What would BF eat, Discussion about possible food sources Options

[jasonch1112]

LOVELY ANALOGY!!!!!!

[jasonch1112]

Maybe bird of prey, like a turkey buzzard after the fact, but the entry hole near the rear flank, and the neck wounds, looks to me like a big cat. Small calf and deer are prime prey for one.

We apparently were not looking at the same pictures. The only deer I saw was a skeleton. The animal I was referencing was a rabbit with it's hair pulled out. Which is what prompted my comment. I do not see how a skeleton could be positively identified as a BF kill. And I SERIOUSLY doubt BF has the fine motor skills necessary to pull tufts of hair out of a rabbit. ON something small like that, I would expect a bite to break the skin, then it pulled back ( a kind of rough skinning), etc. Like I said before, a large animal, I would expect a seriously broken neck. A quick kill. SOMETHING that would indicate large strong HANDS doing the work.

This is like the Animal Control officers in Florida that cannot tell the difference between a house cat, opossum, raccoon, or an orang. I can EASILY tell the difference in all of these.

This post has been edited by jasonch1112: Dec 16 2007, 09:34 AM

[Flashman]

I was thinking, if you can consider any one food "tried and tested" it seems to be apples, seems sometimes every 3rd or 4th report mentions apples, search for apples on BFRO and you get a lot of hits among reports, media articles and older tales ...
http://www.google.ca/search?q=site:bfro.ne...tart=0&sa=N

To me it's conclusive enough to think "If they won't take apples then they ain't hungry" so if the intention is getting a surefire bait then that would be the closest we've got so far.

[jasonch1112]

One advantage of using a fruit that BF would not be familiar with is that you could drug them and they might not notice the scent or taste. If you tried that with a food they were familiar with, they would know something wasn't right with it.

I have heard of some success with apples. That is what was used at the Skookum Casting site. However the fruit wasn't eaten completely or take with the animal. That suggests it was just trying them and didn't care too much for them.

I still can't beliebve they would bait an area and not set up trailcams to watch the bait. A good pic would be much better than that controversial cast.

This post has been edited by jasonch1112: Dec 16 2007, 08:56 PM

[mike2k1]

We apparently were not looking at the same pictures. The only deer I saw was a skeleton. The animal I was referencing was a rabbit with it's hair pulled out. Which is what prompted my comment. I do not see how a skeleton could be positively identified as a BF kill. And I SERIOUSLY doubt BF has the fine motor skills necessary to pull tufts of hair out of a rabbit. ON something small like that, I would expect a bite to break the skin, then it pulled back ( a kind of rough skinning), etc. Like I said before, a large animal, I would expect a seriously broken neck. A quick kill. SOMETHING that would indicate large strong HANDS doing the work.

This is like the Animal Control officers in Florida that cannot tell the difference between a house cat, opossum, raccoon, or an orang. I can EASILY tell the difference in all of these.

I was looking at the calf.

[jasonch1112]

I only took a cursory glance at some of the pics. They told me enough not to waste too much time looking at thier other ones.

[jasonch1112]

I did a little research over the past couple of days. There are many guidebooks on edible plants around. You might be a bit surprised how many reall common plants have at least part of them edible. And of course I mean by western human standards. Frankly we have rather weak constitutions and many plants we cannot eat can be easily eaten by many animals. This is even better seen with mushrooms. There are over 100 known edible mushrooms, by human standards. Many of these are not recommended for consumption. Though they ARE edible, they have unpleasant tastes, textures, or appearances. There are even more that because of unpleasant textures, appearances, or otherwise are not known whether they are edible or not simply because people have been unwilling to try them. There is something to be found at any time of the year.

Even a little bit of research in the library shows that those people who claim there isn't enough food available to feed a population of BF are simply speaking out of the wrong oriface.

