Jump to content

Estimating Sasquatch Population


Explorer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Many of us in BFF have suggested in the past that sasquatch habitat is very similar to black bear habitat because they are usually found in the same places (with diversity of food and plenty of water sources).

 

BugMaster created a map where he overlaid the sasquatch sighting reports over the black bear habitat in USA (see link below for his original posts).  

I am reposting his map, FYI.

 

https://bigfootforums.com/topic/80034-species-distribution-model-and-ssr/?do=findComment&comment=1114768

 

One way of estimating sasquatch populations is to anchor on black bear populations and then estimate a range (10th to 90th percentiles) for the density ratio between sasquatch and black bears.

My initial guesses are:

P10 = Sasquatch density = 1/1,000 black bear density

P50 = Sasquatch density = 1/100 black bear density

P90 = Sasquatch density = 1/10 black bear density

 

When we apply those ratios to the estimates of black bear populations by state we end up with the table below.

It shows a black bear population in the USA of ~460,000 (excluding Wyoming that is missing the data).

From this, the 80% confidence estimate for sasquatch population range from 460 to 46,000 with a median of 4,600.

 

It helps to do a reality check by focusing on single states like WA and CA that have lots of sighting reports.

 

For CA, the p10, p50, and p90 estimates for sasquatch population would be 30, 300, and 3,000. 

That looks like a reasonable broad range given the continued presence reports along the whole Sierra Nevada and up north in the Klamath National Forests.

 

The range is similar for WA, with the p10, p50, and p90 estimates at 28, 280, and 2,800. 

 

 

The sasquatch population estimates appear low for such large states.

Nonetheless, CA has a large human population while the number of public sighting reports per year is very low.

Although, we  truly do not know how many actual visual sightings occur every year in any state.

 

I do not know how big a breeding sustainable sasquatch population has to be, but the p10 estimates appear too low for long term survival.

 

 

Bear Habitat vs Sasquatach Reports Map.png

Using Bear Populations to Estimate Sasquatch Populations.jpg

Edited by Explorer
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few questions that quickly come to mind on the subject I would need to think about.   Maybe some food for thoughts for others.   Its on of my favorite Sasquatch topics as I feel it is a huge piece of the puzzle.  

 

1.  What is the likely hood or of a witness reporting Sasquatch vs. bear and how does this effect reports?

2. Does Sasquatch intelligence hinder report numbers? Is Sasquatch intelligent???

3. Food Sources and availability?  How does this play into sighting reports for both species?

4. Are Sasquatch Migratory and or Nomadic?  How could this play into reports? 

5.  Do they compete for territory / food source?

6.  Breeding - All things encompassed in this, is there a season, litter size (I'd assume 1 typical, twins rare???), infant / young fatality rate.   etc.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Engaged Member
BFF Donor

Wow. Lots of questions. 

It is my opinion that there is a very good explanation for the habitats being shared.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • gigantor featured this topic
On 3/27/2022 at 10:58 AM, Explorer said:

Many of us in BFF have suggested in the past that sasquatch habitat is very similar to black bear habitat because they are usually found in the same places (with diversity of food and plenty of water sources).

 

BugMaster created a map where he overlaid the sasquatch sighting reports over the black bear habitat in USA (see link below for his original posts).  

I am reposting his map, FYI.

 

https://bigfootforums.com/topic/80034-species-distribution-model-and-ssr/?do=findComment&comment=1114768

 

One way of estimating sasquatch populations is to anchor on black bear populations and then estimate a range (10th to 90th percentiles) for the density ratio between sasquatch and black bears.

My initial guesses are:

P10 = Sasquatch density = 1/1,000 black bear density

P50 = Sasquatch density = 1/100 black bear density

P90 = Sasquatch density = 1/10 black bear density

 

When we apply those ratios to the estimates of black bear populations by state we end up with the table below.

It shows a black bear population in the USA of ~460,000 (excluding Wyoming that is missing the data).

From this, the 80% confidence estimate for sasquatch population range from 460 to 46,000 with a median of 4,600.

