Guest rockinkt Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I very much agree with what your getting at. When you consider how much anecdotal evidence of bigfoot comes in the form of foot impression evidence, I think it's quite shocking how many self proclaimed field researchers don't seem to have rudimentary tracking skills. 25 years ago it was difficult to find anyone who was teaching a course in tracking that anyone off the street could sign up for. With the popularity of prepping and primitive skills, just about everyone can now find a school that can teach you the basic principles of track awareness for a few hundred bucks. I've never understood why anyone who feels compelled to spend 100's if not 1,000's of hours of their own time to look for evidence of bigfoot's passing won't also spend a few hundred hours of said time developing some rudimentary skills so they can at least establish continuity and follow the target animal. I also find the explanations that "the substrate at the sighting location was too hard to take a track" a bit too unsatisfying as a legit reason for explaining away why there is no substantive evidence of bigfoot at the proverbial "scene of the crime". Every vertebrate mammal leaves sign of its passing. Even if the ground is too hard to leave distinct impressions. If we had more footers that could actually track, I think we'd not hear about alot of the "the witness(es) were really credible and were not lying" reports because it would be definitively determined that in a lot of those cases there simply was no bigfoot involved. And in some cases if bigfoot is indeed real, we'd hear accounts that go beyond the typical "witness seemed credible" that would include some photos of foot impressions that are distinct, that were discovered by said investigators after continuity was established and followed for some distance. Instead if there's any foot impression evidence at all, we usually get to see "blobfoot" type images and usually only one or two, where red circles and arrows are usually needed to illustrate just where the "ghost print" is in the frame and what is supposedly the front of the "ghost print". Again, not very satisfying or remotely convincing stuff IMO. Usually if there's anything in frame for scale it's usually someone's cell phone or someone's foot. Great if you happen to be the owner of the cellphone or the foot. Not so great if you have no clue as to how big those scale objects are. Small pocket tape measures cost about 2 dollars. I don't think there's any good reason for not having one. I think it would also help if the field researchers knew enough about tracking to realize what factor aging plays. I've never seen a photo of an alleged bigfoot track that ever had an unshodded human footprint, handprint or so much as a thumbprint next to it to give anyone looking at said photo a baseline for the type of deformation soft tissue would cut in the said substrate at the time the photo was taken. Bigfoot is supposed to be incredibly massive, supposedly has a much more flexible foot than humans leading to more pronounced incremental loading, and is supposedly in excess of 7' tall with a pelvic girdle that would have to be substantially wider than a human. If it's real, it has to be leaving a lot of sign both on the ground and well above it that could be followed. At least until it traversed very impressionable substrate. We never hear many stories where bigfoot is followed for any distance and distinct foot impressions are found and photographed. I can think of one account where that happened and we got to see some of the impressions. Excellent post and points! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rockinkt Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 I wonder how many people have missed out on sightings to baby sit a casting as it drying? P& G follow Patty for a few miles into the bush until they lost her tracks. Only then did they return and start casting and recording. So take it from them and collect the souvenirs later and stay on the tracks. Or at the least pore you slurry and then continue searching as it dries. JMO tracker That was only one of the numerous versions of what P&G claimed they did. Titmus then went to the scene some time later and claimed to have followed the tracks in a different direction and up the slope where it stopped and rested while looking back on the scene. Which do you believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boolywooger Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 There was a thread in BFF 1.0 about a group on a training exercise up near the tree line in Alaska that came upon very large (20" or so, can't remember exactly) barefoot tracks crossing their path. They decided to follow them. They followed the tracks for quite a while, when something roared at them from the tree line ahead. The roar was at such volume and of such length that one of the men said to the leader "Sir, we don't want to find what's at the end of these tracks". So they ended their tracking at that point. I think the same thing would occur if you tried this anywhere. You get close enough you get a warning, you still persist and escalation will occur on the BF's part until you desist. I tried to find a link to the original report, but couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 There was a thread in BFF 1.0 about a group on a training exercise up near the tree line in Alaska that came upon very large (20" or so, can't remember exactly) barefoot tracks crossing their path. They decided to follow them. They followed the tracks for quite a while, when something roared at them from the tree line ahead. The roar was at such volume and of such length that one of the men said to the leader "Sir, we don't want to find what's at the end of these tracks". So they ended their tracking at that point. I think the same thing would occur if you tried this anywhere. You get close