Implications of Apparent Consistency of Evidence

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, Franco said:

..........I havent seen or heard anything out there. but the locals say they are there. But that area is very heavily traveled. Which tends me to believe it is a Migration area east and maybe north of shasta. Plenty of big game in there so food isnt a problem...........

 

That's very, very perceptive of you. I have high confidence that you are spot on. The Shasta area is the moutainous link between the Sierra Nevada mountains to the southeast and the Cascade Range to the northwest over the northern limit of the Sacramento Valley. The Shasta area mountains keep the Sierra Nevadas from being isolated by major valleys filled with people. There are similar possible migration routes between the Cascades and Coast Range to the north, especially in British Columbia. Ditto mountainous routes to the Rockies in BC.

 

The forested area of Hwy 299 between Redding and Hwy 89 (and between the two volcanoes, Shasta and Lassen) appears to be a north/south crossing route. The area of I-5 in the mountains (and around the lake) between Redding and the Oregon border appears to be the east/west crossing.

 

[Franco]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

That's very, very perceptive of you. I have high confidence that you are spot on. The Shasta area is the moutainous link between the Sierra Nevada mountains to the southeast and the Cascade Range to the northwest over the northern limit of the Sacramento Valley. The Shasta area mountains keep the Sierra Nevadas from being isolated by major valleys filled with people. There are similar possible migration routes between the Cascades and Coast Range to the north, especially in British Columbia. Ditto mountainous routes to the Rockies in BC.

 

The forested area of Hwy 299 between Redding and Hwy 89 (and between the two volcanoes, Shasta and Lassen) appears to be a north/south crossing route. The area of I-5 in the mountains (and around the lake) between Redding and the Oregon border appears to be the east/west crossing.

 

Thank sir!!!!! familar  with all the place you have mention... and I agree

[xspider1]

^^  Looks like a great place to launch some drones!  😏

 

 

[Huntster]

Both reports of sasquatches crossing Hwy 299 were in the fall. The report of the Hwy 44 crossing was mid-winter.

 

It's interesting that there are not more I-5 crossing reports. There is clearly more traffic on I-5.

Edited May 1, 2019 by Huntster

[Franco]

Such a beautiful area. BF’s have good taste. Lol

looking into buying a drone.  But the ones that stay up and have flir. Are expensive. 

[Huntster]

I'm also wanting to buy a drone, but I want one for fishing, not bigfoot hunting. A good, used Phantom III would be perfect. I just need it to carry my line out beyond the surf. But since I really don't have time to go fishing, I guess I really don't need it. 😪

[Franco]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

I'm also wanting to buy a drone, but I want one for fishing, not bigfoot hunting. A good, used Phantom III would be perfect. I just need it to carry my line out beyond the surf. But since I really don't have time to go fishing, I guess I really don't need it. 😪

I can never find time... I keep buying gear with plans on going.. Then Life takes over... So I fell your pain

 

[SWWASAS]

3 hours ago, Huntster said:

I'm also wanting to buy a drone, but I want one for fishing, not bigfoot hunting. A good, used Phantom III would be perfect. I just need it to carry my line out beyond the surf. But since I really don't have time to go fishing, I guess I really don't need it. 😪

The way things work if you buy a drone for fishing you will find a bigfoot accidently when you use it.  It seems at times that bigfoot understands our intent.  Fishing would interest them.    

[Huntster]

LOL........you may be right. I might see a sasquatch diving for shellfish. 

 

The use of drones for hunting in Alaska is STRICTLY forbidden, and the a$$****** around here would love to take the law (as they interpret it) into their own hands and shoot a drone down, so I doubt I'd fly one around over forests. But for carrying a line out a few hundred yards offshore, I would really like to have one. I've seen them used on video in both California and Texas to excellent effect.

[hiflier]

12 hours ago, Huntster said:

Both reports of sasquatches crossing Hwy 299 were in the fall. The report of the Hwy 44 crossing was mid-winter.

 

It's interesting that there are not more I-5 crossing reports. There is clearly more traffic on I-5.

 

Had discussion a while back about the use of culverts and bridges with natural habitat underpasses under I-5. The discussion revolved around a potential pinch point South of Toledo and a discussion about an East/West seasonal passage involving the Toutle River watershed and it's route under I-5. The WADOT website has some images from cameras they placed to watch animal migrations under some of the larger bridges. No Sasquatches of course but then timing is everything right?  

[Huntster]

4 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Had discussion a while back about the use of culverts and bridges with natural habitat underpasses under I-5. The discussion revolved around a potential pinch point South of Toledo and a discussion about an East/West seasonal passage involving the Toutle River watershed and it's route under I-5...........

 

Excellent point. There are several wonderful such bridges that could be used to cross without detection.

[SWWASAS]

41 minutes ago, Huntster said:

LOL........you may be right. I might see a sasquatch diving for shellfish. 

