Stick Structures are not evidence

[SWWASAS]

10 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

I don't think that's what the virtue of "worthiness" means with regard to interacting with sasquatches. 

 

I feel worthiness when I observe wolves and brown bears in the wilderness. Think about it: how many people observe grizzly bears outside of national parks, where both bears and humans are managed like in a zoo? Indeed, how many people have even seen a grizzly bear in a national park? With about 55,000 brown bears in all of North America (I've seen posts on this forum estimating that many sasquatches, which is ridiculous), I'll bet that well fewer than half a percent of Americans have ever seen a grizzly in the wild. 

 

But most of who have, especially if they've seen them many times, I would say are worthy of the privilege...........

I would say in the case of grizzly and browns the worthiness issue is being able to get close enough to see and not get yourself attacked in the process.   I have had black bear encounters but am not in the low percent who have seen a grizzly.   Given they are not supposed to be in this part of Washington that is fine with me.  

[NorthWind]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

Body language IMHO is the most important aspect of research. People that see them as a 'surprise" probably don't look threatening or are doing something that they are more focused on than looking for BFs. Even just walking without looking around could be construed as a type of non-threatening body language. Bushwhacking while watching for footprints or carefully studying stick structures? Not so much.

 

I know there have been sightings by hunters carrying rifles. Is that non-threatening? Just wondering. 

 

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

I don't think that's what the virtue of "worthiness" means with regard to interacting with sasquatches. 

 

I feel worthiness when I observe wolves and brown bears in the wilderness. Think about it: how many people observe grizzly bears outside of national parks, where both bears and humans are managed like in a zoo? Indeed, how many people have even seen a grizzly bear in a national park? With about 55,000 brown bears in all of North America (I've seen posts on this forum estimating that many sasquatches, which is ridiculous), I'll bet that well fewer than half a percent of Americans have ever seen a grizzly in the wild. 

 

But most of who have, especially if they've seen them many times, I would say are worthy of the privilege...........

 

I saw two grizzly cubs once. They saw me and bolted up a steep embankment.  I did not stick around for a single second to meet mama. 

[hiflier]

33 minutes ago, NorthWind said:

I know there have been sightings by hunters carrying rifles. Is that non-threatening? Just wondering.

 

I be wonderin' too NW. No one size fits all and it may depend on how the weapon was being carried or how familiar animals are with them. Animals still run even when there isn't an intent to harm so does BF have a set of critrria for threat vs. non-threat? IDK but I do think in most cases body language (the language of animals) doe paly a key roll.

[SWWASAS]

A large portion of sightings are armed hunters hunting which certainly are a treat to BF.         Other than hikers which tend to stick to trails,   hunters, loggers, and berry and mushroom pickers are those that get off trail and more likely to encounter BF.     My own experience with footprints finds sure points to the fact that BF avoid using human trails.   If true that means it is the off trail human that is most likely to have a BF blunder into them.    BF human avoidance protocols most likely include what I was taught in military escape and evasion courses.    Avoid trails, roads,  and towns if you want to successfully evade.    There were some remarkable stories of Allied Airmen avoiding capture in WWII and traveling hundreds of miles by avoiding those places where they are likely to encounter humans. 

[hiflier]

One of the things I love about this Forum is how efficiently everything gets stuffed back into the same kind of linear thinking.  Tree structures, footprints, and....hmm......lemme see.....uh......well that 's just about it. Lots and lots of wheel spinning and circular dialogue. Oh, almost forgot, video discussion. There's a fair amount of that too. And lots of pretty pictures. But...uh...no proof. Unless someone's got some somewhere. Doubt it. Of course the nesting site has gone by the wayside. Don't know why that is except it's an outlier and so really doesn't really fit the pattern here so I shouldn't be too, too surprised.

 

Ya see, things like the nesting site and the 'professionals' that dealt with it and its results are kind of getting off easy while discussions about Bigfoot burying their dead under stick teepees seem to be way more important? Not that there's any science to teepee burials but that's beside the point right? But the nesting site? Now THAT's science, and it's a real situation with real biologists involved and real bear experts and real WA State DNR people, and a real professor and a real geneticist. But that discussion and effort at prying open the many questions left in its wake is nowhere to be found here. It's either a real eye opener about what people here really are interested in or it's just a topic that no one wants to get serious about. Don't know which it is but either way IMHO it is the 1,000 lbs. elephant in the room that for some reason or another never gets a mention.