 

It helps to do a reality check by focusing on single states like WA and CA that have lots of sighting reports.

 

For CA, the p10, p50, and p90 estimates for sasquatch population would be 30, 300, and 3,000. 

That looks like a reasonable broad range given the continued presence reports along the whole Sierra Nevada and up north in the Klamath National Forests.

 

The range is similar for WA, with the p10, p50, and p90 estimates at 28, 280, and 2,800. 

 

 

The sasquatch population estimates appear low for such large states.

Nonetheless, CA has a large human population while the number of public sighting reports per year is very low.

Although, we  truly do not know how many actual visual sightings occur every year in any state.

 

I do not know how big a breeding sustainable sasquatch population has to be, but the p10 estimates appear too low for long term survival.

 

 

Bear Habitat vs Sasquatach Reports Map.png

Using Bear Populations to Estimate Sasquatch Populations.jpg


A bit like Goldilocks and the 3 bears….

 

10 percent and the creature is well on its way to extinction. 90 percent and we would have found one by now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, norseman said:


A bit like Goldilocks and the 3 bears….

 

10 percent and the creature is well on its way to extinction. 90 percent and we would have found one by now.

 

 

Exactly, Norseman.

 

The idea is to guesstimate an 80% confidence interval.

 

An upper ceiling of a sasquatch density equal to black bear is not reasonable or credible, but maybe that p90 is not only possible but also probable.

 

Granted, this guesstimating only makes sense if we are talking about a real animal that has the same constraints as any other wildlife in the forest and not a portal hopping creature or ET or multi-dimensional creature, etc....

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the movie Bigfoot's Reflection a BFF poster Bigfoothunter -Bill Miller (RIP)- makes the point of how rare it is to see normal animals in the wilderness around Lake Harrison area of Canada.  He stated you can travel all day and not see a bear and so on when we know they are in the area.    If Bigfoot exists, the number must be extremely small to near extinct.    These numbers would be much smaller than common rare animals.   I remember Grover Kranz said something like 2,500 was his guess at one time.

 

2 number examples come to mind:

 

1- One of the first wolverine sightings ever in Yellowstone National Park  happen just weeks ago.   It was the only one ever caught on video.   The wolverine was spotted by 2 hikers.   It looked at the camera crossing the road and then trotted off in a manner similar to the PGF encounter.  Millions visit Yellowstone over the years and yet only one video of a wolverine sighting exists and that is just recently.   

 

2- In Virgina a few years ago, a lost autistic child Robert Woods was lost for an entire week in the Virginia woods.   It took 3,000-5,000 searchers with dogs and helicopters and special equipment 1 week to find the child in just a 3 miles search radius.    The boy's condition was such he ran away from people and he does not speak.  In this way, if we are looking for a real-world example of what a Bigfoot search really would entails this is the one.   Running away from people and not talking made him much harder to find.    Bigfoot is thought to be a quiet shy animal who also would get away from people searching for it.  But, in the case of the lost boy they had 1,000's of people covering a small area with every advantage.   It still took 1 week to find one person.   No such search has been mounted for Bigfoot.  Even if so, the area here was only a 3 mile radius.   

 

The search area for Bigfoot is just too big and the number of assumed Bigfoot are probably just too small.    Unless massive drones and trail cameras are used to expand the number of eyes out there, I just doubt there will ever be a successful Bigfoot search attempt.   Instead, there will only be occasional chance random encounters which might have a video thanks to cell phones.  For a search to have a chance to work a person cannot just go out in the woods and start looking around.   Need smoke to find the fire.    First a person would have to search near high level of recent activity.  If such a hot spot developed maybe hard work could pay off and one might see such a creature.  Unless the camera was ready quickly, I expect such an animal would be gone in a flash.    

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sésquac
BFF Donor
On 3/27/2022 at 10:25 AM, Twist said:

........What is the likely hood or of a witness reporting Sasquatch vs. bear and how does this effect reports?........