 

The use of drones for hunting in Alaska is STRICTLY forbidden, and the a$$****** around here would love to take the law (as they interpret it) into their own hands and shoot a drone down, so I doubt I'd fly one around over forests. But for carrying a line out a few hundred yards offshore, I would really like to have one. I've seen them used on video in both California and Texas to excellent effect.

Some of the sighting reports in the Washington Ocean Shores area are of BF collecting shell fish at the coast.    Maybe they don't need a shovel but just push their arms down into the sand and grab the razor clams.   

[Huntster]

34 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

Some of the sighting reports in the Washington Ocean Shores area are of BF collecting shell fish at the coast........

 

The reports from Ocean Shore subdivision are incredible. The series of reports from 2009 seem to have died out after 2015, but I suspect ongoing research there and in the area just north of there that is not being publicized. 

 

...........Maybe they don't need a shovel but just push their arms down into the sand and grab the razor clams.

 

I don't use a shovel much when ai dig razor clams, but I do wear a neoprene glove or (more often) a filet glove to protect myself from their shells so I don't get cut up. I dig quickly with my hands like a dog and grab them. I'm pretty good at it. I found myself breaking too many when using a shovel, or digging off to the side, they simply bury themselves deeper too fast for me to catch them. The beaches of Clam Gulch on the Kenai Peninsula have been overwhelmed with people and the clams have been decimated. Flying or boating across Cook Inlet to Polly Creek still produces clamming like the early years on the east side, but clams just aren't worth the cost and effort to me. 

 

If sasquatches are still clamming the Greys Harbor area, I would think that footprints and lots of holes would be evident in the mornings.......unless rising tides cover them up.

[SWWASAS]

BF likely clam at low tide and night or isolated coast,   so their footprints and holes would not last long in the rising tide.   Most of the more successful clamers in Seaside wade into the water and get them in the water at low tide.   .   The clams are shallower in the sand when the water covers them.    I think  BF are smart enough to know the relationship of the moon to the tides.     Probably more so than most humans do.  

[NathanFooter]

On 4/25/2019 at 10:05 AM, Franco said:

Spent alot time in upper NW Idaho [Yellowstone] Bears, wolfs and Elk always use trails, why wouldn't BF... Hell a delivery systems for Food - Grubhub for BF's....

My Wife and I, have done a few BFRO expedition in Wisconsin... What struck me as strange is the randomness of their searches... Lets try hear, with a ton people... Making all kinds of noise. I know from my experience as a avid hiker and Camper that most animals will leave a area where there is a ton of Noise....  I didnt get the whole Idea behind that... I ask why dont we stake out some Game trails... 

" we need to find  where there is Activity" HUH... oh well...  we did get howls and a few footprints.... From them probably then running away from us... LOL

I think that we know or suspect they are in the area, and \or a good sighting report... We need to look at the trails around that area, get a idea of where they are moving to\from and search in that direction... good data would help with that... Not wondering around a area aimlessly.. But This is one mans Thoughts. 

trail cams dont work, the in-fared light omitted by them can be seen by animals.... with the millions of them out there. the amount of BF pictures we get  Proves that point.... 

 

There are alot of reports from the AP trail...... Now that i think of it....

 

 

 Still catching up on this thread, it sounds like you ended up on some poorly executed expeditions.   I had heard from several others that the expeds between Iowa and Wisconsin kinda missed the marked for many folks.  I am sorry that in you case the information was not gone over or presented. 

 

 If Sasquatch are anything like all the other primates then curiosity and self preservation can draw their attention, often they seem compelled to scope out potential threats or evaluate a situation looking for some kind of advantage ( food, entertainment or displaying dominance ).  The sounds either can be an outright curiosity draw or possibly fool any individuals nearby into thinking another Sasquatch may have entered their territory and thus respond.

 

 I am going to quote something I wrote about this a few months back regarding what these expeds are for and what you can expect to learn ( assuming your organizer has their head on straight ).

 

--- The BFRO does not guide you out to gander at Sasquatch the way people do at animals in Yellowstone and nor do we put you on a pack-horse into the most remote locations where a tire may not have met the road in a decade to prepare for a 6 month grant program to be the next Jane G.  This is a common misconception of what we are about as an organization ( I am not speaking for ever single expedition or organizer, some members have their own code of ethics and conduct ). The BFRO as a whole provides a form of education on the entire subject and  how it relates to area ecology and history.  Folks have the opportunity to learn and connect with BFRO members for guidance on some of the points below.   

 

 We provide  attendees to accessible locations that repeatedly generate reports at particular times of the year, we put people in the best position possible to have an experience but we do not promise anything except research methodology and environmental education.  We give directed presentations on witness evaluation, reported behavior, field operations, implementation of thermal/audio technology and basic ecology.       We also offer classes on habitat evaluation, report documentation,  data mapping,  track casting, DNA collection and nighttime observation.  We offer perspective, knowledge, methods, tools and hands on experience so you can go out on your own and maximize your odds of encountering these animals.