norseman Posted October 28, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted October 28, 2022 https://vividmaps.com/moose-population-in-america/ We have a lot here. Despite Elk and Deer populations. I was surprised to see them in the oilfield in North Dakota. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted October 29, 2022 Moderator Share Posted October 29, 2022 Like I said " it be a rare sighting of moose if you see one in the UP of Michigan". I think that you will see a Sasquatch before you see a moose in the UP. But that is just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted October 29, 2022 Share Posted October 29, 2022 56 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said: Like I said " it be a rare sighting of moose if you see one in the UP of Michigan". I think that you will see a Sasquatch before you see a moose in the UP. But that is just my opinion. A quick google shows a 2019 survey of 500 or so Moose in the UP. Probably not quit that many BF up there. 🤷🏻 A moose sighting is still pretty rare up there so I get your meaning though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 (edited) If Harrison Hot Springs is a hot spot for Bigfoot activity, shouldn’t we be looking there? Trail cams and so on? I don’t know how we define Hot Spot as a hot spot might be an area where there are a handful of occasional sightings over a number of years. Such areas sound more like a Luke warm spots if that. Edited November 9, 2022 by Backdoc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKH Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 Who do you keep referring to as "we"? People do many forms of research there and other places, sometimes known as hot spots. The people who do such have their own networks IRL, or typically other places online. Some folks share here, but it's not that often, IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC witness Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 We are looking there, Backdoc. The late John Green and Rene Dahinden spent most of their time in that area, as did Bill Miller. Thomas Steenburg and I spent many days right in the area of this report over a decade, at least, with Bill, and independently, and still do, along with other members of our local research group on a regular basis. We follow up on every report we get from the area, and spend many hours looking for tracks and other types of sign. The area is vast, steep, and very heavily forested, but we do our best to cover as much of it as possible. Harrison Lake - Wikipedia 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 10 hours ago, Backdoc said: If Harrison Hot Springs is a hot spot for Bigfoot activity, shouldn’t we be looking there? Trail cams and so on? I don’t know how we define Hot Spot as a hot spot might be an area where there are a handful of occasional sightings over a number of years. Such areas sound more like a Luke warm spots if that. You know you're allowed to go out in to the woods... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted November 9, 2022 Admin Author Share Posted November 9, 2022 11 hours ago, Backdoc said: If Harrison Hot Springs is a hot spot for Bigfoot activity, shouldn’t we be looking there? Trail cams and so on? I don’t know how we define Hot Spot as a hot spot might be an area where there are a handful of occasional sightings over a number of years. Such areas sound more like a Luke warm spots if that. They gave me a tour when I was getting my jet boat worked on. Its squatchy!😉 Beautiful area! You said your more of a urban guy. So you probably don't get out much. But thats OK because we need guys like you to identify hot spots for us. Crunch the data. Gather the reports. Guys like me generally hate that stuff. But admittedly its a useful tool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 (edited) ^^ I'm here in Iowa so it's small-town Midwest. It's all great with more life and activities than you might think. Iowa is clearly not the PNW. I have traveled to places like the Rocky Mountains of Colorado. Impressive and beautiful but they are more 'peopled' than the PNW. When we think of Bigfoot hot spots I can pretty much guarantee Iowa is not one of them. If there were some reports here and there, they are very much likely to be anything other than Bigfoot. It is logical to me the PNW would be a potential hot spot. The same thing it has going for it-- the massive wasteness of wilderness and expansive resources all the way to Canda-is the same thing making an encounter a long shot. A Billy the Kid- type person said he robbed banks because "that is where the money is". We need to go where the money is as far as increasing odds of a Bigfoot encounter or sighting. It's not Iowa. If 50-60 planes have gone down over years in the PNW never to be found that tells you something. If a plane went down in Iowa, they would find it before lunch time. Edited November 9, 2022 by Backdoc 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 2 hours ago, Duckman said: You know you're allowed to go out in to the woods... Yes Haha Oh yes. Many do. Many are brilliant Outdoor Vets of the terrain and conditions. I don't know if the numbers support this, but it seems to me most people who report a Bigfoot encounter are those who happen to be in the woods near a path or lake or whatever. They usually aren't looking for bigfoot, but instead stumble across him randomly. The encounters are brief - too brief to get a camera out quickly. The idea of a bunch of trial cameras is increasing the number of eyes looking. If you and I and a 20 people spent a few days in the woods would be lucky to search a speck in a giant area off the PNW. Then, we go back to our lives. If bigfoot is out there the leaving a bunch of cameras out there would increase the odds. Trail Cams give: 1- Higher number of eyes equal to greater than a search party 2- Silent 3- don't get tired and work 24 /7 4- Cover the area and line of site where they are placed as long as the battery holds. A search party cannot match this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 3 hours ago, Duckman said: You know you're allowed to go out in to the woods... Are you sure? That's Canada. Everything is regulated even more than the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backdoc Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 15 hours ago, BC witness said: We are looking there, Backdoc. The late John Green and Rene Dahinden spent most of their time in that area, as did Bill Miller. Thomas Steenburg and I spent many days right in the area of this report over a decade, at least, with Bill, and independently, and still do, along with other members of our local research group on a regular basis. We follow up on every report we get from the area, and spend many hours looking for tracks and other types of sign. The area is vast, steep, and very heavily forested, but we do our best to cover as much of it as possible. Harrison Lake - Wikipedia I saw Bill Miller in Bigfoot's Reflection on Netflix and Lake Harrison looked pretty remote to me. The points Bill made about the expansive nature of Lake Harrison and those woods were logical and powerful. He said, "You could drive miles and miles all day long and see footprints of bears and so on and yet you don't see a single one" Locals know bears are there by footprints but you might go all day and not even see one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 4 hours ago, Huntster said: Are you sure? That's Canada. Everything is regulated even more than the U.S. Hahaha, that's an excellent point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted November 9, 2022 Share Posted November 9, 2022 5 hours ago, Backdoc said: Yes Haha Oh yes. Many do. Many are brilliant Outdoor Vets of the terrain and conditions. I don't know if the numbers support this, but it seems to me most people who report a Bigfoot encounter are those who happen to be in the woods near a path or lake or whatever. They usually aren't looking for bigfoot, but instead stumble across him randomly. The encounters are brief - too brief to get a camera out quickly. The idea of a bunch of trial cameras is increasing the number of eyes looking. If you and I and a 20 people spent a few days in the woods would be lucky to search a speck in a giant area off the PNW. Then, we go back to our lives. If bigfoot is out there the leaving a bunch of cameras out there would increase the odds. Trail Cams give: 1- Higher number of eyes equal to greater than a search party 2- Silent 3- don't get tired and work 24 /7 4- Cover the area and line of site where they are placed as long as the battery holds. A search party cannot match this. Except for the fact that trail camera's are absolutely useless in the hunt for bigfoot. Even if you manage to get a good photo, the vast majority of people would day that it's a hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted November 10, 2022 Share Posted November 10, 2022 Don't tell that to those who dragged up the 15 year old Jacob's photo (again and again!) and decided for some reason that it needed another going over. The mantra around here for years has been that photos aren't proof and yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts