I have been pouring over various reports lately and seeing many of them, actually the lions share, are years old. I am wondering what you think is a relevant time line for a practical investigation. I am thinking that anything with in 14 days is great and that anything more than 4 weeks is pretty much just anecdotal at best. What are the thoughts from you guys ??

I think it depends on what you want to extract from the report.

150 sightings from a single mountain range over a 30 year period tells me either the population is all pot smokers, or something has been roaming the terrain.

10 sightings in a smaller part of that region over the last 10 years leads me to believe it's a hot spot.

5 sightings within a 5 mile area in the past 5 years tells me to pack my stuff and bring you with me!

I think these have large large territories, and are constantly roaming as to not drive away or tax the food sources. They are also probably on the lookout for new shelters etc depending on the season and the altitude where they need to hunt.


.

Immediately.



Anything within 14 days is gold.

Anything near 4 weeks is nearly as good as gold.

Anything at all is better than nothing.

I was told a 20" print was found roughly a year ago in the place I'm searching. We had a close vocalization to confirm they were still there. For all we know they could stay for many years in the same area or travel through at a certain time of year staying for intervals.

I don't think vocalizations confirm anything... could have been coyotes.

I would add that anything within six months is pretty good if there is a history of previous encounters in the area. Especially if that history extends over years...

You weren't there, I was. Coyotes don't approach and articulate guttural raspy whoop calls.

Some considered Pine Ridge pure Gold. It had continuous activity for years.



Neither do sasquatch.

RayG

Good one RayG. I take it you're an expert on the subject? No you're not. You may think you know it all but that's your problem. You weren't there, I was. So as far as I'm concerned Squatch will stay in an area for a length of time or will travel through an area at certain times of the year staying for intervals. I spend enough time in the bush photographing and chasing wildlife that I feel confident enough to understand and evaluate what I heard. There's been nothing happen all winter. I've been in there almost every weekend since and I will continue to do so until hopefully another encounter occurs. Maybe Sasquatch doesn't even exist Ray and we're both chasing the wind blowing through the trees calling whoop whoop whoop.

I believe that "ANY" sighting is well worth looking into, even if it was "years" ago. Of coarse the fresher the sighting, the more exciting it becomes, but even the older ones deserve to be looked into by someone that has experience, or at least some degree of knowledge about the signs that these creatures leave behind. Taking into concideration the stealth, and the shyness of these creatures, they could have easily been living in that exact same location for several years, but have only been seen once. "Yes" there is a chance that the sighting was of a creature that was simply passing through the area, so there's nothing more to be found. But there's also the chance that it's much more than that! The only way to find out is for an experienced field researcher to investigating the area further. Simply because a sighting is somewhat old doesn't mean that the area is no longer active, and the only way to find out for sure is to get your butt out there and see.

Good one? No, a reminder that anyone can claim almost anything about squatch and there's no way to prove them right or wrong. If you actually have a squatch, then you're one up on me and everyone else. Expert on the subject? I consider myself somewhat informed about the subject (none of us know it all), but can't lay claim to the title of expert. No one can.



You do realize that without some sort of evidence that this is happening, I remain skeptical that your opinion is the correct one.



I'm not as confident about your confidence.



Maybe, maybe not, but it will be the evidence that convinces me, not whoops in the woods from unseen sources.

RayG

Sure they do. You would be surprised at all the different sounds a coyote will make.

ANYONE can lay claim to being an expert, but backing it up and proving it is a whole nother animal. We've had a few of them in the news recently and none could stand muster. Only reason I was asking this question is due my checking out a few reports in the past that have led me to what are now housing developments or strip malls. I am wondering if much, or any sign would be left after say, 6 months or so. Up here in Washington with the rains and snows, any tracks won't last long and that is about all your going to see after the fact. The only plausable reason would be to check out the terrain and surroundings, but even that can be just a creature passing through and not really habitating even for a short while.

