleep in safety and raise young. There are other reasons too but this is enough for this thread to maybe get folks thinking.

 

One last note, Drainage in those nesting sites would be good and also the direction such a location faces compass-wise and it's primary wind exposure could be a factor s well. One thing I heard on the podcast was that the nests at first had greenery attached and now, of course, not. If they were the result of migration then there could be other sites along a route? If it was a mating area then it may be the nests are generational and so will be dormant until a new mating cycle occurs. If females do not mature until a decade or more later then the nesting site could remain unoccupied for some years. I would be curious to know if one dug down would they find older nesting material buried under the current ones which would show evidence of repeat habitation.

[SWWASAS]

As I recall the description of the nesting are given in presentations by the Olympic Project, it is on a hillside overlooking an active Steelhead stream.     If not Steelhead then Salmon.      They envisioned BF nesting there during the run and harvesting the fish.   .   Steelhead and Salmon runs are very seasonal and limited to a few weeks.  BF could bed down at night or stash juveniles in the nests during the day while the adults harvest fish.  The seasonality of certain food items in certain areas has to be the primary driving force behind movements of any hunter gatherer like BF.   We have lots of evidence BF is a hunter gatherer but none that they are into food cultivation.   Of course I have to admit that BF seems to have ties to herds of elk.    While unlikely, it is not impossible,  that BF may have associations with elk in the way that Siberian First Peoples have with reindeer and American plains Indians had with buffalo.    Both followed the herds and harvested for their subsistence.   Does BF follow the elk herd migrations?     If BF is a hunter gatherer, rather than try to determine their behavior from abstract witness reports,  perhaps we need to look to human hunter gathering behaviors and try to determine similar patterns in BF behavior.   There has to be many similarities with a sentient bipedal hunter gatherer.   .      

[BobbyO]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

As I understand the location description of these nests they are places where humans would not ordinarily go into.  In dense thickets of brush with limited entry.   No wonder that they are rarely found.  Even at that there are indications that they are only temporarily occupied on a seasonal basis.   Most likely theory would be fishing, hunting or gathering.   Determine the reason for that temporary occupation and one should be able to extrapolate to find others in other areas.    The methodology would likely involve examining scat found in the area of nests for diet, determine when that diet is plentiful, and look in that and other areas for nests when those food sources are plentiful.   At times science is a slow and tedious process.  

 

Absolutely, but the creek there is key imo.

 

Not the only key of course, but it appears to most certainly be one key..

 

----

 

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

  The seasonality of certain food items in certain areas has to be the primary driving force behind movements of any hunter gatherer like BF.    .      

 

This is exactly where my head is right now Randy, hence my efforts in to this and the specifics Randy..;)

 

----

 

Here Explorer, just a regular report with info on the area, maps and of course the data.

 

Purely objective, nobody interested in my opinion so it's solely objective..;)

 

Edited April 3, 2018 by BobbyO