Correlations Between Seasons And Sighting Elevations?

[bipedalist]

Seems correlation to the development of the personal computer and modem use (internet, bulletin boards) and widespread availability beginning in the early to mid nineties is in part responsible in additon to newsletters and databases that began to springboard off Bluff Creek PGF incident as well.

Would it help accentuate the density/dispersion during that blue snow storm at all to look at the datapoints as a scatterplot or scattergram with simply the datapoints not connected by lines?

[Guest]

Wow! The spring sighting elevations are interesting! Never would've thought they'd be higher than summer. But yeah, there might be something special going on in spring, like births, or plants, etc. (Are there special plants that grow at higher elevations?) I've often wondered if they have a mating season. Having babies in the winter time would seem detrimental to the young ones survival, unless they stay in caves, or something. For them to have babies, it would seem if they didn't have them in dens that they'd want to be as far away from any danger as possible. If they had a mating season it would more than likely be around summer time.

Good work, fellas! Interesting data.

[gigantor]

Wow! The spring sighting elevations are interesting! Never would've thought they'd be higher than summer.

I wouldn't draw any conclusion yet bro, we should look at more localized data, which will be coming later tonight.

It seems BobbyO is having himself a heyday calculating targeted averages, etc and I don't want to steal any of his thunder. So I'll just focus on a more general area, the big pic if you will. That way we split the labor.

Seems correlation to the development of the personal computer and modem use (internet, bulletin boards) and widespread availability beginning in the early to mid nineties is in part responsible in additon to newsletters and databases that began to springboard off Bluff Creek PGF incident as well.

I accept that and agree for the mid 80's forward, but what about the 70's? I wonder if most of those reports were logged years after the fact.

Would it help accentuate the density/dispersion during that blue snow storm at all to look at the datapoints as a scatterplot or scattergram with simply the datapoints not connected by lines?

Good suggestion, I think it does a little. Notice Excel suuuucks, it won't go back before 1900, and there a bunch of those in the dataset. It also won't let me control the x axis, it just does what it wants. I need a better spreasheet program...

Edited November 10, 2011 by gigantor

[bipedalist]

Yes, mid 80's on the pc, didn't get around to correcting that. Another observation would be that around 1960 the trend toward greater numbers above 2000ft. begins. How does that correspond in some areas to construction of the interstate highway system I wonder? Thanks for the scatterplot I think it helps a tad.

[gigantor]

Yeah, the more I look at, the more it helps.

I agree, I guess technology and economic success, which yielded disposable income/time, could have contributed also. There were simply more people with the time, money and technology to climb higher.

On the other hand, maybe population encroachment and global warming forced the BF to retreat to higher elevations.

[gigantor]

I made some plots of the PNW area. I selected a square (50N, 129W and 40N,107W), the pic below is the approximate area.

Below is the scatter plot af all sightings for the area between 1999 and 2010.

And individual years.

I think this confirms that sightings in the winter occur at lower elevations.

[BobbyO]

It would be good if we have a summary of all these results, so that they're all in one place. In spreadsheet form...

I got em safe on Excel G, no probs there..

Wow! The spring sighting elevations are interesting! Never would've thought they'd be higher than summer. But yeah, there might be something special going on in spring, like births, or plants, etc. (Are there special plants that grow at higher elevations?)

Yeah don't take too much notice of that PacNW, that was just one ( of the smaller ) Wilderness areas also with only 10 Sightings, the Alpine Lakes data would be more accurate as it is bigger & has more Sighting to crunch numbers of..

I'll do the Olympics today/tonight as i believe they'll be even more helpful due to the Reports and the fact that it's the biggest Wilderness in WA..

I made some plots of the PNW area. I selected a square (50N, 129W and 40N,107W), the pic below is the approximate area.

Below is the scatter plot af all sightings for the area between 1999 and 2010.

And individual years.

I think this confirms that sightings in the winter occur at lower elevations.

HUGE thumbs up G..

[gigantor]

Next, I chose the area south of the PNW (40N, 123W and 35N, 102W). The pic below shows the approximate area.

Here is the scatter plot for all sighting in the area from 1999 to 2010.

And the individual years.

Uhh, the pattern is not just in the PNW.

Edited November 11, 2011 by gigantor

[BobbyO]

Ok, Olympic Wilderness & Sightings within 5 Miles of it and we're back to the same order of Seasons >> Elevations as the Alpine Lakes Wilderness..

Reports = 42 in Total

38% in Summer

43% in Fall

14% in Spring

5% in Winter

Winter average is 790ft in elevation

Fall average is 1,016ft in elevation

Spring average is 1,405ft in elevation

Summer average is 1,533ft in elevation

Edited November 11, 2011 by BobbyO

[gigantor]

British Columbia and Alaska. (60N, 140W to 49N, 112W). The pic below shows the approximate area.

Below is the scatter plot for all sightings from 1999 to 2010.

And individual years.

Again, there is a clear pattern here.

[gigantor]

Arizona - New Mexico area (36N, 120W to 30N, 107W). The pic below shows the approximate area.

Scatter plot for all sightings from 1999 to 2010.

Individual years.

[gigantor]

Texas - Kansas (40N,107W to 25N,95W). The pic below shows the approximate area.

Individual years.

Edited November 14, 2011 by gigantor

[Guest LittleFeat]

First of all, great analysis of the data guys.

However, I just don't think that there's enough data to draw any conclusions about where they are located. I've thought about building a GIS database for the same reasons as you, except I don't have any confidence in the coordinates given for the sightings. I have a hunch that at least one large online database intentionally gives the wrong directions and and coordinates, unless of course the "investigators" are instead directionally-challenged. IMO the sample size is too small for valid statistical analysis.