If they're claiming to be a bigfoot expert I say they're full of bullshite, plain and simple.

RayG

I owned a country home for a few years, and one of the things that I still miss about that place is sitting in the garage listening to the coyotes at night. One thing that I learned is that they are capable of making a very wide range of sounds, but to this day I've never heard a coyote make anything close to a "whoop call". In fact I've lived here on the coast of Washington my entire life, and I've never even heard of this. "I could be wrong", but I don't believe so. They do however make an incredible range of "yipps", "howls", "barks", "whines", and even "growls", but I believe that your mistaken about the squatch style "whoop calls". As I already said "I could be wrong though".

I have been pouring over various reports lately and seeing many of them, actually the lions share, are years old.
Are you referring to (at least in part) the BFRO reports going through the auto-updated RSS feed, more specifically the ones that can be accessed directly from the BFF? It is because it is an RSS feed that you'll find reports ranging from very recent to before any of us were alive, literally one report after the other.

I am wondering what you think is a relevant time line for a practical investigation.
This is somewhat arbitrary as it depends on who is doing the investigation, where the location of the report was, the nature of the report (general wood knocking vs. camper being rocked off of its wheels - unknown location vs. known location), etc. (having hundreds of proper investigations in my career, I could give you a document of variables).

I am thinking that anything with in 14 days is great and that anything more than 4 weeks is pretty much just anecdotal at best.
I would hope the investigation would begin ASAP, within 14 days (assuming it's a "new" report). The bulk of the investigations I did in my military career began on the same day of the event. Of course we had all of the funding we needed and it was of utmost priority to determine what happened (plane crash, etc.) especially if there was loss of life. Literally every minute of those specific investigations counted as, for example, fire from jet fuel could eliminate many of the leads very quickly.

Back to BF, ma nature has a way of washing away evidence quickly. If there were footprints, for example, and the investigation began 4 weeks later I wouldn't expect much (if anything). I have a few words to say (when I've got time) on the "BF Hotline" thread as well, and time/money is a huge factor here and there.

Do you consider the ancient PGF to be relevant (or anecdotal at best) as far as practical investigations are concerned, especially with the technology now available to civilians? That isn't rhetorical either. The PGF is the extreme example here, but it should shed light on how something decades old is still a hot debate.

Anyone with a pen and paper can call themselves an investigator in this field. Those who conduct proper scientific investigations, ruling out all other possibilities, factoring in all of the variables along with the understanding that they must be prepared to adapt and alter technique and method for each and every investigation might just come up with something, even if it's just questions (less of them). It isn't always going straight for the answer; one must work to eliminate as many questions surrounding the event as they can before putting under the microscope what they have left to work with. More often than not there is very little left over. Believe it or not that can be a good thing.

You need to get out from behind that screen and go out and research on your own, there is in no way any credible BF call, howl, or whoop is a coyote.

You have to hear for yourself in the hills, just way to powerfull and over the top to be any kind of dog, wolf, or little coyote....

As far as a time frame, man they can travel a long ways in a short period of time...I have to say with in an hour and you might get lucky.

You're absolutely right TooRisky. It's night and day difference. Just no damn way I heard a Coyote. Plus Coyotes don't do knocks just before they call. When you hear a whoop call up close, there's NO mistaking it for anything else. It's a surreal profound moment to put it mildly. I'll be in that area pretty much every weekend until something happens again. It may never but that's the chance I'll take. Considering the fact that someone who frequents the area told me in the last five years the wildlife in there has pretty much disappeared, it's a possibility that they are still there. I haven't been in at night since the winter and hope to do a walk through there this Friday night. If I get some action again, it would lead me to think that they aren't very active in the winter or leave the area completely and reappear in the spring. Being told that it was a year prior that a print was found, I tend to lean towards the possibility that they may hang around for years if all the right elements are there.