 

Did I miss something? Like the nests were created by a bunch of teenagers pranking the land owners or something? I mean other than Dr. Meldrum's and Dr. Disotell's quiet announcements on two obscure podcasts I haven't heard boo from either one. Surely there's more to this than that? I assume the Olympic Project is still investigating the area? Wouldn't know from their website. Wouldn't really know about much of anything really. The whole subject seems to have just faded away. Odd. An important find like that and....zero word. The Olympic Project, Dr. Meldrum and Dr. Disotell must not think anyone on the BFF cares a whit about it. Well....except for 'hiflier' that is, but I'm still just one random person so I guess it's not really important to inform me of anything. 

Edited May 22, 2019 by hiflier

[Twist]

HIflier, are you 100% there is no more work being done regarding the nest site?   Could there be stuff going on we don't know about? I didnt follow it as closely as yourself so I'm not sure.  

[hiflier]

Quite a while ago I heard/read there was another area in the general vicinity was going to be explored. Any comments I have on that though would only be speculation. Because other folks have he facts, I do not. Do I have speculations on the matter? Of course I do. LOTS of them. And logic tells me they are good speculations. It seemed like a good place in this thread to bring up the subject but it isn't the proper place to pursue it.

Edited May 22, 2019 by hiflier

[Huntster]

4 hours ago, NorthWind said:

.........I saw two grizzly cubs once. They saw me and bolted up a steep embankment.  I did not stick around for a single second to meet mama. 

 

LOL........in 1976 I was driving from LA to Alaska and came across two grizzly cubs in the ditch in northern BC......Pease River country. I stopped backed up to where they were, rolled down the passenger window, and fumbled for my camera. I got one pic when one of them stood up on two legs and made a bawling sound.

 

That woke me up.

 

I put the camera down, shifted the tranny into first gear, and as I was letting out the clutch, I saw her coming at full speed in my rear view mirror. She didn't catch me, but it was close..........

[NorthWind]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

LOL........in 1976 I was driving from LA to Alaska and came across two grizzly cubs in the ditch in northern BC......Pease River country. I stopped backed up to where they were, rolled down the passenger window, and fumbled for my camera. I got one pic when one of them stood up on two legs and made a bawling sound.

 

That woke me up.

 

I put the camera down, shifted the tranny into first gear, and as I was letting out the clutch, I saw her coming at full speed in my rear view mirror. She didn't catch me, but it was close..........

Scary!  I don't mess around like that. We once were headed to a fishing hole on the Bulkley river way up in BC, on foot. Came across a big ol' grizz track on the bank that was still filling up with water, going the same direction we were headed. We made the choice to let Mr. Bear have the hole for a while, and we went the opposite way. I have no desire to be eaten while I am still alive. Glad to now be in Oregon - no Grizz to contend with. Still cautious of the black bears and kitty cats, though.

[9-dot]

To continue the discussion I would like to add my observations regarding arches and tree breaks (I purposefully ignore tree structures presently, because they are much more complex, and I feel their manufacture involves more complexity).

Last summer, after observing many tree breaks and arches that appeared to me to be due to other than natural causes, I began to photographically document and record their GPS x-y locations. 

Some observations in mixed coniferous montane forests (pine, spruce, fir, aspen trees at elevations of 8500 – 11,000 feet) over the last few years:

Tree Breaks
67 tree breaks described.
All involved Aspen trees.
Range of tree diameter at break = 2.6 - 6.2 inches.
Breaks occur from 2.2 to 15.7 feet above the ground level (median just above 8 feet).
About 2/3 of the breaks exhibit obvious left rotation of a few to many degrees (max about 15* - most a few degrees only).
All the observed breaks are within 100 yards of a human trail – some next to a trail, some within view from a trail, some well removed from a trail (but not far).
65 of the 67 breaks lean toward the trail – usually within 10-15* directly toward the trail (I have observed only 2 breaks that lean in the 180* azimuth away from a trail).
I am including a few photos of some breaks.
One of the included breaks has with it a personal story that I will relate if a discussion ensues.
 

Arches
34 arches have been described (many more have been observed).
The arches are what I say are graceful curves with a fairly consistent radius.
All arches involved Aspen trees – thin saplings in every case (2 – 5 inch diameter near base).
Arches were made (or occurred) while the saplings were alive and supple, although most are now dead and brittle.
About half (16) have their tips anchored into the ground and then pinned with a branch (usually a short aspen branch) inserted at a low angle over the arch tip.
One arch in particular was pinned in a much more complex way – see my photos in an earlier post in this thread.
Once the aspen arch sapling has died the pinning branch can be removed with the arch remaining in place, so some of the older arches may have had pins removed by natural or other forces (I see no way to have determined this).  In other words, all arches may have been pinned at one time.
Aspen arches made during the current summer growing season (2018) rebound to some degree if they are unpinned.

