Over the years I've heard of claims from folks who say they have feeders set up for bf. Some to this day talk about the amount of corn they go through and how intelligent the bf are who feed from them. Others talk about putting other food stuff out and having bf animals happily walking away with the goods. Is it just me or does this not sound to be a little bit out there? I wonder if there are any forum members here who can validate such claims or who believe them? I have a hell of a time struggling with this sort of thing.

t.

Here is a good example of all the embellishment that goes on. (IMO) If that is the case then why wouldn't these individuals collect evidence? If I had BF show up to one of my feeders I would be out there with a pair of tweezers looking for hair, I would take pictures, and if I saw him I would follow him home! It's not just you terry, I agree it a lot out there. Almost like some people that have dragged on for months with tales of how BF somehow shows up only on their property but they can't seem to come up with any thing to prove it.

Terry
Oh tho I can not say that I set up a feeder for these creatures I can say this ,That when we were camping one weekend when we had our encounter this incident took place.What took place was during the night I had gone to sleep and the other two had gone for a walk to the creek that was at least 100 yards away from camp.I awoken by some movement and heavy breathing around the camp so I called out to the other two on the walkie talkies but they were out of range and did not respond.Out side the tent I could hear movement and I was real nervous to look so i grabbed my pistol and loaded it and kept it in front of me.Well next to our tent was our camp fire and there was some logs and on the logs there was some prunes a pan for cooking and next to this log was some packeged salmon.Well I kept real silent and waited till i heard the others returned .When i heard thier voices that is when I stepped out of the tent and explained to them what i had heard and that is when the began to explain to me that the packeged salmon was gone and on top of the log we found a rock that was left behind.This all happed around 1:00 or 2:00 am do not remember but I do have a picture of the rock that was left behind.It is a big rock and whatever was in our camp carried this rock with it and left it and took the salmon.Here is the Photo:

That's a nice wood handle spatula............looks like stainless steel?

Nice fry pan too! What is that a Griswold?

Maybe Sasquatches live by the barter code?

or maybe the salmon was better to carry than the rock. The rock was probably to throw at you.

Hi


Rocks are what BF uses for money, Don't try and barter with him for anything worth more than a few bucks, Have you ever seen what he uses for 20 dollars worth of goods, let's just say you would have to walk around it


Peace
Tim

Interesting julio12.

what else is fascinating to me is how that cast iron skillet is sitting there so precariously without falling. It appears to be half off of that stump.. Those things are heavy! Did you leave it sitting like that? Or was it moved?

pretty cool.

Well, even if it wasn't a BF, as a general rule, it's not a good idea to leave salmon out on a stump overnight. Someplaces will actually fine you because of the belief that bears or racoons and other animals will be encouraged to be in the proximity of humans, which can be a bad scene for them. I don't know about the rock. Seems like you'd definitely see that thing if it were there the previous night.

A Few questions.

1. Where were your camping companions when you couldn't contact them?

2. How long after you tried to contact them on the Walkie Talkie before they showed up?

3. What was the purple tie from in the picture, under the rock?

4. Did you check around the stump for tracks before disturbing the area?

5. Were your buddies there looking for bigfoot too? Or do they know you're interested in it?

Sorry, julio12, but this is an obvious hoax.

Nobody eats prunes!

Terry,

Those that profess that they constantly get Bigfoot coming to their feeders without any concrete evidence (photos, hair samples, etc.) ever shown are just trying to make people believe that they have something and are important, when in fact they have nothing and they are just compulsive liars. As the old saying goes, " You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time".

One good example is a certain person that I think we all know, on a message board that starts with a " G" and ends with an " O" who keeps telling everyone that he constantly gets BF coming to his feeders on a regular bases, but when he's asked question to validate his story we are given the runaround and eventually band from their message board when you ask too many questions.

I think you all know who and which BF message board I'm talking about.

Hey...What The?,

You can spell it out. Some people that are new to this forum may not understand that you are talking about the GCBRO.

If you want to talk about anything that is claimed by members of the GCBRO, perhaps you should go over to their message board and ask your questions. They would be better at answering any questions you might have. I doubt you will get a response from them on this board.

Unless, of course you already got your self banned over there.

Just be glad a rock the size of the one left on a tent in Canada causing the tent to be left behind, wasn't used,
and good thing you had fish, if not, the rock may have been a boulder, since you were in the tent when the deed was
done that might not have been a pretty picture Julio12

Hey Pywacket,

I'm not going to waste my time with the embellished claims coming from the GCBRO. I doubt that I would even get an honest response. Sorry, but not all of us are obliged to believe everthing coming from the GCBRO.