[Smiles]

they are definately opportunistic eaters. I recently heard of a guy who got his deer stolen by a BF. A 250 lb deer in northern Wisconsin. The guy left the deer at the base of the tree to get help dragging it out. He came back with the guys and it was gone. They followed a drop blodd trail, so it wasn't dragged by a bear (there was leaves at the time (fall) so it would be obvious if it was dragged). Plus bears were starting hibernating too. So anyway they found the deer 100 yards away going towards the boonie part of the wilderness area (swamp). The deer was starting to get ripped up too. So they eat deer and meat definately along with berries and such.

Does anyone know if the eat fish? I would say most likely. Fish have a great protien source and BFs could use it well.

Thought I'd contribute my story and 2 cents.

This post has been edited by Smiles: Jan 4 2008, 10:39 PM

[bipedalist]

I have found huge caches of sunflower seeds several miles from nowhere, they didn't get transported there in a chipmunks
pouch, something hand-carried these things a long distance from bird feeders or bags left out and it wasn't a human in the remote area I was in, they were
cached near a suspected overhanging den area of crushed rhododendron with tree trunks on top. I also feel they are tough
on salamanders in creekbeds in the southern Appalachians, I have been observing for use of lichen but haven't seen such yet
doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Its good survival food for humans too.

real maple syrup and oatmeal bread worked for me
have substituted molasses successfully too

[jasonch1112]

Great posts Smiles and bipedalist. Thanks.

I cannot see how fish would not be a part of BF's diet. BF are known to like to be near water and have been seen to swim. Why else would they need to swim??? Water plants and most other aquatic animals are easily obtained near shore. Also (Ithink I said this before somewhere) BF reports seem to be lacking in 'tearing' teeth. Meat might be occaisional but difficult to eat because of this. Fish would be much easier to eat than red meats. But then I do not claim to be an expert on teeth. Maybe someone has better information on this?? It would be nice to know.

[RedRatSnake]

Hi

He eats all things,, Some dirts, grubs, bugs, worms,, rodents, fish, reptiles ( sadly) birds , grass, roots, and all plants, nuts, berries,, tree bark, leaves,, but i don't think he eats or needs much is lots of meat,,, not much at all just enough for protein.....,, just like my reptile friends keep it simple and easy, survive on whats always there, if BF eats lots of meat that would cause problems for him,, if he eats mostely meat i belive there would be more signs of something chowing on animals,,, you know an extra carcuss or many,, don't you ??? plus he would have to be a more active hunter eating meat and risk being seen more, and tons of other stuff


Peace
Tim

[dogu4]

Regarding BF eating fish: I've heard it said, and if you google up an image you might agree, that the mammal that has teeth most like the human's is the sea otter. That's not to say that I'm an enthusiastic supporter of the aquatic ape theory but the connection between hominid evolution and lacustrine environments is pretty good, water being critical for a supposed savannah living creature with no special adaptations that allow them to live long without a water source or supply nearby.

As for big animals getting enough calories...you might recall the movie "Never Cry Wolf" based on the book of the same name by the author Farley Mowat. It was based on the true story of the author's being sent into the barren ground caribou country to find out more about the wolves that were presumed responsible for the reported drop in their numbers. He discovers that the wolves eat almost no caribou, surviving instead on voles and other small rodents, and when they did eat caribou it was almost always the weak and un-productive and ultimately acting as a positive influence on the population's continued good health, actual number being controlled by a number of other factors.

It had always been presumed that wolves were rapaceous killers but that was largely due to the fact that wolves had always been observed in the context of forests and where the wolves were under pressure from hunters, where studying them in their natural state is difficult. When observed over the long term in an open and undisturbed environment their complex social relationships and their relationship with their prey becomes apparent and old notions were radically changed though they do still linger.

[Seijin]

One things for sure, he doesn't eat our garbage! Of course if he did he would've gotten rabies wandered into a suberb and gone on a rampage and we would've shot 'em killed 'em and prooven his exsistance by now.