I agree--I live in a rural area and I call tell the difference between a coyote call and a noise alledgedly made by BF--Regarding the time frame on a BF report, I say that the time frame is wide open--Reports from years ago can be helpful while reports from an hour ago can be bogus--as another person has said, the credibility of the source makes the difference.

You mean that same computer screen you were sitting behind when you wrote that, right? What the hell makes you think you have any idea what anyone else here does or does not do in regards to getting out in the woods? You have no freakin' clue, so where do you get off making remarks like that? Ah well... you're just the latest in a long line people who have made the same stupid mistake. Guess it shouldn't be so surprising at this point.


That said, Can't argue that!

wow...i gotta say, that it's absolutely no wonder that the reason we're all here in this community chooses to keep clear of us! there are literally thousands of reasons for these creatures to avoid us and if one of them was unlucky enough to have his big a## planted behind a computer screen reading the ridiculous bickering between everyone here, he'd have yet another one. and for the record, i wasn't singling anyone out with that comment. take a deep breath and swallow a modicum of pride before responding eh!

cheers

I think the timeframe (as has been mentioned) depends on a lot of other factors.
For example, in more southern latitudes where the winters are mild and there is constant game, it seems plausible that a BF (or group of) might stay put as long as conditions warrant it. If this is the case, than reports quite far back can still be significant.
On the other end of the spectrum, in northern climes where winters are harsh and game animals migrate, reports even an hour old could be obsolete for that season.

Lots of factors to consider, and I think it may be a mistake to assume there is any uniform, or normal, behavior as it describes how long they may spend in a specific area. (not that you made that assumption, just sayin'...)

Follow the food, the rest should become clearer (hopefully).

Cause I go out, was out last night in the rain and snow.....I also know a coyote call and the difference between a bear and a sasquatch....you know these things by being out there reaserching.....as far as the computer this is a wealth if infomation to do my reaserch and gain insight and ideas of what is working and what is not....and what makes me think this, hell I live in Sasquatches back yard, no more than a hour drive and I am deep into the NW Cascades of Washington State doing reaserch for the last 20 friggin years ...thats why I know and have an idea what is going on....

any other questions...Stacy...BTW take some vacation, come out with my small group and get a real education....

If you absolutely cannot be fooled you should contact someone in the scientific field, for apparently your brain works differently than anyone else.

As for the "real education"... about bigfoot? I doubt it, you merely sound like another blowhard.

RayG

Not to speak on Stacys' behalf ( but what the heck, she is my wife.) What makes you think that how long you've been doing this has any bearing on your capacity to separate a real Bigfoot call from some other animal ? Hell if you want to go that route, I've been at this for over 30 years now, so does that make anything I say or do more relevant somehow ?


Yeah, I didn't think so either.

So do you have a website or anything where you've posted all the video, pictures, game-cam shots, hair, scat and DNA test results??? Anything? After 20 friggin years...and you want to give others an education?

Ray is right.. there is no such thing as a "Bigfoot Expert", its all WAGS and imagination. Anyone who thinks they "Know" any facts about BF are only kidding themself. Speculate all you want, but if you claim factual knowledge, then show some real data about how you came to your conclusion.

I will tell you what I have for all the ney sayers and the arm chair researchers.....This is an open invite to join my group on an outing to see and hear for your self....just plan a vacation to WA. State, bring your gear and I will pick you up fom the airport drive you to your motel and pick you up when we are heading out.

There is nothing I can say or show that is not already out there, but I will garentee you will have the total primal rush of the fear to the bone experience that can only happen in his back yard.

Also there is one way in and one way out...needless to say if you go off screaming and wetting your pants you are on your own.

other than that it is a fun camping trip.

Just PM me for a date you are free and I will make it happen

Can you also 'garentee' that we'll bag a squatch if we want? I love these claims that everyone will run off screaming and wetting their pants. From what? Stories? Noises? Hype?

Some of us remain unconvinced and quite unimpressed by your boasting.

