Looking for Bigfoot in Open Areas

[Foxhill]

8 minutes ago, Believer57 said:

My original question was based on considering a remote area to be like the Sierra Nevada range, Nordegg, Radian, the Yukon, etc. Some folks have to ditch their trucks and use ATVs. I picture in my mind the old films of Ron Morehead trekking into the wilderness with pack mules.

 

I'd suggest you do a little research on the timber industry in the US, over the past 200 years.

I found it to be a real eye opener as to the issue of what's remote and how any creature over 5lbs could remain undiscovered in the US.

[norseman]

2 minutes ago, Foxhill said:

I'd suggest you do a little research on the timber industry in the US, over the past 200 years.

I found it to be a real eye opener as to the issue of what's remote and how any creature over 5lbs could remain undiscovered in the US.

Because animals are static like a redwood.

https://www.blueridgeoutdoors.com/environment/return-of-the-ghost-cat/

[Foxhill]

1 minute ago, norseman said:

Because animals are static like a redwood.

MEH....your the expert 

[norseman]

Just now, Foxhill said:

MEH....your the expert 

I guess? A little logic goes a long way. You are correct that not much virgin timber remains in the US. But it wasn’t all logged in one go. But how that would apply to a bipedal omnivore primate? We are not talking about an Orangutan here.

[Foxhill]

3 minutes ago, norseman said:

I guess? A little logic goes a long way. You are correct that not much virgin timber remains in the US. But it wasn’t all logged in one go. But how that would apply to a bipedal omnivore primate? We are not talking about an Orangutan here.

Where did I say it was all logged at one time........maybe you should do a little research on the logging industry in the US, then maybe we could have a discussion after that.

  No we are not talking about Orangutans, do you want to talk about Orangutans, your kinda all over the place and we're definitely off topic.

   I would think the ramifications of nearly the whole continental US being logged multiple times would be obvious, as it relates to any undiscovered species. 

[hiflier]

12 minutes ago, Foxhill said:

 I would think the ramifications of nearly the whole continental US being logged multiple times would be obvious, as it relates to any undiscovered species.

 

As it may relate to the rarity of same? Because mobility would be a factor. Not SAYING the Sasquatch exists, though I can't say it doesn't either. There are apparently large seasonal nests-like structures built in a remote area of WA state that hadn't been logged in over 50 years according to the land owners. If anyone is going to discuss BF existence then ALL elements of the case must be included in the picture.

[norseman]

31 minutes ago, Foxhill said:

Where did I say it was all logged at one time........maybe you should do a little research on the logging industry in the US, then maybe we could have a discussion after that.

  No we are not talking about Orangutans, do you want to talk about Orangutans, your kinda all over the place and we're definitely off topic.

   I would think the ramifications of nearly the whole continental US being logged multiple times would be obvious, as it relates to any undiscovered species. 

I live in Kettle Falls on a ranch. I own chainsaws and sell saw logs to Boise Cascade. I’ve hauled wood chips to Paper mills all around the PacNW. I’ve skidded logs with a 1956 D47U. I own a 160 Kobelco with a mulching head. What would you like to know about logging?

 

So your abandoning your position that anything over 5 lbs would have been eradicated because of logging over the last 200 years?

 

Its your position. You flesh it out. Why can’t Bigfoot exist because very little virgin forest remains in America? Why does the Grizzly Bear still exist? Moose? Elk? Deer? Etc?

 

 

[Kiwakwe]

41 minutes ago, Foxhill said:

Where did I say it was all logged at one time........maybe you should do a little research on the logging industry in the US, then maybe we could have a discussion after that.

  No we are not talking about Orangutans, do you want to talk about Orangutans, your kinda all over the place and we're definitely off topic.

   I would think the ramifications of nearly the whole continental US being logged multiple times would be obvious, as it relates to any undiscovered species. 

Are you saying that 98% of the country has been logged many times over and that any undiscovered species would have been found, as if it were all logged in an instant?

 

Taking N Maine for instance, where I like to tromp around. It's by no means an ecological wilderness but by "civilization" or population standards it is. There is one patch of 5000 acres that has never been logged, virgin forest. Outside of that, miniscule amounts in 5000 sq miles, 3.5 million acres of that owned by a private timber consortium.  Take a look at guggle sat, old logging roads a-plenty but about as near to wilderness as one can get on the E coast and most of the US. There will be a hunting camp here and there, most times of the year unoccupied. I've been up there for 3-4 day stints, driven hundreds of miles on old logging spurs and not seen another human. When I bushwhack in a few miles off of an old spur, I'm sure I'm not the only critter who feels it's in "the wilderness" 

Edited February 7, 2021 by Kiwakwe
typo

[wiiawiwb]

4 hours ago, Foxhill said:

I'd suggest to you that very few "researchers" are no more than a couple of miles from the vehicle they drove to the "remote" wilderness research site. The fact that more reports come in from very unremote sites is a pretty good indication of what your dealing with.