Maybe you can fill us in since you're a member of the GCBRO.

Yeah, I suppose it is a little hard to believe some things that one hears in this community.

I am not aware of any "embellished" claims, just some true reports of bf activity. Some of which I am a witness to, myself.

In all my time asking questions from members of the GCBRO, I do not believe I have gotten anything but an "honest" answer.

I am not asking anyone to give the GCBRO or any other BF group or independent researcher any slack in questioning any claims. However, in my own research, I have witnessed things and have had things happen to me while in the field, when I wasn't able to get a photograph, recording, or other evidence. That didn't mean that it didn't happen. I just can't prove it. I can go on record to state the events and it is up to others to choose to believe me or not.

As far as bf eating out of feeders, that is how Mr. Lansdale first realized that he had some type of "deer corn eating" creature other than "deer" on his property. About 15 years ago or so, he and one of his young sons drove up on one of the creatures, squatting down and eating out of one of his feeders. As soon as the creature realized that they had drove up on him, he ran off....on all fours. That was Mr. Lansdale's first sighting of one of these creatures, and he had no idea what he had just seen. His young son saw it too. Imagine trying to explain what that creature was to a kid.

It did answer some of the questions that he had concerning why he was finding feeders turned over and empty, finding the lids pulled off the barrels (which would have taken an opposable thumb and something stronger than a raccoon), and finding those lids over on another trail completely. His first thoughts were that someone was trespassing and vandalizing his feeders. He switched over from barrel feeders to 4" PVC pipe feeders. It was after that the he had his first glimpse of what was eating all of his deer corn.

Keep in mind that the purpose of the deer feeders on this property were to feed deer, not bigfoot. He doesn't have as many feeders out now as he did in the past. And yes, he has put trail cameras on the feeders, with no luck of catching a photo of a bigfoot. One thing to mention, when a trail camera is put at a feeder, the feeder never gets touched. Take the trail camera away, and the feeder gets emptied pretty quick. Go figure.

Pywacket
It's like I have said before these creatures know somehow.They are self aware and stay away from camera's.This is why they are so hard to prove with a photograph.I can see them raiding those deer feeders tho.Yes you are absolutely right that it is hard trying to prove to people who have never seen these animals that they are real with out some type of strong evidence.Thats is why I just try to stay out of the argument of what I seen and what happen ,they are either going to believe me or not and in which case it just does not matter because they were not there and they did not expierance what we have.Each expierance is diffirent and it effects each person in a different way.



moregon
1.My companions were off by a creek checking things out and getting more water

2.I believe it was about 20min before they showed up.When I heard the noises outside the tent I was to scared to look out side of the tent (Yes I ill admit to it)I layed flat on my stomach and did not move a muscle gripping my pistol in one hand and the walkie talkie in the other hand.I did not get out of that tent until I heard thier voices.

3.I think that purple was chalk or a marker of some sort.We left everything the way it was found before we moved anything from that stump .As you also notice the top of the prune can was missing and we believe that they also took that as well.We are not sure why they would just take the top and not just the whole can of prunes .They did the same thing with a peonut butter jar that they took and had also brought back that same night but earlier like around 8:00pm

4.There were no tracks around the stump and that was due to the ground being very hard but we did find tracks in other areas of our camp sight.

5.Yes ,Our job was to see if we could capture these creatures on thremo and which case we believe we did but just barely and i have been trying to find this tape but have no luck in doing so.I had lent the original tape to someone and some how when it was returned parts of it was missing.



Incorrigible1
You Might say that this could be a hoax ,But the truth is that same evening we had our second encounter with these creatures.I say creatures because there more then one creature that we saw that evening.There was one large on and two small ones ,the large one was standing within the two track covered by some brush swaying side to side while one of the smaller ones was on its left and the other was on its right withing the trees.We were looking at them through the starlight scope the two one left and the right were hunched over while the larger one was just swaying side to side.It was the wierdest thing I have ever seen but yet the most peacefull feeling .There was no fear like we all felt ealier that day when we all walked away from the camp only to come back while one was visiting our campsight earlier that day.There is when we felt zapped or whatever that feeling you can call it is.So you can see from my point of view i do not believe I was hoaxed.Believe me if I felt threaten I would have been more then ready to shoot it if I had to .Like I have said before, you can believe me or not I do not care.

julio, you left off my punch line. "Nobody eats prunes."