RayG

Oh what fun, I missed this yesterday.

Listen, TooRisky... again, you know exactly jack s**t about what anyone else on this forum does or does not do in the woods. What you answered with indicates that you think that because you go into the woods, you can tell who else here does or does not. And there you go throwing about the lame, dead, tired old "Armchair Researcher" label again without a fracking clue.

Not that it matters to anyone but me and my group, but at this point in the year when we still had snow three weeks ago, I've been out for a total of 5 days so far. Off the top of my head and without looking at the field notes, we spent roughly 5 weeks in the woods last year between April and October, and thanks for the invite (as if) but I assure you, I do not need to go out to the PNW and into the woods with you to "get an education"... I get plenty of answers and plenty of action right here where I am.

So, you know... get over yourself. Nobody's impressed.

Hi

Well maybe you don't have anything more than the next person on catching Bigfoot, But you sure have the making giant Snowmen thing down pretty good

Peace
Tim

You know, I just love it when new people show up and make automatic assumptions about members here.

We have members here who have spend weeks or longer in the woods each year. Some live in prime habitat and can hike out into their research areas and be home for dinner. We have hunters, loggers, rangers, and avid outdoors people. We have members here with degrees in everything from zoology and botany to archaeology and anthropology. We have people here who have spent years working with large primates in their native habitat.

Still, these people haven't heard every known sound that every known animal can make. It is not possible. So what gives you the audacity to come in here and boast that you are the expert and can teach us a thing or two?

The more you open your big mouth, the more you make a fool of yourself. You might want to stop while you're behind.



Can I get an Amen?

Regarding the relevance of reports. The more recent the report, the better chance for gathering any type of evidence. It also helps weed out whether a report has a shred of credibility or should be tossed in the round file.

Redwolf

Hey, hey, hey! I don't know this guy. We don't know each other but I'm a little interested in his guarantee:


Tell us a little bit about your group. How many in this group? How long have they been involved in this study, to whatever extent? How many of them participate here? How many of them have written anything anywhere regarding any of their experiences and/or observations?

No, that's probably true, but you could show us anything at all that you consider significant among all that you have amassed in all this time of such extensive fieldwork.

Now you're talking! Guaranteed, huh? That implies such certainty that, if it does not happen as promised, there will be some consequence or result as restitution. If someone was to join you at their own expense, and you don't see or hear jack, so to speak, what is the remedy behind the big talk of your guarantee, if any?

If you have identified such a choice research location, why do you now want to bring others into it? Have you documented anything in any way with anyone else? Have you filed any reports with any groups or invited any other individuals to investigate further?

If you haven't already, why don't you detail somewhere some of your own observations and experiences for our review, rather than just kicking in the door and telling us how great thou art.

Hell, I used to do that every weekend when I was drinking whiskey.

i like that time line layout gives a great scale for plausible possible maybes alot of researchers i think wonder these same things this is what I did in my area to narrow down my search areas...As anyone will tell you where the rubber meets the road persay in this game is putting in the time to find an area that has the best chance of making your field time more than just a camping trip....so.....try the 5-4-3-2-1 method(or thats what i call it...this includes 5= year log of the sightings in the area every thing you can gather vocal twistoffs actual sightings everythinggg, 4= field researchers minimum to be able to cover atleast two direction from camp each time you go into the field (2 per group), 3= weeks to make your absolutly possativly forsure place you want to make base camp this time will give you time to think hard on terrain access to food and water and ease of a fight or flight route for creatures in the area ,2= miles of coverage be willing to move your search atleast two miles ON FOOT from your base camp this may not be needed but if things are very quiet animals may be more likely to move low an slow sorta speak and might fain away from alot of activity, 1= goal find evidence that could be linked to the existance of an unknown animal do not and i cant stress this enough do not go into the field with your heart set on getting a big ole fury hug from harry henderson be doubtful be thourough and be open minded