[RedRatSnake]

Hi


There is a report on BF visiting a dumpster, check it out

http://www.geocities.com/sutek316/


Peace
Tim

[Rounder]

Regarding Farley Mowat and what wolves eat. I too am a fan of Mowat, and have read most of his books, but you have to take some of what he says with a grain of salt. For a non-fiction writer he's never allowed bare facts to get in the way of a good story. Never Cry Wolf was a bit of an apology for the perceived vicious nature of wolves, and I suspect Mowat went a little overboard in his claims that wolves rarely eat caribou. Another note as well, I'm sure you've all heard the old platitude that there has never been a documented case of wolves killing a human. Not so anymore -- a coroner's jury about a month ago here in Saskatchewan came to the obvious conclusion that wolves did indeed kill and eat a guy here. Poor bastard was a grad student from Ontario doing a work term in a northern mine. He was out for a walk one night about a year ago and the wolves got him. So much for limited diet of wolves.

[dogu4]

Rounder; I've heard that about Mowat(great wiki on him) but the point about wolves' diet and their relationship with their prey is fairly (farley?) solid, even if he painted them in a kinder light than had been done much before him. It is a great read which was the author's primary intent, I believe (My favorite non-fiction is "Sea of Slaughter" for its research method and its depiction of life prior to commecial havesting) and a pretty good adaptation on the screen. It also jives pretty well with the observations of the Murie brothers who brought the concept of an interlligent wolf society to the attention of science in the 30s after their study on the wolves in Denali, likewise a non-forested landscape of the north with a population thought to be relatively undisturbed by the pressure of modern hunting and so a fine place to watch at a long distance from the subjects for a long period of time; something never been achieved before this...again in a similar relationship with caribou. But that also makes it problematic in ascribing behavior generally to wolves who occupy as wide a range of terrestrial habita as any other creature ('cept'n us).
As for the myth of wolves never preying on humans; I've known for a while that one reason for that would be that when you get dissappeared by wolves you really get dissappeared but good. I observed a moose carcass dissappear over a 4 or 5 day period with nothing left but a few tufts of moose hair and a single shard of shin bone about 5 inches long, and I don't know why they hadn't eaten that. As a young guy I knew an old timer whose little baby brother dissappeared from the family up beyond the Mesabi Range in Minnesota while berry picking and wolf sign was all around though there were no witnesses and so no official report. But even accepting lots of other cases are wolf kills, it still seems a rare event and like most predators even when opportunistic they are not too interested in taking down unfamiliar animals. Especially with humans, unfamiliarity equals the possibility of injury which especially in wild wolves is a short step to re-entering the carbon cycle. However along with the modern tolerance for wolves, something that humans haven't expressed for a long time, there comes familiarity from the wolves so maybe some packs are becomming more interested in us. I've heard a couple of stories out of Fairbanks that raised my eyebrow, but nature always has the capacity to surprise a person sometimesin delight and understanding and sometimes in unpleasant ways...which always seemed like as fair a bargain as life ever really hands us.

[Rounder]

dogu4,
You're right about the wolves and habituation. These were not 'pristine' wolves, but rather a pack that had gotten used to hanging around the garbage dumps surrounding the mines. They were so habituated, they apparently would come running when they heard the garbage truck a'comin. I felt kind of bad for the poor guy that got eaten, I think he was a mining engineering student doing an internship, so I'm not sure how much real bush experience he had. Let's hope he never formed his opinion of wolves by reading Mowat's work. There never was any doubt how he died though, as soon as he went missing they went out looking and found the pack still chewing on him. I'm not sure why the coroner's inquest was even held, unless it was just to place on the official record that wolves will in fact eat people on occasion.