enough you get a warning, you still persist and escalation will occur on the BF's part until you desist. I tried to find a link to the original report, but couldn't. IMO and that of many others, firepower prevails, unless you are ambushed and can't fire. You'd pretty much have to set yourself up for that, though, which is doubtful if it was a military group (I am guessing, you did not specify what kind of training group it was or if they were armed). We are the dominant species on this planet because of our intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoot Hunter Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 In many (but certainly not all) cases I think it boils down to poor planning. I am about to embark on an adventure here in Louisiana this fall and have a military style plan including the use of sophisticated equipment balanced with seasoned hunters and trackers. The plan will be based on a battle style plan where we use flanking techniques supported with IFR heat sensing cameras via a small aircraft. The way I see it, if you can't "see" the body heat it ain't down there. If we can see the heat then we have eyes in the air and can move in and attempt to complete the expedition. I am not sure if anyone has gone at this in a military style manner with seasoned professionals before. I simply don't know what others have done or how seriously they have taken the expedition. I am not really a BF believer or a non-believer. I just know that the sightings have always been here and I have witnessed the rock tossing and tree knocking first hand for many years so now I think it is time to embark on an expedition of my own since I have more free time now that I am in my 40s. Sightings here seem to peak in the fall so that's the time I plan to try to make this happen. NW Louisiana will be the area, not to far south of the infamous Boggy Creek area of the 70s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 7, 2011 Share Posted July 7, 2011 IMO and that of many others, firepower prevails, unless you are ambushed and can't fire. You'd pretty much have to set yourself up for that, though, which is doubtful if it was a military group (I am guessing, you did not specify what kind of training group it was or if they were armed). We are the dominant species on this planet because of our intelligence. If it was a military group on a training excercise they probably didn't have live ammunition, just blanks. And even if they did have live ammunition do you really want to take on a pissed off Sasquatch with 5.56mm FMJ's? I don't! I think most people that find supposed bigfoot tracks stumble across them and are not prepared to follow them for any length of time. Tracks could be hours or days old. You would have to be prepared to follow them, where ever they go. And if you didn't want to spend the night in the woods then you would have to keep in mind how far you follow them if you want to be out of the woods before dark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Texas Bigfoot Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 It's more about determination than skill. I've read hundreds of stories where people were screamed at by an unknown, and unseen animal that was mere yards away. The reports of the volume go from jet engine to mythical. I have yet to see a video of that event however. Humans decided to go to the Moon, and we did. When we decide to track, or follow one of these things, which will require courage and training, we will. Then we will have results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Willi, I understand where you are coming from, I am not a tracker, I can tell raccoon tracks from deer up here in NY but thats usually a defined track in mud........ edited because the word checker wouldnt let me use a slang for raccoon Driftinmark, Reading your comment in the other thread (about taking Hardin's class), I have no doubt that you or anyone else can learn to track if the desire is there. It might seem like "voodoo witchdoctor" type stuff, but really it involves careful observation and the willingness to sacrifice some time (a fair amount of time) to begin to get proficient. If you're serious, I'd recommend buying Kearney's book: Tracking: A Blueprint For Learning How. The price Hardin is selling it for, is a literal steal of a deal @ $20 with free shipping. The book is an easy read (only 150 pages and ~ 50% photos) and very easy to understand. IMO it's still the best place to begin as far as books go. If you decide that looking for and staring at holes in dirt and flipping over leaf litter to look for bruising and broken spines isn't you're idea of a rewarding hobby, you're only out $20. After reading the book if you find your interest level is still there, run through the exercises in the book. Despite my handle I'm not in NY (the "inyc" stands for something else) but these folks will probably be able to put you in touch with other trackers, clubs and potentially good schools in your area if you decide to progress to that point: Central NY Nature Study Club http://www.freewebs.com/cnynaturestudy/ Hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Driftinmark, Reading your comment in the other thread (about taking Hardin's class), I have no doubt that you or anyone else can learn to track if the desire is there. It might seem like "voodoo witchdoctor" type stuff, but really it involves careful observation and the willingness to sacrifice some time (a fair amount of time) to begin to get proficient. If you're serious, I'd recommend buying Kearney's book: Tracking: A Blueprint For Learning How. The price Hardin is selling it for, is a literal steal of a deal @ $20 with free shipping. The book is an easy read (only 150 pages and ~ 50% photos) and very easy to understand. IMO it's still the best place to begin as far as books go. If you decide that looking for and staring at holes in dirt and flipping over leaf litter to look for bruising