With that in mind, you missread me, my friend. I didn't deserve ten lines of reproachment. It was humor. My comment was:

"Sorry, julio12, but this is an obvious hoax.

Nobody eats prunes!"
----------------------------------------------------

You're comment to me:

"Ten lines of blah, blah, blah."

I'll spare the reader. OK?

I do feeders etc too and have them "ravaged" from time to time too ( as well as wild game coming up to my pens)

Our cameras ( not really game cams as these are hardwired or wireless for security reasons- not catching game pictures per se) often get predators, wild turkeys, deer and such on them. ( ours arent triggered, they run 24/7)

Just from watching animals with them, blinds, human motions in fields with tractors/hunting etc- I cant accept that somehow BF can recognize a camera, understand what it is, sees it as something to avoid, has an idea where that cameras FOV and range is and avoids them like a master ninja.

They dont seem to avoid bait, skillets, campsites, radios and such ( other manmade objects with scents,sounds etc)- yet an animal has some innate sense to know specifically ( and only it appears) ONE device?

I'm sorry, I just cannot accept that entire premise

On the site below, I read about Mr. Lansdale and the article will be continued next time so you get strung along.

BF and feeders are very possible especially when BF has been around the farm for a long time. Their caution may wear off, so they will come on in for a bite. Out of 10 habituation sites, how many are just making up stories?



"However, Mr. Lansdale and I agreed very strongly on one point - we have no time for game players, people who simply want to put out crap research, or hoaxers. It's my personal opinion that Mr. Lansdale takes the activity on his property very seriously. It even appears to me that he wants this over quickly, and organizing these hunts as a fast way to bring closure. So, I think while many out there see a tough - at times fairly harsh - individual posting on the GCBRO message board, in reality Mr. Lansdale is simply a man who has witnessed something more than once (this has been ongoing for him over the period of years) and just wants it over and done with"

I wouldn't count on that article getting completed.

yea the rock was to throw at ya when or if you tried anything funny.breaking and entering bigfoot style lol.

You folks are just being waggish. BFs certainly do come to deer feeders.

And, BFs don't know what cameras are. They avoid them for other reasons.

Hi

What other reasons do you think makes the Big Guy avoid cameras ?

Peace
Tim

LENSES LOOK LIKE GUN BARRELS.

Because they look like they don't belong there, and they smell like PEOPLE.

(Besides, I don't think, I know. After all, I am the Ghost of Bigfoot LOL!)

Hi

I asked a question about cameras a while ago on the same line as your post , I got a reply from a well known member that uses them all the time,

Not an exact quote but, The cameras are camouflaged and all smell human or otherwise is removed, Pretty much a standard thing to do


Peace
Tim

Removing all human scent is hard to do. I know a lot of products claim to do this, but with varying degrees of success. Even if you remove all human scent, plastic, batteries, and circuit boards still smells like plastic, batteries, and circuit boards. They don't smell like wood, leaves, and flowers. And, a game camera looks unnatural. Not impossible to hide, but defintely difficult. Just because you can't detect it, doesn't mean an animal can't.

Thats true but I would suggest that we should also not make more of that than logically is required.

If the PGF and most sightings, BF is more ape/homin whatever so in accordance with that logic, its doubtful his senses are any more than what the overall classification is but in either case, since he doesnt have a snout and long nose, its doubtful his sense of smell is equal to or above the average dog.

Also, there is "human contamination" all over ( an old flashlight, burger king bag, old TV and such) so whats the probability that a camera has so much effect when nothing else seems to.

Then again, if the accounts are true and BF comes into yards, looks into windows, comes near campsites,steals chickens and such- the scents ( much greater in intensity) dont seem to faze him so why would a lone camera weathering in the woods be like a strobe in the night?

If (and a really big "if") that logic could be applied, then his sense of smell would be MUCH better than an outdoorsman or hunting guide who has spent their lives in the woods, and who themselves can smell "city folks" over quite some distance in the woods. Also, if his olfactory senses were equal to a dog, then it would be as much as 200 times greater than the average human.



How do you know that it doesn't? If these items already exist in certain locations in his area, like any other animal, he probably doesn't pay much attention to them once he has them located and decides they aren't a threat. If you really want to see how certain animals react to game cameras, there is a popular website posted by a guy in East Texas that has some fantastic shots of animals - some extremely close up - that show how these animals notice and percieve the camera. The guy has been doing game cameras since before they went digital, and is evidently a wizard at hiding and masking the camera. Even so, the animals occasionally seem to find it. I don't have the address handy, or I would post it for you.