 

Good questions. In this one, I don't believe that people "report" black bear sightings to anybody who officially cares (area biologists), and like Northwind writes, many (if not most) people who see a sasquatch keep mum about it, though that might be changing due to the nature of today's bigfoot media themes vrs what was televised 40 years ago.

 

Also, with reference to the claim that many people see a bear and mistake it for a sasquatch (which is clearly true): the opposite must also be true. People see a sasquatch and believe they've seen a bear. One obvious reason that would be true is because people have been conditioned to believe that sasquatches don't exist, so it must have been a bear. What else could it have been?

 

I'd like to reference you to some reading that might answer this question for you to some extent. First is the Glickman report. In it he specifically discusses sasquach reports, and how media exposure to the phenomenon effects reports, as well as hiw report densities are sure to differ regionally with respect to the population densities of both people and sasquatches:

 

http://www.photekimaging.com/Support/rptcol2.pdf

 

Secondly, here is the page for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game listing their management reports for all big game species in the state, including both black bears and brown bears (but not polar bears, which are federally managed). These reports can reveal a huge wealth of kniwledge and understanding about how official biologists estimate population densities for bears in the different habitats, in addition to so much more. If you're interested in big game, this kind of reading is addictive:

 

http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=librarypublications.wildlifemanagement

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/27/2022 at 11:25 AM, Twist said:

A few questions that quickly come to mind on the subject I would need to think about.   Maybe some food for thoughts for others.   Its on of my favorite Sasquatch topics as I feel it is a huge piece of the puzzle.  

 

1.  What is the likely hood or of a witness reporting Sasquatch vs. bear and how does this effect reports?

2. Does Sasquatch intelligence hinder report numbers? Is Sasquatch intelligent???

3. Food Sources and availability?  How does this play into sighting reports for both species?

4. Are Sasquatch Migratory and or Nomadic?  How could this play into reports? 

5.  Do they compete for territory / food source?

6.  Breeding - All things encompassed in this, is there a season, litter size (I'd assume 1 typical, twins rare???), infant / young fatality rate.   etc.


1) It’s likely that it goes both ways. Except people would not report seeing a black bear to anyone normally. So any Bigfoot sighting mistaken as a Bear would likely go unreported. And how many black bear are mistakenly reported as Bigfoot? It depends on who you ask. Most skeptics would put that number at 100 percent. But there are other determinations to rule out a bear. What time of year was it? Was there footprints found? What activity was observed?

 

2) Obviously. We cannot seem to corner it in the wilds. All primates are intelligent. Great apes including humans are the most intelligent species on the planet.

 

3) Bears hibernate. Higher primates as a rule of thumb do not. Both are omnivores. So one would expect some overlap for roughly 3 seasons of the year. 
 

4) A male Griz has a home range of up to 2000 square miles. That’s almost twice the size of Rhode Island. A large omnivore living in a northern forest is going to need to be mobile to survive.

 

5) According to Indian legends and one report from a Alaskan fishermen. They do. And the bear gives ground.

 

6) It would not be advantageous to birth offspring in winter. Although higher primates don’t typically have seasons per say. Higher primates also rarely have twins compared to other animals. Orangutans are some of the best mothers on the planet and do not lose physical contact with their baby for like the first 5 years of their life. I highly doubt a baby Bigfoot is in much danger of anything except for maybe another male. Chimps are known to commit infanticide on male babies if the father is ousted or killed.

 

Its all conjecture. All we can do is extrapolate what we do know about other species. The biggest hurdle is winter. Where do they go? What do they do to survive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
SSR Team
On 3/27/2022 at 11:58 AM, Explorer said:

Many of us in BFF have suggested in the past that sasquatch habitat is very similar to black bear habitat because they are usually found in the same places (with diversity of food and plenty of water sources).

 

BugMaster created a map where he overlaid the sasquatch sighting reports over the black bear habitat in USA (see link below for his original posts).  

I am reposting his map, FYI.