and broken spines isn't you're idea of a rewarding hobby, you're only out $20. After reading the book if you find your interest level is still there, run through the exercises in the book. Despite my handle I'm not in NY (the "inyc" stands for something else) but these folks will probably be able to put you in touch with other trackers, clubs and potentially good schools in your area if you decide to progress to that point: Central NY Nature Study Club http://www.freewebs.com/cnynaturestudy/ Hope that helps. Will, Thanks for the links, I think I am going to pick up that book, it might give me a few clues that I dont know right now..... on a side note, I was talking to my buddy, hes a great hunter and he also tells me he "knows when things arent right in the woods" meaning he can sense when things are disturbed while out in the field....me, i just look for tracks on the ground...but he says that he looks for everything, bushes, trees, rocks, literally everything....... I always thought that while tracking all you do is look for fresh sign, but he says he can pick up things that are weeks old, and says that stuff matters too, not just the fresh stuff, because he wants to see the "behavior" of what hes tracking, not just fresh sign.... central and western Ny are where its at, I might go check out that group also! it appears I need to really brush up on my tracking skills, lol again thanks for the links!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toejam Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Personally I think trying to track a BF is a waste of time. While you're out there crawling through bush and climbing steep terrain, I'll be hanging around the camp area waiting for an approach. I'd bet my odds would be much better than yours at a chance for an encounter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Personally I think trying to track a BF is a waste of time. While you're out there crawling through bush and climbing steep terrain, I'll be hanging around the camp area waiting for an approach. I'd bet my odds would be much better than yours at a chance for an encounter. I respect your opinion. However, running the odds, statistically, you are better off actively stealthily pursuing your guarry based on actual sign (if you possess those skills) than you are sitting in one spot in the midst of tens of thousands of square acres hoping one walks past you (or up to you). Of course, not as many folks have those skills nowadays, and you may be sitting in a place that BF seems to frequent, but you can see my logic, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toejam Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I respect your opinion. However, running the odds, statistically, you are better off actively stealthily pursuing your guarry based on actual sign (if you possess those skills) than you are sitting in one spot in the midst of tens of thousands of square acres hoping one walks past you (or up to you). Of course, not as many folks have those skills nowadays, and you may be sitting in a place that BF seems to frequent, but you can see my logic, I think. Yes I see your logic but we're not dealing with your average "animal" here. Their range is extremely wide and there's hundreds of sightings yearly worldwide yet they're still considered a myth. Doing your homework and picking the right place at the right time seems to work for me. Attracting their attention if they're in the area is not a difficult task. One time it could be considered luck. Twice maybe not. A handful of times tells me I'm doing something right. Right place right time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wild eyed willy Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Hmmm wonder where I fall in... I dont live in a city, have claim to high tech gear or have a safari hat... But I live in a house on the very edge of the power grid and have to go to town to get my mail... very harsh, I don't think so... So I see you have got it all figured out, your going to spend your time finding tracks and follow them right to Ol' Biggie huh... OK good luck with that and we will I guess hear from you when ya bring Ol' biggie back on a short leash... Very good then, see ya when you return... Gee TooRisky, I guess you and most of the rest here have fallen through the cracks. It isn't fair you havent got a catagory.. we should protest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wild eyed willy Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I don't think you really want to chase down a BF, and even if you really could do it, it would likley be the last thing you ever did ( not including your hitting the ground). Casting the tracks as quickly as possible would make the most sence to me( fresh track, more detail). You might want to slowley follow a track to look for hair samples caught in the tree branches, or other evidence for the lab... Put your silly human pressure on a Squatch, I Don't recomend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boolywooger Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I respect your opinion. However, running the odds, statistically, you are better off actively stealthily pursuing your guarry based on actual sign (if you possess those skills) than you are sitting in one spot in the midst of tens of thousands of square acres hoping one walks past you (or up to you). Of course, not as many folks have those skills nowadays, and you may be sitting in a place that BF seems to frequent, but you can see my logic, I think. Basically what you're talking about is what I and others call "predator mode". IMO what that gets you is predator treatment. Which I believe is observation from a distance without any contact. You'll hear some knocks, but that's about the extent of the encounter. I think that anyone thinking they're going to sneak up on Ole Hairy is being delusional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts