This Is Why We Can't Find A Body Here In Wa. State...

[Guest RayG]

Who's "we"?

You name 'em.......

That's a collective we. You, me, them, everybody, everybody.

RayG

[Guest alex]

http://www.texasbigfoot.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/67-ecological-patterns

[Guest RayG]

alex, as much as I'd love to be able to read minds, I have no idea what argument you're trying to present with that link.

RayG

[Guest alex]

alex, as much as I'd love to be able to read minds, I have no idea what argument you're trying to present with that link.

RayG

Sorry, it was meant to be addressed to Saskeptic

[Huntster]

Saskeptic, on 25 September 2010 - 03:15 AM, said:

Huntster, I ask you check out a specific claim in a specific thread and you respond by explaining away an entirely different source of information?

I have addressed Glickman. His "clusters" can be readily explained by geographic variability in the familiarity with and acceptance of bigfoot mythology. Same spatial pattern of reports without a real bigfoot behind them.

Then why do Reports occur more frequent in different season's of the year, and why do they have a connection with bodies of water?

And why only 7 reports in Iowa, none in Hawaii, and nearly 500 in Washington state? And why dozens of reports from Prince of Wales Island and absolutely none from Kodiak Island? And why only 2 reports from Benton County, Washington, and 52 from Skamania County?

Sorry, Professor Saskeptic. It is clear that if you even read Glickmans cluster theory, you certainly didn't think about it. Maybe when you read it, that's when you were nodding off to sleep?

[Guest alex]

And it is reasonble to discard sightings which do not correspond with habitats that could support a sasquatch, you are more likely to encounter one In Washington than on Long Island. Why are there no reports in cities at all?

[Huntster]

RayG, on 24 September 2010 - 08:58 PM, said:

we can't find fresh bigfoot meat... well... anywhere. (you name it)

Who's "we"?

You name 'em.......

That's a collective we. You, me, them, everybody, everybody.

It most certainly does not include "everybody". I'm cutting quite a bit of hay pointing out that it does not include our official wildlife management agencies, the very people who should be ascertaining if or if not fresh bigfoot meat exists.

[Guest RayG]

Well then quit bitching about it and drag one in for 'em. Rub their snotty little noses on the bigfoot's rump while yer at it. You'd be out hunting anyway, right?

RayG

[Huntster]

Well then quit bitching about it and drag one in for 'em.

Screw 'em. Let 'em do their own jobs. They don't do mine.

Rub their snotty little noses on the bigfoot's rump while yer at it.

Frankly, shooting a bigfoot might be worth it if I could, but then I'd be prosecuted for shooting the bigfoot, then assaulting the useless fools.

You'd be out hunting anyway, right?

Yup. But not for apes.

[Guest RayG]

Frankly, shooting a bigfoot might be worth it if I could, but then I'd be prosecuted for shooting the bigfoot, then assaulting the useless fools.

Not to worry, you could paddle your way down to the Queen Charlottes. I bet you'd love it there.

RayG

[Guest]

Speaking of ducking and dodging...

Kerchak simply wanted a guess as to how many people might be in TooRisky's vid. Variable Probability Sampling, Prismoidal Volumes and Corrections, Closed Traverse Plotting, Form Class Tables, Basal Area Relative to Site Class in Even Aged Management and Defelection Requirements per Turn by Weight for a Running Skyline System, although all "basic knowledge" items, are irrelevant to answering his question.

Not very many people go out into the woods. At least that's what my 30+ years has taught me.

[Huntster]

Not to worry, you could paddle your way down to the Queen Charlottes. I bet you'd love it there.

Oh, no doubt about it. That's the other large island down there that boasts the largest black bears in the continent. I'd love it!

But Canadian officals wouldn't let me hunt there without hiring a guide to the tune of thousands of dollars, and wouldn't even let me have my guns without hiring the guide and playing the game.

No, thanks. I'll stick to Alaska. There's plenty of good ground for me to explore right here, and a several month tour/hunt of Revillagigedo and Prince of Wales Islands are in the plans for the spring/summer/fall of 2013. I'm less than three years away from it........

[Guest Kerchak]

Brown bear population densities in North America is a fascinating science in and of itself, and Alaska tops the science. Fully 75% of North America's brown bear population is in Alaska. And in Alaska, we have regions with bear densities of 1 bear per 300 square miles, and areas with densities of several bears per square mile.