Assuming the animal is operating with at least some intelligence, he is not blindly walking into human domain without knowing humans are nearby. Cars, houses, campsites, and cameras hanging on trees are all items that don't belong in his natural habitat. He is well aware of the human surroundings, and enters the area under caution. Even deer and coyotes are at least this smart. Just because he enters the area doesn't mean he doesn't notice it.

well Ghost, here goes

>>>If (and a really big "if") that logic could be applied, then his sense of smell would be MUCH better than an outdoorsman or hunting guide who has spent their lives in the woods, and who themselves can smell "city folks" over quite some distance in the woods. Also, if his olfactory senses were equal to a dog, then it would be as much as 200 times greater than the average human.

I dont see that as a big "if" at all- I see the pictures of him and I raise/use hounds. I dont see thet long olfactory tract that gives BF more smelling capability than anything else in the short nose species. I see nothing that indicates BF has heightened senses of anything and IF he does, he doesnt seem to use them consistently.

>>>How do you know that it doesn't? If these items already exist in certain locations in his area, like any other animal, he probably doesn't pay much attention to them once he has them located and decides they aren't a threat. If you really want to see how certain animals react to game cameras, there is a popular website posted by a guy in East Texas that has some fantastic shots of animals - some extremely close up - that show how these animals notice and percieve the camera. The guy has been doing game cameras since before they went digital, and is evidently a wizard at hiding and masking the camera. Even so, the animals occasionally seem to find it. I don't have the address handy, or I would post it for you.

Short answer is I dont. With that said, I have seen nothing compelling that he "does" either. Even those animals didnt catch it in time ( capacitors charging or whatever) otherwise their pictures wouldnt have been captured. I see no data supported reason to give BF heightened powers all others in the animal kingdom dont have.

>>>Assuming the animal is operating with at least some intelligence, he is not blindly walking into human domain without knowing humans are nearby. Cars, houses, campsites, and cameras hanging on trees are all items that don't belong in his natural habitat. He is well aware of the human surroundings, and enters the area under caution. Even deer and coyotes are at least this smart. Just because he enters the area doesn't mean he doesn't notice it.

That was my point- now apply that same logic to the cameras

I do see it as an "if" because the subject of the PGF is still in question. However, since BF is not a dog, whether or not he has a long snout isn't necessarily indicative of his olfactory abilities as a dog. And, short snouted dogs still have better senses of smell than humans. Depending upon the animal, the length of snout means nothing as far as their sense of smell. Snakes have an excellent sense of smell, and they don't use their "snouts" at all.




I do, however, think it is safe to assume that he does have better sense of smell than humans, and at least as good as wild apes or monkeys. Even I can smell plasitics, batteries, and circuit boards if I get my nose close enough to them. And, if he can at least smell as good as some other animals, he can smell or even see the camera. However, the question isn't whether or not he gets "caught" by the camera, but whether or not he actually gets withing range of it to begin with. The answer seems to be that he doesn't even get within range of it to trigger a flash charge and discharge. He knows it's there because he sees it and/or smells it. Just like some of the wildlife pictures would indicate on the game camera site I referenced.




I did in the previous message. He knows it's there. The probability is high that he sees it, or smells it. Pictures of other wildlife would indicate this.

www.hagshouse.com

www.realdealhuntingchat.com

i belong to these home brew game camera sites if i had to guess from who you was talking about it would be P******b , i decided not to post his name due to respect for him ,,,, he is by far one of the old timers in this hobby with more experience and insight on the making gamecams and video units and camo of these units ,,

but things are moving past digital cameras and video units now there going all solid state units on hard drives ,with high res cameras ,, and there going to get very small in the near future ,,

as far as BF knowing what these are i don't think he could with out having been captured on camera already at least once , and once for each BF out there would of had to see a cam to understand that its strange and with sightings from CA to WV WI to TX its not like they have cell phones , so there should be pics every where of them


go to one or both of these sites and check out the photo and video sections look at the pics you can find every animal in the USA there or close to it ,,

but be warned these sites are addicting

as far as the( in my tent laying still on my belly holding my gun in one hand ),,,
on your belly the worst defencive posture you could take unless your saying hay big boy
as for your gun
your going to shoot your eye out ROFLMAO why do these people even go out but nice pic of the rock

When I see these people strapping a camers box onto a tree about 6' off the ground, I have to laugh. The camera is so obvious that it might spook a more intelligent animal just from the visual presence and not from some high tech sensing. Why not have a box with moss and leaves glued to the box and strap then add scent? Then test to see how long it takes your buddy to find it.