[dogu4]

Interesting. Thanks for that Rounder;
I guess we'll see a few more of those kinds of encounters in the future but given the total # of humans and the total number of deaths it seems like just another thing that could get you.
Maybe the most horrific aspect of being eaten by wolves is just imagining it, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were some instinctual fear that amplifies the horror...unlike being killed in a highway accident, for which most of us have little actual fear despite the almost half million of us that have died in 'em in the last 10 years...but this is off topic.
As to what BF eats, I think an amimal's intelligence implies the ability to adapt to what it encounters, understand its surroundings and altering its strategies, so I think BF is an apex predator that eats whatever it likes, not finding that it eats what it finds, and using its ability to travel big distance to make it happen. But I don't think it hangs around the PNW's rainforests eating plants until the next salmon run. Like, when you're on the trail up the Hoh river, even though the trail is another dozen miles until you reach the sub-alpine and alpine zones, it really is only a few thousand feet away... in elevation and if you could bushwhack straight up as I suspect an 8 to 10 foot tall guy with strong legs could do it pretty well.
I also don't think it's some kind of cellulose digesting fermenter like gorillas or as has been proposed for the giganto and its phytolithic-scared molars, but I'd bet they can pack away a lot of berries when they're in abundance, or some farmer's apples if they could.

[Rounder]

dogu4,
I agree with your assessment that this is likely an apex predator that eats whatever it can and has the legs to take it where the food is. I think you're also right about the options open to mountain dwelling types, but I wonder about the ones in the boreal forest where they have to deal with five months of snow and some pretty harsh temperatures. I have nothing to back this up but pure speculation, but suppose they employed a strategy somewhere between a bear and a wolf. I don't see them travelling as much in the winter, especially during the brutal cold snaps. Would it not make sense to establish a sort of denning area within a reasonable distance of some available vegetation and a couple of deer yards. On nice days you browse and scrounge opportunistically, and when you feel frisky you run down a deer and stash it near or in the den. When the weather turns toward 30 below you say screw it and snooze in the den chewing on a deer leg. I don't see them hibernating like a bear, but neither do I see them out in the open everyday -- it would just take too many calories. For what its worth, in all the sighting reports I've read there seems to be a higher number of sightings in early snowstorms, and I wonder if that's not the time they get on the move to wherever they spend the winter. Its just a hunch, but if I was looking for sasquatch prints in the snow I'd head to the most inaccessible place I could find -- in these parts that would be the Wildcat Wilderness Area in the Pasquia Hills. No roads, no development, no nothing but lots of room and no human company.

[dogu4]

That sounds emminently reasonable to me. Ever since reading Charles Sheldon's "A Winter in Denali" I've thought that a long duration winter expedition would be great...excellent. If my computer wasn't actin' up I'd google earth the area and scout out a nice elevated southern exposure with good sightlines....cheers.

[Rounder]

You got 'er bud, in the sun and out of the wind, that's where they'd be.

[thief]

I posted this on the "cold climates" topic, and I'll do it again here. I wonder if Sasquatch raid garbage cans and dumpsters like bears do in order to get calories? It would seem an easy source.

[bipedalist]

See the Dan Jackson Flordia skunk ape encounter where he was face to face and shot at one with a
.44 that lunged at him--and missed, that changed him from an investigator to an observer n(redratsnake posted the
url for his site under What Would Bigfoot Eat thread http://www.geocities.com/sutek316/
and also the Oklahoma Casino case (BIPcast 4 Sasquatch on the Oklahoma Prairie by the way and a good listen) of the grease trap and dumpster diving
squatch investigated by Roger Roberts and others where the squatch ducked under a 9ft. street light and was caught
on video surveillance camera walking across a parking lot by tribal security for the casino, but they refused to release the video due to unwelcome publicity and wacko concerns.
There are also more than one BFRO report near apartments of dumpster diving squatches.

