Jump to content
hiflier

Where Are The Sasquatches In The OP??

Recommended Posts

bipedalist
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, bipedalist said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

Excuser moi, make that south and east or southeast, this easterner has his left coast gps on often!

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

*sigh* need to address this. Faulty? Should be easy enough to check. Just produce the "missing" BFRO reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, gigantor said:

True Bipedalist, but I think we group them together because BF doesn't obey county borders... 

 

When was the last report of them swimming the Tacoma Narrows then?!

 

Oh, that;s right, they can leave single prints, walk on water and come in from the the East such as JBLM (Lewis/McChord)--not denying JBLM is a hotspot and points further East in the Cascades.

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor
9 minutes ago, bipedalist said:

When was the last report of them swimming the Tacoma Narrows then?!...........

 

I wonder how many people see bears swimming across the arms and canals of Puget Sound. My bet is that it happens all the time, but few to nobody sees it.

 

People never report bears swimming across Turnagain Arm south of Anchorage, and the mere thought of any living creature trying it sounds like suicide. The mud is like quicksand, and the tides are so incredibly ferocious that a bore tide is common.

 

But after fitting a black bear that repeatedly got itself into trouble in Anchorage with a collar equipped with a satellite sender, ADFG was astounded to see that the bear promptly left town, swam across Turnagain Arm (instead of simply going around it), traversed Resurrection Pass, and the signal stopped along Skilak Lake Road. They drove to the site and found that the collar had been cut, meaning the bear had been shot and killed. The harvest had not been reported, which indicated that the “hunter” shot the bear illegally (no license or tag, which is free) even though it was a legal hunting area and black bear was open for hunting.

 

A couple of years ago I myself saw a grizzly wandering around out on the mudflats of Turnagain Arm for the first time in my life, despite having traveled it countless times since 1975, including being a railroad track inspector there for a year.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn
BFF Donor

So does it not make sense for a animal to take the fastest route possible and the shortest route as well. A point A to B route  then to go around an obstacle in a animals mind. It would seem that the bear would rather risk the route of cutting across then wasting it's time going around. I know that in some places hunting I know that I have made some mistakes to cut across a field to get to some woods only to find out that it was swampy only to have to turn around . The problem is that you get to a point of no return that you have to go through with your decision. Maybe animals might have the same instincts where they do some thing and have to go through with what they decide. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Old Dog

To assume that sightings and other signs of Bf are dropping off in the OP is a bad assumption.  Perhaps turned in "reports" of them are dropping off, but the instances are still happening.  I live generally in the OP, and specifically in Ocean Shores, and we still get word of sightings and evidence ( sounds and prints) quite a bit.  Not many will hear of sightings or occurrences on tribal lands, as the First Nation people tend to keep those to themselves and only share them with those they really trust.  Also, some areas of tribal lands are only accessible by permit from the tribal elders.  As far as Ocean Shores specifically, some of those reports are of a family of bears that have made a home on our little peninsula.  It would take a very stealthy BF to get through town to the areas that we get reports from.  Not saying it's impossible, but more than likely they are misidentification.  An area that is fairly hot at the moment is around Lake Quinault,  Grave's Creek areas.  Also some reports coming out of the Mt. Carrie and Whiskey Bend areas.  I'm not absolutely sure as to why there seems to be a drop off in formal reports, but I suspect it has to do with reports being turned in and nothing being followed up on by whatever agency or group the reports are being turned in to.  At least that is what I've gotten from a couple of folks that have gotten hold of me to talk about it.  

 

So if you are doing any research in the OP,  stick with it.   Or if you are thinking about coming here to take a look, come ahead.  Bring your thermals!

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor
On 12/14/2018 at 11:53 PM, Huntster said:

 

I wonder how many people see bears swimming across the arms and canals of Puget Sound. My bet is that it happens all the time, but few to nobody sees it.

 

People never report bears swimming across Turnagain Arm south of Anchorage, and the mere thought of any living creature trying it sounds like suicide. The mud is like quicksand, and the tides are so incredibly ferocious that a bore tide is common.

 

But after fitting a black bear that repeatedly got itself into trouble in Anchorage with a collar equipped with a satellite sender, ADFG was astounded to see that the bear promptly left town, swam across Turnagain Arm (instead of simply going around it), traversed Resurrection Pass, and the signal stopped along Skilak Lake Road. They drove to the site and found that the collar had been cut, meaning the bear had been shot and killed. The harvest had not been reported, which indicated that the “hunter” shot the bear illegally (no license or tag, which is free) even though it was a legal hunting area and black bear was open for hunting.

 

A couple of years ago I myself saw a grizzly wandering around out on the mudflats of Turnagain Arm for the first time in my life, despite having traveled it countless times since 1975, including being a railroad track inspector there for a year.

 

 

They spotted the first coyote by Flir crossing the new I-90 overpass for wildlife in Washington recently, first mammal! 

 

https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/watch-coyote-crosses-i-90-using-new-wildlife-overpass/281-621869597

 

so, I would believe anything, just seems like more people would see such, but not much boating in some of the off-season around Washington state anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shooter

I've heard from friends of mine that  EC130s do emit Gangster Rap when the Army and Jar heads need the enemy rattled up!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BobbyO
SSR Team
On 12/15/2018 at 2:39 AM, bipedalist said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right on the Pierce, Thurston being non-OP for sure; does not compute they are on the south, west  or southwest side of the south Puget Sound in the Olympic rainshadow by and large contrary to Mason which but right up into the Olympic Crests and headwaters and Jefferson the same.  Kitsap is another one of those peninsulas too. 