The Gulf of Alaska coast holds the lion's share of brown bear in Alaska, but even then, there are areas with few brown bear and extremely high densities of black bear. This is especially true on the larger islands. Kodiak Island, of course so well known for it's very high density of brown bears, has offered not a single sasquatch report that I know of. It shouldn't be a surprise, and I've challenged skeptics repeatedly asking why that is, and if I get a response at all, it is typically lame or diversionary at best.

But what is not widely known are the brown bear densities of the ABC islands of Southeast Alaska; Admiralty, Baranof, and Chichagof Islands. These island are high density brown bear habitat. Admiralty Island boasts brown bear numbers/density as high as Kodiak. As expected, few sasquatch sightings come from there (see Raincoast Sasquatch by Rob Alley).

Just south of the ABC islands is Prince of Wales Island. It is the third largest island under the US flag (after the Big Island of Hawaii and Kodiak). There are no brown bears, however, the island boasts an extremely high density of the largest black bears in North America. Not surprisingly (to anyone studying reports, which does not include anybody within the science industry, apparently) there is a very high sasquatch report density from this island.

Just to the east of Prince of Wales Island is Revillagigedo Island. This is the island that the city of Ketchikan is located. Ketchikan is the third largest city in Alaska with a population of 14,070 (approximately 1/3rd the population of Azuza, California). This island, too, is devoid of brown bears, but hosts a high density of black bears, and also boasts a high density of sasquatch reports.

Thank you Huntster. I have the book Raincoast Sasquatch which as you know goes into detail about this area and it is all very interesting and I share your conclusion that the higher densities of brown bears seem to have a very good correlation to fewer or no sasquatch reports.

I guess the brown bears in eastern BC/western Alberta are less of a problem population and density wise.

The average lay feller can see the obvious trend here, but I'm afraid scientists and pseudo-scientists can't. They're busy discussing sasquatches in metro Oklahoma City..................

I know. Gets very old and tiresome doesn't it. Lets stick to what might make sense before we concentrate on what doesn't make sense. I have no desire to try and account for sasquatch waiting at a bus stop in downtown Philadelphia.

There's plenty of good ground for me to explore right here, and a several month tour/hunt of Revillagigedo and Prince of Wales Islands are in the plans for the spring/summer/fall of 2013. I'm less than three years away from it........

Cool. Sounds great. Make room in your backpack for a good camera and some casting material.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Kerchak

[Guest Kerchak]

Kerchak simply wanted a guess as to how many people might be in TooRisky's vid.

Thank you norcallogger. I didn't make any claims like "there are no people there". All I did was ask a question and ponder something. I have no idea why the reaction was like it was.

Variable Probability Sampling, Prismoidal Volumes and Corrections, Closed Traverse Plotting, Form Class Tables, Basal Area Relative to Site Class in Even Aged Management and Defelection Requirements per Turn by Weight for a Running Skyline System, although all "basic knowledge" items, are irrelevant to answering his question.

Well I thought it was too. I even asked the question again relatively nicely.

Not very many people go out into the woods. At least that's what my 30+ years has taught me.

Exactly. And fewer still go very far off the beaten track. So, a road building or logging crew might have crashed their way through the area years before. That doesn't mean they are there today and engaging in much activity deep in the brush far from trail/road access. In that end portion Too Risky is in his car on the track on the mountain side. I can't imagine too many humans would be messing about going off trail and yomping away down to the left on that slope.

Edited September 26, 2010 by Kerchak

[Guest rockinkt]

Kerchak simply wanted a guess as to how many people might be in TooRisky's vid. Variable Probability Sampling, Prismoidal Volumes and Corrections, Closed Traverse Plotting, Form Class Tables, Basal Area Relative to Site Class in Even Aged Management and Defelection Requirements per Turn by Weight for a Running Skyline System, although all "basic knowledge" items, are irrelevant to answering his question.

Not very many people go out into the woods. At least that's what my 30+ years has taught me.

The implication of the question was there based on the posts of mine previous to his - you are still ducking and dodging IMHO.

You are a very well educated forester and logger. You know that a lot of the area shown on the video was logged and how much human activity in that area would come with that logging. Why the ruse?

Sure - not many people go off the beaten track - but there are quite a few who do. You do. I used to. My brother still does. I have lots of friends whose bread is put on the table by going off the beaten track.

Edited September 26, 2010 by rockinkt