As a general observation – I have hiked through numerous aspen groves that do not contain a single break or arch (or other structure) that I would consider anomalous.  Then, in some of those groves, it seems like I have crossed a sharp boundary and entered a zone with numerous breaks and arches (and structures and tangled, intertwined aspens – like a fence) that appear anomalous.
 

Wind and snow certainly work in wondrous ways!

[Twist]

US Forest service is already ahead of you on the coverup!  

 

Physical Factors

Aspen is affected by a variety of physical and mechanical factors as well. As aspen is very intolerant of shade, the lack of light may affect tree vigor and regeneration. Mature aspen trunks may sunscald if they are abruptly exposed to large increases in sunlight. Wind can sometimes severely impact an aspen grove as would a severe forest fire. Trees are blown down and broken, the area is opened up, and aspen suckering is stimulated. Snowstorms may do extensive damage to aspen if the snow is wet and clings to the aspen crowns. Limbs may break, sapling to pole size trees may be broken off, bent to the ground, and sometimes partially uprooted. Weather-related phenomenon, such as hail and lightning, temperature extremes, and drought may damage aspen.

 

 

[JustCurious]

3 hours ago, 9-dot said:

Tree Breaks

67 tree breaks described.
All involved Aspen trees.

About 2/3 of the breaks exhibit obvious left rotation of a few to many degrees (max about 15* - most a few degrees only).

 

 

9-dot, this statement highlighted in bold is interesting.  Were these observations collected from varied forests or just different areas of the same forest?  Since several of your pictures show a slope, are these on the same side of the slope? 

 

It's always good to see someone study something objectively like this!

[9-dot]

Good questions!  The arches and breaks came from two areas separated by 48 miles with a mainly treeless basin between the two.

Because most human trails are in valleys and close to creeks occupying those valley bottoms most of the breaks are uphill from the trail and thus are pointing downhill.  However, all observed breaks below the trail (I am guessing about eight) also point at the trail and are thus aligned uphill.
An additional observation:  I have hiked for many miles on trail and off trail in adjacent connected areas of dense forest with aspen groves at similar elevations in which I observed no breaks, arches, or other tree modification that I would deem other than natural.

The areas from which the photos were taken impress me as different worlds with tree geometries that I consider extraordinary given my many years of observation (I am old).

A side note relating to your left twist question:  manes of horses in this area (and in other areas) are sometimes found to have been braided overnight with long hairs pulled from the tail and inserted into the mane braids (ostensibly to lengthen them), and those braids are tied off with a square knot - a square knot as a left hander would tie (the fact that right versus left handers tie square knots differently was news to me when I learned that).

 

And thank you for the compliment.

Edited May 24, 2019 by 9-dot
Add a thank you.

[WSA]

9 Dot ...would ,love to hear the story that you alluded to regarding one of those breaks.

 

Thanks for sharing your data. My impression is you are no stranger to these woods....which I think is an under-appreciated aspect when people of your experience share observations about this stuff.

 

[9-dot]

would ,love to hear the story that you alluded to regarding one of those breaks

 

As promised, here goes:

I have had two gifting sites in the Colorado Rocky Mountains for a few years now.  During the Summer 2016 activity started in July with increasing intensity into mid-September during which there were a number of amazing encounters.  The last of the above photos of aspen breaks relates to a vicarious encounter September 14, 2016.

The photo of the break was taken 7/23/2016.  It is just downhill from a trail I was taking every 3-5 days between my two gift sites, which are about 1/2 mile apart.  I have stopped to admire that tree break at least 20 times - alone, with my niece, with my squatching buddy.  On 9/14/16 I stopped to admire it - then continued to my gift site for a brief visit.  Upon my return I found an aspen sapling placed perpendicularly across my path such that I would have tripped over it had I not removed it.  As I continued hiking I kept thinking "it looks just like the top of my aspen break!"

Sure enough when I reached the aspen break the top was missing.

In 30 or more hikes on that trail I have encountered only one hiker (the Forest Service closed the trail years ago - sorry, that is why I use it).  There were no cars in the trailhead parking area, which is also remote.

I later paced off the distance the top was from the bottom - 98 yards.

That, along with other intense activity in late Summer, led me to believe it was a vicarious acknowledgement that a friend was telling me she (tell you later) wanted me to know she is here (not necessarily a teaser - rather I feel uncomfortable relating events that will be certain to subject me to scorn).

See attached photo with redacted notes.

Edited May 24, 2019 by 9-dot
spelling errors