Scent associated with encounters

[Backdoc]

21 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

Predators that hunt 'point blank' do not give up their location. The scent that makes the hair on the back of your neck stand up is not a constant release from Sasquatch. The human sense of smell is not that great. Many odors exist below out threshold of detection. Ask your wife. Women have a different sense of smell than men.

 

 

Some animals can see a limited range of color.  Some can smell a limited range of smell.  Some animals have the kind of receptors which receive or respond to some pheromone where that same pheromone chemical is useless to another type of animal.  

 

Bigfoot would be the Hide-and-Seek Champion.   We can explain this in many ways.  One of the assumptions would be Bigfoot knows we are there long before we arrive.  I doubt they have People Radar so it's more likely to be some sense that warns them we are coming.  Maybe its hearing, sight, or smell.   Whatever these were, they were foiled during the PGF incident.  Maybe things like the wind direction or the sound of the running water was just enough to allow Roger and Bob to get lucky.

 

What we do know is not so much some ability Bigfoot might possess so much as the report traits bigfoot exhibited to Roger and Bob.    Some of these things should point to a profile of traits which may be helpful in seeing/ finding one again with intention vs dumb luck of a random encounter.

 

1)  Bigfoot was near water so we might assume that could be a link in the future

2)  Bigfoot was in the deeper wilderness/ woods

3)  Bigfoot smelled like a wet dog.  Thus, bigfoot had a detectable (to us) smell.

 

 

1 and 2 are a given.   #3 is a trait we may be able to use somehow to our advantage.   

[Catmandoo]

11 hours ago, Backdoc said:

Whatever these were, they were foiled during the PGF incident. 

 Good points in your post BD. However, the first axiom of Sasquatch is that they find you, you do not find them.

Rodger and Bob may have been 'school'. The behavior of Patty will always be debated. All animals watch horses. A horse watching session presented itself. Patty could have cloaked. The movement of Patty in the way of a 'lead-away' procedure could have been 'exit....stage right' and possibly to school her offspring in the behavior of humans and horses. We will never know. Many animals and birds do a 'lead--away' and 'look back' procedure.

Water is the common denominator for all animals. Artesian wells are important to check out since they are limited in surface area and visited by many animals.

Using smell has challenges. Smoke from forest fires reaches Seattle and has a strong odor and visual presence at times. There are regional and seasonal differences of course. Clean mountain air is a pleasure but sometimes we are denied.

[Backdoc]

Two types of encounters are possible:

 

1)   A random occurrence (Surprise!)

2)  An intentional hunt with success.

 

I would make the argument there has never been in the history of a Bigfoot a #2 encounter.  ALL reported Bigfoot encounters have been random occurrences- a #1 encounter.   Roger and Bob went to Northern California to see tracks and film them. They never went there to hunt bigfoot itself and must have assumed to do so would be a long shot.   Then, after weeks of travel all over the Bluff Creek area, they came around the giant tree fall and had a #1 Encounter. That is, a complete random unexpected encounter with Patty.  Clearly Patty was also surprised because had she known they were coming I have to think she would have hidden.   

 

We might think whatever motivated her to take a chance and get out into the open on a sunny day must have been worth the risk to her.  But what was real the risk?   We assume she might even think a risk existed when- to her mind- maybe it didn't.  She is at the top of the food chain.  For all we know, she had never in her life even seen a human being before.  If she had, she may have waited until night to go grub hunting or whatever.   Further, she may have reasoned she was down low and hidden by the tree.   In her entire life (maybe she was young and foolish) her world until the time may have been devoid of human contact.  We assume such creatures have encountered people and thus, are good at hiding and observing them.   We seem to think Bigfeet somehow know to be suspicious.   We attribute these traits to explain why we never see bigfoot instead of thinking in reality it may be because 1) they are few in number and 2) they may never normally see people.   

 

There is nothing Patty did any different than what animals do all the time.  It's typical behavior. People are spotted and animals just trot away.   Sure, Urbanized deer loose their fear of people and come up and eat the flowers in my yard.  But that is after long hours of becoming tame to people.  If Bigfoot was as good as some think they are, they would never be seen in the first place.

 

 

From Patty's standpoint she was in the area and obviously perceived no threat.  She goes out in the open with no concern or she wouldn't have been there.  Then she took off taking the easiest path to walk away.   That is why she walked away.   She wasn't leading anyone away form her young.  She just went the path of least resistance.   She could have going up the hill and into the woods- a more direct path- but a harder path to move through.  Maybe she didn't want to turn her back on  the people threat.   

 

 

 

What you have is an animal who probably never saw people in her life.  She sees an open creek bed and was hungry   She went down to eat or drink.  she had no worries or threat.   She stoops down to the creek and the sound of running water downs out Roger and Bob.   Next thing she is as surprised as Bob, Roger, and the horses were.  She stood up and walked away.

 

The PGF was a random encounter which would be only an eyewitness report if they hadn't had a great camera with them.  If not, it would have been one more encounter with no visual evidence.

 

Bigfeet are so few in number they would operate in places devoid of human contact.  Most probably live their entire life never encountering a human.   If this was not the case, we would have reports often of bigfoot sightings.  

