Is The Skookum Cast Still Considered To Be A Potential Bigfoot Lay?

[starchunk]

On 3/25/2017 at 9:34 PM, norseman said:

 

Sasquatch tracks!?

A general reference to whatever is in the area. The point being if you are consistently out in the same area for a prolonged period of time you develop knowledge of what's there, what's normal in way of back ground noise, what animals, etc

[norseman]

It depends on the animal and it's home range. Some animals are hard to find tracks of because they pass through so infrequently.

 

Hooved animals also make easier to see tracks than non hooved animals. Some heavy use bear trails are just matted down linear areas with no discerable tracks. Not unlike a human trail down to the beach at a well used campground.

[joebeelart]

In reference to Norseman's comments:  One of the techniques I often use when taking people up the hill is to show them a deer track.  Doe, buck, yearling?  But most importantly, if we are not in snow, I ask them to show me the other three tracks that match the one observed.  And, after that, to show me not the next set of tracks made by the four hooves, but the third set in succession.  It is rare that a new observer can make it that far along a track line.

 

I'm just mentioning this in regards to the discussion of track rarity and repetitiveness in regards to hooved animals.  With luck we'll find a bear track. 

 

In our area of interest, depending on the population cycle, in the Cascades there is about one bear per two square miles during population peaks and one bear per four - five square miles at the bottom of the cycle.  So, the idea is to tell people that bears are fairly common and that we should "easily" find a track in three-four hours of wandering.  Often, if there is no snow, no bear track is found, mainly because new people don't go near water much, they like to stay "up high" where they can see things and not fight brush. 

 

Then, the exercise in finding succeeding bear tracks in the track line proves much more difficult than with hooved animals.  Now, let me go "wild" and estimate one Bigfoot per 10-20 square miles depending on habitat.  How many track finds and how often?  I feel successful if I'm up 20 plus days a year, spend a lot of time afoot and find one unmistakable Bigfoot track.  Two or three in a line is a very rare treat.  So, I'm just saying that a "researcher" must       persevere and not go up the hill to find Bigfoot tracks.  You better have something else on your alleged mind.   

 

When I had the film crew from Missouri up for several days and they stumbled on their first track -- which was obviously left as a marker of some kind -- they were astounded.  It was in mud beside a creek next to a game trail crossing.  I was over a little ridge so by the time I got there the fellow carrying their "black" box had slipped and ruined it, but fortunately they had photographed it.  Well, enough rambling for now except for one more "thing." 

 

The story behind the photo:  Managed to stay dry that night with only a tarp, but I was alone so that made it easier.  This point is about 15 miles {no exaggeration} from the nearest often used road, and by often, since I often camp near it, I mean 1 truck per hour per summer day, maybe 1-2 during the night.   That night, after the rain, one came around and walked around camp leaving several tracks.  So the moral of the story is to go to where they are and let them come to you.       

[Twist]

I think that last line Joe is the key.  Let them come to you.  It would take exceptional luck  and skill to stalk/hint one given our current knowledge base.

[BobbyO]

Again, again, again, we are the bait.

 

Lure them in, they will come.

[starchunk]

On 3/26/2017 at 4:31 PM, DWA said:

Quoting evidence cinches my case.  There are no elk tracks where they must be in the Skookum Cast for that to be an elk.  And what would you know about the BFRO?  I'm not trusting anybody who seems to think elk levitate, personally.

 

Enough to know that their senior leadership operates on a for profit motive and is involved in entertainment concerns (finding bigfoot specifically). Beyond that you look for the most likely culprit for a find like with without bias. Greatest likelihood, it's elk. 

 

As for the profit motive and entertainment involvement; it taints motives. Misidentifications dont amount to ratings or dollars, in my opinion.

[norseman]

Except that it wasn't the BFRO having the last say.....no matter their motivation. 

 

The cast changed Phd Darius Swindler's mind about Bigfoot as a long time skeptic. Also Meldrum and Sarmiento looked at it as well.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daris_Swindler

 

So your wrong if you think science was not in the loop, and that only the opinions of amatuer bigfooters was being taken.

[starchunk]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

Except that it wasn't the BFRO having the last say.....no matter their motivation. 

 

The cast changed Phd Darius Swindler's mind about Bigfoot as a long time skeptic. Also Meldrum and Sarmiento looked at it as well.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daris_Swindler

 

So your wrong if you think science was not in the loop, and that only the opinions of amatuer bigfooters was being taken.

 

Can't speak to the PhD. But Meldrum and Sarmiento have basically become celebrities at this point so they are not unbiased scientists on the matter at this point.

[norseman]

Yah Swindler was a big deal in Primatology. He also helped with the Ted Bundy case. He last taught at U of W. The skookum cast changed his mind about Bigfoot.

 

I mispelled his first name, it's "Daris", he has since passed on.

 

Im not trying to convince you of anything. But we are not taking the BFROs word for it, that it's a Bigfoot. One of the leading scientists in primate anatomy declared it a Bigfoot and not an Elk.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Primate-Gross-Anatomy/dp/029595261X

 

So naturally we sat up and took notice. But this cast like all casts will never prove anything to science. We need the body that made the cast....,

 

 

[starchunk]

On 3/31/2017 at 5:23 PM, norseman said:

Yah Swindler was a big deal in Primatology. He also helped with the Ted Bundy case. He last taught at U of W. The skookum cast changed his mind about Bigfoot.

 

I mispelled his first name, it's "Daris", he has since passed on.

 

Im not trying to convince you of anything. But we are not taking the BFROs word for it, that it's a Bigfoot. One of the leading scientists in primate anatomy declared it a Bigfoot and not an Elk.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Atlas-Primate-Gross-Anatomy/dp/029595261X

 

So naturally we sat up and took notice. But this cast like all casts will never prove anything to science. We need the body that made the cast....,

 

 

In that we agree. After all this time the skookum elk lay has never been proven as otherwise and in my opinion the burden of proof would be with those seeking to give it bigfoot status.

[norseman]

If the Skookum cast was PROVEN to be that of a Bigfoot? Then we would be naming a new species of Primate correct?

 

Science don't work that way.....what comes first the chicken or the egg?

 

All of the dental resin in the world will NOT do what one well placed bullet WILL do. We need the foot that fits the glass slipper.....not the glass slipper.

 

But the defense that it's an Elk lay, simply because Bigfoot doesn't exist, doesn't fly on this forum or in cryptozoology in general.

 

What it is, is above my pay grade, but I certainly listened to what scientists had to say about it including Swindler.

[scottv]

Has anyone tried to repeat the conditions that produced the imprint? Use bait/attractant for tracking station or a trail camera?

[norseman]

I feed deer blocks every winter in snow.

[scottv]

Have you had any luck? How many blocks do you use and what spacing? I'm thinking like a trap line, e.g. 20 bait stations spaced every 200 meters or so.

[norseman]

Great success on white tails, Elk and turkeys.