I was thinking of this site:

Steve's Wildlife and Game Camera Page


There are some impressive pictures here. Even some close-up pictures of bucks on scrapes that look like the camera was only three feet away. He has been at it since before digitals. He evidently does a good job of disguising the cameras. But, I do remember at least one picture of a coyote that looked like he could see the camera and was stalking it. Also, other photos of animals smelling the camera.

On his game camera tip page, he doesn't mention gluing brush to the camera. He also says not to spray scent on the camera. Why?

Why is he not a big fan of scent sprays?

His web page with all the pictures is interesting.

I had occasion to meet this fellow in the presence of some other bigfoot noteables. He apparently stays out of the BF limelight though. I don't know why he doesn't like the scent sprays. I also remember that he does not use baits, either. If memory serves me, he is a professional guide, hunting lease warden, and quite a knowledgeable fellow. He is the one person who the great Jim Keegan said would get BF on film, or on a slab, if anyone could. There might be some truth to this, because some say he has photos that he isn't showing to the public.

Speaking solely from an engineering standpoint, many of the chemicals involved in these scents/adhesives possibly could have an adverse reaction to the polymers used or other effects.

Brush glued directly to the camera could also possibly shift and obscure lens or PIR sensors.

I would guess thats what he means.

I would recommend placing things around the camera and using scent around the camera rather than directly on it.



I hope these arent arent like these other "secret" pictures/reports/evidence etc that so many others "have" too that never seem to see the light of the day

Even if you mask the scent on the camera your not getting into and out of the woods without leaving your scent everywhere else. My guess is they know what is in their woods and a camera is out of place to them. Not being an electrical engineer I would think they can hear the camera buzzing! If they can't smell like a hound maybe they can hear a freq range that includes a camera.

Hi


Do the cameras make a sound all the time ???

How long before the scent you leave is dissipated in the woods ???

With the new cameras how long is the time between the subject walks in front of the camera range until the picture is snapped ???

In a blog talk interview i listened to lately one of the guests had reported that a few of his cameras were ripped right of the trees and thrown, The question was asked if it might have been kids or other hunters but since the cameras were not taken and just broken it seemed to him that is was not likely,

Peace
Tim

All good questions...I would assume an electrical device emits some sound, maybe some of our electrical members can answer. Same with scent, don't know how long it would remain I'm sure conditions play a big part there. My thoughts are add all these theories up and it's probable BF can tell when one is around and he just turns and goes the other direction.

I wouldn't know. If they are his pics, then it is his decision on what he does with them as far as I'm concerned. After seeing some peoples' reaction to anything less than a dead body for evidence, I can definitely understand why he would keep them to himself. Game camera pics themselves aren't exactly studio quality images, and would definitely lend themselves to scrutiny.

No, they do not. Let me give you the background of why I say that.

This question came up back in Nov/Dec on another thread. I went to my neighbor (who is an avid wildlife picture taker and deer hunter and uses these things all the time all over our farm) just to find out for myself if they did or didnt because I wanted to know when I went home to the States.

We took several of his with the firms Quest noise dosimeter ( which we use for monitoring sounds in plants for OSHA compliance) and its detectable range goes from lower than infrasonic to almost to high freq sonar.

On all the ones we tested- ( excluding mechanical noise which we didnt measure because we expected to get that as it fired)- none of them emitted anything in the static mode until the PIR was triggered and the charging cycles were just a fraction over a second.

Just some background information here- noise dosimetry isnt new as a technology but it is new regarding its applications regarding electronics. ( around 10 yrs or so as being actively pushed)

Its universally understood that electrical components emit sounds ( electrical being differentiated from electronic and solid state etc) as generators,transformers,capacitors,lights and even conductors themselves emit an audible "hum" ( in some cases, conductors will even jump in raceways under a high load) but little to no thought was ever given to electronic devices such as PC,calculators etc.

Now, with various studies in HSE ( Health,safety and environmental) have shown that many such devices do emit noise but individually they are almost nil BUT when in an office environment when dozens or more are there with a cumulative effect- it can become a low risk hazard over time. ( this is completely excluding mechanical noise such as hard drives turning etc)

The end effects as of now ( studies are really inconclusive currently as to end effect) arent known but the focus is more on the exposures to EMF in office areas.

That said, they factually do emit "noise" even tho current technology cant really measure low enough so currently they are determined mathmatically.

So, unless BF can hear noises better than a bat or hi freq sonar- he wouldnt be able to hear the range these emit in except for that brief second when they charge but then could he discern that minute noise from normal background is another question.