 

 

 

Edited June 19 by Backdoc

[Huntster]

6 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

Two types of encounters are possible:

 

1)   A random occurrence (Surprise!)

2)  An intentional hunt with success.

 

I would make the argument there has never been in the history of a Bigfoot a #2 encounter.........

 

I disagree. In both the PG filming event and Freeman filming event, the photographers intentionally went into the field seeking a sasquatch, successfully filmed a sasquatch, and obtained footprint casts of the filmed sasquatch at the film site.

[Backdoc]

I could have it wrong I’ll clearly admit but I never heard an interview where Roger or Gimlin ever claimed they were intending to film Bigfoot.   Their intention was to film footprints.   Clearly if they happen to get a film of bigfoot they would take it.  That was never their primary mission based on what Roger stated at the time or anything I ever heard Bob and Roger state.   As for freeman I think it’s a nothing, misidentification or a hoax    

[Huntster]

5 hours ago, Backdoc said:

……..I never heard an interview where Roger or Gimlin ever claimed they were intending to film Bigfoot.   Their intention was to film footprints.   Clearly if they happen to get a film of bigfoot they would take it.  That was never their primary mission based on what Roger stated at the time or anything I ever heard Bob and Roger state……  

Had they stated the intention to film a Sasquatch, that very statement would have been used against them as evidence of a hoax.

 

When I go “bear hunting”, I’m hunting for sign. Sightings. If I get a shot at the right bear, great. I’m picky. I see bears regularly, but rarely shoot. But I’m bear hunting.

 

When I go “caribou hunting”  I also carry bear tags (black and grizzly) and sheep tags. Am I bear or sheep hunting? Yup….maybe….if the right specimen presents me with a shot.

 

Supposedly, they were filming scenes for a sasquatch documentary. They were smart enough to do it in prime sasquatch habitat, where fresh sign was reported, and encounters had been reported for the previous twelve years. 
 

Even if they were just going to film footprints, they were successful, and just happened to film the creature actually making the footprints they filmed.

 

Quote

………As for freeman I think it’s a nothing, misidentification or a hoax    

Paul Freeman was the best sasquatch hunter that ever lived.

 

 

Edited June 20 by Huntster

[xspider1]

yeah, I'm still undecided about the Freeman footage.  Why would that creature apparently need to stare at its feet while walking?  Anywho, regarding the smells:

 

I recently learned something new about dogs when my Gracie came home from a trip to the woods stinking to high heaven.  I always wondered why she rolls around and rubs her body on the ground seemingly at random and I never thought about it too much until that day.  peeUhhh! lol The funk in the truck on the way home was almost unbearable.  Then I read different theories which all made sense:  1.) dogs roll in the carcasses of dead animals as a throw-back to their hunting days as wolves when they needed to mask their scent from other animals.  2.) they do that as a way of distinguishing their smell to be kind of a big-shot to other dogs.  3.) they just like the way dead animals smell.  Either way it was rough for a couple of days!!  (Gracie will not "bathe" - she only takes dirt baths, but baby wipes did help a little bit!  hah)  not sure if a Sasquatch would employ any of those tactics, but who knows?     

 

 

 

Edited June 20 by xspider1

[Catmandoo]

On 6/16/2024 at 1:55 PM, Darkwing said:

The MABRC is looking at the viability of Bigfoot using scents for the markers that they may be making in the woods, this is basically what most every mammal out there does, marking their territory with scent, so why not Bigfoot doing it to mark their markers, making it easier for them to locate these markers in heavy brush, at night time and more.  The technology exists to measure scents, it's just beyond reasonable cost to procure it.  

 

Just spit balling here.  To 'measure scents' is a yes-no / go, no-go classification.  Breathing and the glands in armpits release VOCs. VOCs are highly volatile with a high vapor pressure. I did a cursory Google search to find the ionic charge of VOCs and found nothing so far. There are Air Ion detectors available that don't cost an arm & a leg. Sampling with an Air Ion detector for animals is an unknown. An initial test of function would be with 2nd hand dog food vapors. A forest animal test would be with the scents that one purchases at sporting goods stores for olfactory signaling with deer pee and elk pee etc., etc.. Coyotes and black bears love deer pee. And then there would be real field testing. VOCs would have to have some durability to act as a trail marker. Air Ion detectors / counters are a huge question. For about a thousand dollars, one can jump into the Air Ion arena. If you buy one, just tell them that you are checking for radon gas in your house.

 

I started out spit balling, and now I am out of spit.

Edited Saturday at 06:07 AM by Catmandoo
text

[Backdoc]

^^^
 

 

I'm hopeful of any tech which can increase the odds of seeing/ filming Bigfoot.    The smell thing just seems like a better option vs line of sight but I’ll take whatever would work.   I was in an airport where they “smelled” inside one of our bags.   They aimed a device near our bag and seemed to spray air and smelled for dangerous particles and traces.    
 

 

love for anything like this to be used for bigfoot esp on a large scale if possible 

 

 

Always wondered what could be done if seeing/ spotting / finding Bigfoot was manhunt involving a matter of urgent national security or something.   How much $$$$, men, and tech could be involved and how effective might it be. 

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 01:36 PM by Backdoc