What's A Skeptic?

[indiefoot]

There are zero wild bears in N.E. Kansas. As far as non-existant Bigfoots, they can live wherever they **** well please.

[southernyahoo]

Looking at the difference in toe size between the far left toe and the far right toe, I'd lean towards hominid/human track. Also, the toe drag out / in looks as though the track maker was doing a side step. Could be that only the fore foot registered well with heel up.

[indiefoot]

The tracks are either Homo Sapiens Sapiens or Sasquatch, I could go either way. They do have what looks like dermal ridge data that was left with the track. Again, that is why I posted them, because of the ridge information. I believe it shows that it can remain behind in a track.

I do no believe it possible for the tracks to be bears.

[Guest]

There are zero wild bears in N.E. Kansas. As far as non-existant Bigfoots, they can live wherever they **** well please.

Do you consider bigfoot as more plausible than black bear in northeastern Kansas? If so, why?

[indiefoot]

Bigfoot have been reported here, Black Bear have not.

Saskeptic, if you don't believe that Sasquatchs exist, why argue their range or habitat. They are just as likely to live in downtown Kansas City, if you don't believe they exist at all.

Edited September 29, 2010 by indiefoot

[Guest]

Well there you go.

There have been black bears in southeastern KS since they were extirpated in the 19th Century.

[Drew]

Black bear- another species extirpated completely from the state of Kansas, this goes along with Michigan extirpating, cougars, wolves and wolverines from that State. Amazing how they were able to kill EVERY SINGLE individual of those species, in the entire state. And black bears are elusive.

[Guest Lesmore]

I've often wondered how many areas there are in North America where the Black Bears are few, if not just extremely rare...or don't exist.

I live in near areas where Black Bears are very common...Manitoba and North Western Ontario. In fact in some areas around here, they're so numerous they are regarded as pests...along the line of some of those other overly numbered, wild pests such as White Tail Deer and Canada Geese.

So I do wonder if many a BF searcher, unfamiliar with the Black Bear...may sometimes come across such a creature....at night or in a forested area with poor light...see it standing up or leaning against a tree and assume in the excitement of the moment that this unfamiliar , large, lumbering creature is a Bigfoot...not what it really is...a Black Bear.

Sometimes regions where a particular animal species is thought to have been extirpated many years ago will be favored, with an infrequent and temporary visit, from an example of that species, that has a bad case of wanderlust.

So, if it's at night, or the light is poor, or the forested area is thick and all you see is a fleeting glance of a large, unfamiliar...to you....creature..well..it wouldn't surprise me if incidences like this are responsible for some confusion.

I'm not saying this would be the case in all instances....but at least occasionally.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Lesmore

[indiefoot]

Kansas Wildlife and Park thinks there are some bears wandering into the extreme SW corner of Kansas from the Ozarks. That is 200 miles from me. There have been no modern reprts of Black bearss in NE Kansas. That still leaves Homo Sapiens Sapiens as a possible for any hominid shaped tracks here. Although you make a good point about the narrow heel.

http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/wildlife/mbsp/fs/blbear.html

[Guest]

Your map shows that AR, MO, OK population pretty well, and we know animals from that occurrence are doing well and dispersing away from the mapped areas. We know there have been bears in central OK, for example, a good distance west of the mapped location. I know that black bears are thick as thieves in NW New Jersey (pest status - raiding bird feeders, etc), and that occurrence doesn't show up on the map. So I'd suggest to you that (1) 200 miles is no big deal for a dispersing black bear and (3) the distance to the nearest population center these days might be a good bit less than 200 miles.

[Huntster]

Black bear- another species extirpated completely from the state of Kansas, this goes along with Michigan extirpating, cougars, wolves and wolverines from that State. Amazing how they were able to kill EVERY SINGLE individual of those species, in the entire state. And black bears are elusive.

Not when you consider the extirpation of millions upon millions of bison from the entire region in just a couple of decades.

[Huntster]

Your map shows that AR, MO, OK population pretty well, and we know animals from that occurrence are doing well and dispersing away from the mapped areas. We know there have been bears in central OK, for example, a good distance west of the mapped location. I know that black bears are thick as thieves in NW New Jersey (pest status - raiding bird feeders, etc), and that occurrence doesn't show up on the map. So I'd suggest to you that (1) 200 miles is no big deal for a dispersing black bear and (3) the distance to the nearest population center these days might be a good bit less than 200 miles.

There have been several remarkable, documented cases of single animal migrations in Alaska. One of them was a problem black bear in Anchorage that got collared. It was a city pest until one day it simply took off and headed south along Turnagain Arm (a "bay" of Cook Inlet, which boasts some of the most radical tides on Earth), until the thing crossed Turnagain Arm (a remarkable feat, even for a wild animal; few thought animals did that), and ended up in the Skilak Lake area of the Kenai Peninsula, a road trip of about 150 miles. Then it's collar sent signals from the same location without moving. When they checked, sure enough, they found the collar cut with a knife and no bear in sight. Irresponsible. It was a legal hunting area. All the hunter had to do was call ADFG. They probably weren't familiar with the regs (can't blame them there; you have to be a part time lawyer in order to live in this society anymore), figured they did something wrong, cut off the collar, and left with the bear.

Another case was of one of a wolf caught in the Fortymile country near the Canadian border where controversial wolf control measures were being debated. One of the "solutions" proposed was to live-catch the wolves and transplant them to areas with smaller wolf populations (dumb; the local wolves will likely kill the interloper, but I guess that makes human emotional basket cases feel better). They brought her to the Knik Glacier near my home. What did the wolf do? She promptly took off to the east immediately, and within 7 days, had travelled over 500 miles to end up right back where they caught her.

[indiefoot]

I'll trust Kansas Wildlife and Parks who say that NO bears have been reported outside of two counties at the extreme SW corner. You have to twist credibility to put a black bear in North East Kansas to back up your claim that a print was made by one. If one was seen it would be all over the news.

There are prints there of three disticnt sizes. One is 10 X 5 at the ball, one is 8 x 4 at the ball, and one is 15 X 6 at the ball. Do bears run in packs?

[Guest]

I'll trust Kansas Wildlife and Parks who say that NO bears have been reported outside of two counties at the extreme SW corner. You have to twist credibility to put a black bear in North East Kansas to back up your claim that a print was made by one. If one was seen it would be all over the news.

There are prints there of three disticnt sizes. One is 10 X 5 at the ball, one is 8 x 4 at the ball, and one is 15 X 6 at the ball. Do bears run in packs?

Try replacing the words "bear" and "bears" with "bigfoot" and "bigfoots" and I think we'll begin to understand each other.

[indiefoot]

First you said a google of NE Kansas didn't show you any suitable habitat for BF, then you said the print looked "bearish". What changed? The habitat was still the same, but you now have bears walking two hundred miles to get there. You keep going back and forth.

I don't believe all BF live in the deep forest. Small groups make a living however they can, wherever they can.

Now, back to the dermal ridges that were the purpose of the photos being posted. Does anyony besides my self think they are pretty obvious. Does anyone think they are castable?