Compounding the problem is the adage that (at least) two things have to take place for there to be a sighting:

1. A BF has to be in the area.
   
2. A person must be in the same area to make a sighting.
   

Plus, how do we know that BF live where they're sighted... maybe they're just visiting a food source that they only visit when they're passing thru the area once every five years. To me, there has to be a compelling reason for them to be where they are, for example, very difficult access, perennial springs, rivers or creeks, a healthy ungulate population, elevation over the surrounding land to see who's coming and going, etc.

There may be many BF at higher elevations, but most people tend to recreate in the lower elevation montane areas surrounding the high mountains. If more people explored higher elevations for extended periods of time, they may well find the BF "glory hole". By NOT having equal numbers of people exploring all elevations, the data is automatically skewed, because there's too many variables to predict.

Again, I don't mean to poo poo your analysis, because it's very well done, but you know what they say, "garbage in, garbage out".

[BobbyO]

First of all, great analysis of the data guys.

However, I just don't think that there's enough data to draw any conclusions about where they are located.

Well i'm initially focusing on WA, the State with i believe over 500 Reports in the BFRO Database & of course it's going to be incredibly to " locate " them, but i just felt with what i'm currently doing ( which i'm giving off little parts of it as i go along ) in looking at the correlation between BFRO Reports & the proximity of a designated Wilderness area ( within or within 5 miles of ) it may just give us an idea at least.

I have since added elevations >> seasons which i'm glad i did as i believe i'm finding out patterns, which may just help us locate them/one, you never know.

I've thought about building a GIS database for the same reasons as you, except I don't have any confidence in the coordinates given for the sightings. I have a hunch that at least one large online database intentionally gives the wrong directions and and coordinates, unless of course the "investigators" are instead directionally-challenged. IMO the sample size is too small for valid statistical analysis.

I'm not so sure, maybe they do, but one of the reasons i chose WA was that i am a little bit familiar with the areas i'm focusing on & if/when i'm stuck, i'd like to think i can call on a few Members of the Forum who are much more familiar with the specific areas who can help me.

I have come accross wrongly located pins in the Mangani Google Earth overlay ( are you aware of that program ? ) but with the one i'm doing my spreadsheet, i am able to " weed them out " & trash them which shouldn't affect my numbers..

Compounding the problem is the adage that (at least) two things have to take place for there to be a sighting:

1. A BF has to be in the area.
   
2. A person must be in the same area to make a sighting.
   

Of course, which is why i got pretty excited ( in a Geek kind of way ) when i looked into the North Cascades National Park ( earlier in this thread ), it's Year by Year & Month by Month visitors & found it what we did compared to other parks >> sighting ratios.

Plus, how do we know that BF live where they're sighted... maybe they're just visiting a food source that they only visit when they're passing thru the area once every five years. To me, there has to be a compelling reason for them to be where they are, for example, very difficult access, perennial springs, rivers or creeks, a healthy ungulate population, elevation over the surrounding land to see who's coming and going, etc.

We don't know anything LFF, that's why i'm doing what i'm doing anyway in the hope that maybe, just maybe, we can find soem consistency's in what we have to work with & i honestly believe we ( including Gigantor ) are doing so.

There may be many BF at higher elevations, but most people tend to recreate in the lower elevation montane areas surrounding the high mountains. If more people explored higher elevations for extended periods of time, they may well find the BF "glory hole". By NOT having equal numbers of people exploring all elevations, the data is automatically skewed, because there's too many variables to predict.

The Data is pointing towards a unanimous elevation >> season ratio where average elevations from Reports are calculated and then the Seasons added which give us an obvious pattern.

The pattern is that the elevations go in the same order every time in areas with over 20 Reports which is needed to give decent & hopefully more accurate averages.

Summer reports have the highest elevations, Winter reports have the lowest elevations, with the 2 Seasons in between pretty even.

If what i find for WA would be the same like i think it will be, for BC, OR & CA would that be a pattern that could/should be taken notice of, or would it be dismissed ??

As a witness, i will completely take notice of it as will i believe every other Witness to these things that know they exist as we're not fighting with the idea that they may not exist.

Do you understand what i mean ?

Again, I don't mean to poo poo your analysis, because it's very well done, but you know what they say, "garbage in, garbage out".

I've never heard that saying personally but i'm not really one for sitting on my butt & waiting for something to happen so i'd prefer to " do " rather than " not do " & as i can't be in the US like i currently want to be, i feel that what i am doing here can help other researchers & if it does, it'd make it all completely worthwhile for me.

The saying that i like to link to this is " If you don't shoot, you don't score. "

My bold above.

Another good Season >> Elevation idea within the Mount Rainier Wilderness areas which include the Clearwater, Goat Rocks, Norse Peak, Tatoosh, Glacier View and the William O Douglas Wilderness areas.

There are a total of 41 Reports.

Fall makes up 54% of these Reports

Summer makes up 32% of these Reports

Spring makes up 12% of these Reports

Winter makes up 2% of these Reports

Winter's average elevation is 1,600ft

Spring's average elevation is 2,112ft

Fall's average elevation is 3,286ft

Summer's average elevation is 3,485ft

Edited November 15, 2011 by BobbyO

[Guest MJ151]

Nice job guys. My encounter was in the Olympics (Dosewallips Valley) in the spring at a starting elevation of 1100' Seems to be in the neighborhood at least.