This post has been edited by bipedalist: Jan 6 2008, 09:26 AM

[jasonch1112]

dogu4,
You're right about the wolves and habituation. These were not 'pristine' wolves, but rather a pack that had gotten used to hanging around the garbage dumps surrounding the mines. They were so habituated, they apparently would come running when they heard the garbage truck a'comin. I felt kind of bad for the poor guy that got eaten, I think he was a mining engineering student doing an internship, so I'm not sure how much real bush experience he had. Let's hope he never formed his opinion of wolves by reading Mowat's work. There never was any doubt how he died though, as soon as he went missing they went out looking and found the pack still chewing on him. I'm not sure why the coroner's inquest was even held, unless it was just to place on the official record that wolves will in fact eat people on occasion.

It was probably held to determine actual cause of death. Just because they saw the wolves eating him does not mean they are the ones who killed him.

This post has been edited by jasonch1112: Jan 6 2008, 11:00 AM

[Rounder]

No. it was all there in the snow for all to read. The guy was killed, then dragged a short distance to where the pack was discovered feeding on him. I should add, the coroner's inquest was held after some pressure from the victim's family, not because the government or the mining companies were particularly curious. This is just speculation, but I got the sense the family was trying to establish a link between the careless unregulated garbage dumps and the death of the young man. I think this may have been in preparation for some sort of suit against the government and the mines, but since I've heard of no legal action since (its only been a month or so) I might just be reading things wrong.

This post has been edited by Rounder: Jan 6 2008, 11:12 AM

[dogu4]

You'd think they'd just arrtibute it to an "Act of doG".


I think the dead, if they have anything, have a keen sense of humor.

And Rounder: what better reason to be 10 feet tall and covered by hair than to be able to stand out on a tundra when it's like 20 below to enjoy a beautiful aurora filled sky while you can still a bit of red in the southeast...knowing you're gonna get a calm sunny day if only for a few hours. Most people don't know what they're missing. I pity the people who measure their comfort with a thermometer.

This post has been edited by dogu4: Jan 6 2008, 12:46 PM

[bipedalist]

One of the things the "Ammi" person with pics on bfro forum thread pics over there, states
in the sasquatchdetective show on blogtalk is that "her" bf do not eat citrus. It is funny I'm
in the same state and I have seen no evidence in my research area that they will take citrus
either, anybody else have familiarity with this situation at a feeding station, just curious if citrus
turns them on in other parts of the country.

[StaninWI]

Hairy man and Redwolf had plums as bait. Whatever ate them barfed them up soon after eating them. I believe their expedition was in Northern CA. Gawd 4-5 yrs. ago.

[Drew]

Hairy man and Redwolf had plums as bait. Whatever ate them barfed them up soon after eating them. I believe their expedition was in Northern CA. Gawd 4-5 yrs. ago.

Was any DNA taken from the BARF?
That is a good tactic possibly. Lace bait with Vomit inducers, then once bait is taken, grid the area, and perform a search for the Gack.

[xpert4u]

Was any DNA taken from the BARF?
That is a good tactic possibly. Lace bait with Vomit inducers, then once bait is taken, grid the area, and perform a search for the Gack.

Why don't put laxitives in the bait and follow the sh-t trail back to their sleeping area?

[jasonch1112]

Why don't put laxitives in the bait and follow the sh-t trail back to their sleeping area?

Because what if was a bear not a BF. I would not want to run into a bear with an upset stomach and sore @$$!

[jasonch1112]

Ok. Some questions for biologists and such. In my research trying to determine good food sources for BF, I found that watercress is high in iodine. Is is my understanding that iodine is not a common substance outside of seafood.

1) How important is iodine in animals other than man?
2) How common is it really?
3) Are there other substances that are necessary for animals that are hard to get naturally?
4) Where can these substances be obtained by wildlife?

If it something an animal needs, yet is hard to come by, finding a source might be a good place to stake out. Animals seem to have a good sense on what they need.

[Scooby]

I was flipping through the channels last night and saw an add for a show about orangutans. It showed them fishing (grabbing them up from the water) and eating them. Kind of gives credence to the Native American tails of Sas raiding salmon traps.