 

4 hours ago, Foxhill said:

Well I guess your definition of remote and mine differ......I don't believe there are to many places in the continental US that you are more than 30 miles from a road.

 Where did I say "most reports come from unremote sites"?

 

I'll stand corrected-- you did not say most. You did say "more" which in the context you were speaking is the equivalent to most.

[Incorrigible1]

There's that old bit 'o advice that when one finds themselves in a hole, to stop digging. YMMV

[Madison5716]

NorthWind and I just live in an awesome location, and I've been fortunate enoght to have had very knowledgeable mentors for a short time (thanks, Tobe Johnson and "Tracker"!), who pointed me in the right direction early on, and I extrapolated the relevant data, applied it elsewhere and hit paydirt. Teaming with NorthWind was the cherry on top, since our research methods and capabilities are superbly compatible. All our spots are within an hour or so of where we live. They are rural, but not extremely so, for the most part. I assume, since Oregon became more populated after the 1850's, that the sasquatch had much more mire room to roam back then, and we humans now encroach on their territory as we extend our homes into the woods. I find the edges - where people and sasquatch clash, to be good places for interactions. We get to hear a lot of stories lately, and follow up as we can. Bigfoots pissed at campers. Sasquatch throwing rocks at people at boat ramps, bigffots spying on campers or looking in the windows of very rural households etc.

[Incorrigible1]

Apologies to Johnny Lee, but it seems I was looking for Squatch in all the wrong places.

 

I was lookin' for Squatch in all the wrong places
Lookin' for Squatch in too many faces
Searchin' their eyes, lookin' for traces
Of what I'm dreamin' of
Hopin' to find a primate and a hominid
I'll bless the day I discover,
Another Squatch- lookin' for love.

[wiiawiwb]

Wow, Madison. It sounds as though there is a lot of interest and interaction in your area by sasquatches. Perturbed, maybe...curious, probably.  It is instructive they are not hightailing it out of there for more remote areas. They stay around for a reason.

 

Have you found early Spring to be a productive time with increased activity?

 

[Foxhill]

On 2/7/2021 at 2:43 PM, norseman said:

I live in Kettle Falls on a ranch. I own chainsaws and sell saw logs to Boise Cascade. I’ve hauled wood chips to Paper mills all around the PacNW. I’ve skidded logs with a 1956 D47U. I own a 160 Kobelco with a mulching head. What would you like to know about logging?

 

So your abandoning your position that anything over 5 lbs would have been eradicated because of logging over the last 200 years?

 

Its your position. You flesh it out. Why can’t Bigfoot exist because very little virgin forest remains in America? Why does the Grizzly Bear still exist? Moose? Elk? Deer? Etc?

 

 

Cool toys.....doesn't really seem relative but if you think that makes you an expert on logging industry in America...good for you!

 

Where did I say anything about eradication of anything, due to logging? 

 

Where did I say anything about anything not existing because of logging?

 

I'm not sure why you want to put words in my mouth, but I'd appreciate if you would stop, maybe buy less cool toys and do as I suggested to the OP and do a little research on logging in the US.

On 2/7/2021 at 4:36 PM, wiiawiwb said:

 

 

I'll stand corrected-- you did not say most. You did say "more" which in the context you were speaking is the equivalent to most.

Its ok to be wrong, but most embarrassing when you double down IMO. 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

25 minutes ago, Foxhill said:

Cool toys.....doesn't really seem relative but if you think that makes you an expert on logging industry in America...good for you!

 

Where did I say anything about eradication of anything, due to logging? 

 

Where did I say anything about anything not existing because of logging?

 

I'm not sure why you want to put words in my mouth, but I'd appreciate if you would stop, maybe buy less cool toys and do as I suggested to the OP and do a little research on logging in the US.

Its ok to be wrong, but most embarrassing when you double down IMO. 

I can tell that your inability to articulate your thoughts is causing you a certain amount of frustration here.  

 

Perhaps you could begin by explaining your meaning behind this statement:

 

"I would think the ramifications of nearly the whole continental US being logged multiple times would be obvious, as it relates to any undiscovered species."

 

What ramifications?  Why would those ramifications be obvious and how exactly would they related to an undiscovered species?  What do you mean when you say 'logged multiple times'?  That gives the impression that you are trying to say that entire country has been logged repeatedly...that there is no section that remains untouched nor have any of these areas regained growth of timber.  Perhaps you mean something else? 

 

You obviously have a point that you would like to make here, but are having difficulties expressing it.