 

 

We have to draw a line somewhere and with the location of these specific reports, i had no issue in lumping them in the Olympic Peninsula Geographical Zone as opposed to the North/South Cascades. Admittedly i could have added a "Puget Sound" Zone but honestly, i have no issue with Gig Harbor(which i know is a Pierce County sighting specifically here) being grouped in the OP Zone, irrespective of what county it falls under, from a purely geographic perspective. Kitsap County, again geographically, no issue with it being part of the OP Zone.

 

Regarding reports dropping off, they're not, they're just not in the SSR as they're not in the public domain with database x or y, and therefore we don't/can't add them.

 

I can assure you there's no slow down of sightings, if not reports, in the Olympics though.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
BFF Donor
15 minutes ago, BobbyO said:

 

 

We have to draw a line somewhere and with the location of these specific reports, i had no issue in lumping them in the Olympic Peninsula Geographical Zone as opposed to the North/South Cascades. Admittedly i could have added a "Puget Sound" Zone but honestly, i have no issue with Gig Harbor(which i know is a Pierce County sighting specifically here) being grouped in the OP Zone, irrespective of what county it falls under, from a purely geographic perspective. Kitsap County, again geographically, no issue with it being part of the OP Zone.

 

Regarding reports dropping off, they're not, they're just not in the SSR as they're not in the public domain with database x or y, and therefore we don't/can't add them.

 

I can assure you there's no slow down of sightings, if not reports, in the Olympics though.

 

Can someone explain the politics of not posting sightings reports whether it's with the SSR, BFRO, etc?

 

Ongoing investigations or what else is going on where we shouldn't be sharing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BobbyO
SSR Team
On 12/15/2018 at 4:31 AM, bipedalist said:

 

When was the last report of them swimming the Tacoma Narrows then?!

 

Oh, that;s right, they can leave single prints, walk on water and come in from the the East such as JBLM (Lewis/McChord)--not denying JBLM is a hotspot and points further East in the Cascades.

 

I'll give you a funny one kind of relating to what you say here B.

 

If you drew two straight lines, one from Mt Rainier going west and then the other from dead centre of the Olympic Interior going south, your X point would be there or thereabouts in Oakville, WA, a town where a resident went on record on a radio show to say that she believed that Sasquatches were mating in the vicinity of her property and surrounding areas in the Spring.

 

She of course didn't know what the SSR was/is (and probably still don't) but whatever, i did, and you might be right..;)

 

Edit to add : Technically too however B, regarding Kitsap, it IS connected by land to the Olympic Peninsula and via an area that is very prominent where reports are concerned too in truth.

 

 

10 minutes ago, NatFoot said:

 

Can someone explain the politics of not posting sightings reports whether it's with the SSR, BFRO, etc?

 

Ongoing investigations or what else is going on where we shouldn't be sharing?

 

Where the SSR is concerned, we are at the mercy of other databases and them publishing reports publicly as and when, as we then back link them to every entry we add to the SSR of that report, so people like you can look at it.

 

For example, if i ran some numbers on the SSR and shared with you a Google Earth File mapping out some sighting reports, every report that would be within it would also have a back link to the original report in it so you could heck out the details of it instead of it just being a point on  map.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor

That area West of Capital Forest and Oakville does look like prime habitat with farmlands and rivers, lots of cove areas and nooks and crannies for the amorous Squatch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo
BFF Donor
6 hours ago, NatFoot said:

Can someone explain the politics of not posting sightings reports whether it's with the SSR, BFRO, etc?

 

Natfoot, many here are independent, solo researchers. We share jack most of the time. Perhaps you have not considered the crazy factor and the bullet factor. If one were to post about a private land sighting, I would expect crazy people and persons with large caliber firearms to show up. The property owner/property may receive damage from trespassing.

National Parks and National Forest. Factor in the crazies too. I am mostly in National Forest areas. I work alone. I think in terms of a safety factor. I do not give up locations. I have had lead  blow by me. The ricochets are very unnerving. Those people were removed from the NF and I have not seen their vehicle since.

Lack of reports is not lack of encounters. We are just trying to keep hairy and not so hairy types safe.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
BFF Donor
3 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

 

Natfoot, many here are independent, solo researchers. We share jack most of the time. Perhaps you have not considered the crazy factor and the bullet factor. If one were to post about a private land sighting, I would expect crazy people and persons with large caliber firearms to show up. The property owner/property may receive damage from trespassing.

National Parks and National Forest. Factor in the crazies too. I am mostly in National Forest areas. I work alone. I think in terms of a safety factor. I do not give up locations. I have had lead  blow by me. The ricochets are very unnerving. Those people were removed from the NF and I have not seen their vehicle since.

Lack of reports is not lack of encounters. We are just trying to keep hairy and not so hairy types safe.

The skeptic in me calls bullshit.

 

There are not enough crazies out there to 1) believe they are real and 2) actually go out with a gun and be that lucky.

 

Seems like another excuse.

 

Shit is getting old after 10+ years.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, NatFoot said:

There are not enough crazies out there to 1) believe they are real and 2) actually go out with a gun and be that lucky.

 

Crazies don't have guns. The big game hunters do. Review the gun & kill threads on this forum and check their success rate.

Stick around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×