 

https://bigfootforums.com/topic/80034-species-distribution-model-and-ssr/?do=findComment&comment=1114768

 

One way of estimating sasquatch populations is to anchor on black bear populations and then estimate a range (10th to 90th percentiles) for the density ratio between sasquatch and black bears.

My initial guesses are:

P10 = Sasquatch density = 1/1,000 black bear density

P50 = Sasquatch density = 1/100 black bear density

P90 = Sasquatch density = 1/10 black bear density

 

When we apply those ratios to the estimates of black bear populations by state we end up with the table below.

It shows a black bear population in the USA of ~460,000 (excluding Wyoming that is missing the data).

From this, the 80% confidence estimate for sasquatch population range from 460 to 46,000 with a median of 4,600.

 

It helps to do a reality check by focusing on single states like WA and CA that have lots of sighting reports.

 

For CA, the p10, p50, and p90 estimates for sasquatch population would be 30, 300, and 3,000. 

That looks like a reasonable broad range given the continued presence reports along the whole Sierra Nevada and up north in the Klamath National Forests.

 

The range is similar for WA, with the p10, p50, and p90 estimates at 28, 280, and 2,800. 

 

 

The sasquatch population estimates appear low for such large states.

Nonetheless, CA has a large human population while the number of public sighting reports per year is very low.

Although, we  truly do not know how many actual visual sightings occur every year in any state.

 

I do not know how big a breeding sustainable sasquatch population has to be, but the p10 estimates appear too low for long term survival.

 

 

Bear Habitat vs Sasquatach Reports Map.png

Using Bear Populations to Estimate Sasquatch Populations.jpg

Thanks for giving our map some credit! This is exactly why we made it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • gigantor unfeatured this topic

In the linked video below (at ~ 5 min), Dr. Meldrum provides his range estimate for the sasquatch population in Idaho at between 75 and 150.

This is a much narrower range that I provided above for Idaho (it is above my p10 estimate and below my p50 estimate).

I am not surprised by the narrow range estimate, since subject matter experts (in all fields) tend to be too overconfident about their range estimates.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSmXA9VYI8A

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Explorer said:

In the linked video below (at ~ 5 min), Dr. Meldrum provides his range estimate for the sasquatch population in Idaho at between 75 and 150.

This is a much narrower range that I provided above for Idaho (it is above my p10 estimate and below my p50 estimate).

I am not surprised by the narrow range estimate, since subject matter experts (in all fields) tend to be too overconfident about their range estimates.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSmXA9VYI8A

 

 

 

And he has nothing more to go on than the rest of us. He's essentially guessing to.

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Steering Committee
BFF Donor
2 minutes ago, zeebob889 said:

 

And he has nothing more to go on than the rest of us. He's essentially guessing to.

 

I get the impression you're not a fan of Dr. Meldrum.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

I get the impression you're not a fan of Dr. Meldrum.

 

Why does it  have to be about dislike. I'm neither a fan or disparager. Simply pointing out the obvious, we have no baseline specimen, thus noone knows anything more than anyone else. It's all conjecture until that point. Yes, he's a primatologist, a mormon belief influenced primatologist (or so its been suggested elsewhere online). I would take his thoughts over Moneymaker's who is clearly in it for the money, but he like anyone else doing this has yet to earn the pedestal.

  • Thanks 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sésquac
BFF Donor
1 hour ago, zeebob889 said:

 

And he has nothing more to go on than the rest of us. He's essentially guessing to.

 

We all have the same estimating tools. That really boils down to report densities. In the case of comparing those report densities to known black bear densities, the ratio estimate can obviously vary. Explorers table above gives three options: 1/10, 1/100, and 1/1000. My own preferred ratio to black bears for the past 20 years has been 1/200, and Dr. Meldrum's sasquatch population density estimate for Idaho (and I don't now what he bases that on) is near mine (125). Yes, all this is speculative, but the sasquatch report densities are remarkably identical to black bear range and densities. The most likely reasons are:

 

1) Sasquatch sightings are actually black bear sightings, or

2) Sasquatches and black bears share habitats.

 

Can you suggest other options?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...