In Sasquatch: Apes Among Us, John Green mentions a link between precipitation and sasquatch. Basically, sasquatch sightings didn't occur when average annual precip fell below 20 inches. He implied that the relationship was categorical rather than continuous, meaning that the relationship was not linear.

Has anyone else done any more work on this concept?

Here's why I ask.... in working on the black bear project, I've also looked at the precipitation maps for various states. Precipitation levels overlap with both black bear habitat and sasquatch sightings.

Here's California's map of annual precipitation. Notice the distribution levels over the state. It's a good match to the other maps (see black bear maps in the correlating black bears thread in independent research)

California precipitation map

Also notice that the heaviest precip in CA is in Del Norte County, which happens to have the highest number of BFRO sightings per capita in the entire state. Black bear populations are also more dense in the northern Cascade part of the state.

Here's Oklahoma precip:

Oklahoma precipitation map

The precipitation is heavier in the eastern part of the state. That's also where the most BFRO sightings are and where the black bears are. And that concentration of high precip in southeast OK? That's smack dab in Honobia country.

In Colorado, most BFRO sightings occur in the central third of the state with some spill over into the western part. Sightings are almost non-existent in east CO.

Here's a Colorado precip map:

Colorado precip map

This looks worth exploring to me along with the black bear material. Precip might be an indicator of richness of food sources, water availability, and density of cover. If the relationship was linear (who knows at this point), then that would mean more rain = more sas.

So, has anybody looked at this more in depth since Green?

i dont know if it would mean more sas. maybe but i think it would mean more sightings. at least in the areas i hunt i see very little game on hot dry days but when its wet out the woods come alive. everything is on their feet and moveing around. the more rain the better. on a day you wouldn't want to go outside is the best day for scouting and hunting. i think they move more during the day than night. animals in dryer regions may be different. i dunno.

Here's another one:

Ohio precip map

Oh Lord, if this is true, as I suspect, it'll be another item to add to my Bigfoot Business Card! Thanx

(Actually, of course, I'm grateful for whatever inferential support I can cite on behalf of Bigfoot.)

Maybe, if there's no room, I can put it into my "Counterpoints" card--as a rebuttal to the skeptical assertion that sightings are a product of human psychology.

OTOH, rainier areas are better for agriculture, and have more water available to be tapped for residential purposes, so they should have a higher human population--and that may be what accounts for the higher number of sightings. This factor will have to be corrected for somehow.

Interestind data. Here's another link to a US precip. map with links to individual states:

http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/branch/gdb/p...mate/index.html

On a side note, I don't think the precipitation relationship holds in areas with a lot of low lying land and swamps. I haven't been rigorous about this, but my impression from looking at the Gulf Coast states is that precip doesn't matter there.

hell. we get twenty inch rains in ONE DAY.

sassys should be piled on top of one another here. hoggin th line at th ci ci's pizza, backin up all th beauty shops to get their hair curled, rushing krogers to buy up all th marshmellows.

it should be working alive with em here.

but, as juda says, th gulf coast it dont seem to matter rains or not.

BUT, it could be a population on th coast.

it COULD be.

I can only give you an intuitive response, Jud. I think it can be inferred that this is a forest adapted animal. To the extent that the precipitation-prevalence relationship has any validity, I suspect that precipitation is a proxy for appropriate vegetative cover.

-Vern

Maybe--it would depend on the data. But I think Green made the point that sightings were rare on the (drier) Eastern slopes of the Cascades, and in the Rockies. These are forested. (But, possibly, the residents of those areas are more inhibited about making reports, and the lower population densities there make it less likely for witnesses to contact someone who'll pay attention.)

You're right, it doesn't seem to matter. S/W La here. I'm more inclined to think it has to do with water period irregadless of whether it is rain, high water table or whatever the source.

OK, this clinches the relationship between precipitation and black bear habitat, at least in the West.

Arizona annual precipitation

Arizona black bear habitat

When I flip back and forth between these maps, I see almost a complete overlap. Even some of the finer details map onto one another.

Additionally, when you get to the yellow areas, black bear habitat disappears. It looks like the black bears need at least 16 to 20 inches of precip annually. Green's observation was that 20 inches was needed by sasquatch.

Unfortunately, the Arizona BFRO map doesn't help me, because Arizona counties are huge. If I had a more detailed map of sightings for Arizona, I could do some checking.

[QUOTE]

Well, it seems to me that the first hurdle is to demonstrate that frequency of reporting bears a meaningful relationship to actual sasquatch population densities. It's not so clear to me that it does.

-Vern

Working on that...

Another set:

Washington Precipitation map

Washinton black bear habitat map

And the WA BFRO map again:

Washington BFRO sightings

In this case, I think the BFRO map overlaps even better with the precip map than it does with the black bear map. There are hardly any sightings in the 10 to 20 inches of precip range.

There definitely seems to be a link between the two.

Rainfall = lusher, more wooded terrain = better habitat for black bears/sasquatch.

Another thing to note... both the lowland and the mountain gorilla live in equatorial Africa, which is the rainiest part of the continent.

I can't find good maps of gorilla habitat and average annual precipitation in Africa to link to this thread. I do have a world atlas that shows me the breakout for precipitation in Africa. I've also read in what countries gorillas can be found. Both high precipitation and gorillas congregate around the middle of the continent.

If anyone can find good maps on the internet for either of these, please post a link!

Thanks!

P.S. A special thank you to Shorebreak for suggesting looking at this! For all I know, he's already found the internet maps to link!

As soon as I posted the last reply, Shore e-mailed me three links!

Check them out:

Africa annual precipitation - click small icon 1/3 down the page

Mountain gorilla habitat - click on map for bigger view

Another gorilla habitat map

Hmm....

Closed canopy forests according to Sanderson: Montane Forests and Bottomlands.
I think you have the key, Vern...annual precip is an important variable, as it is an enabler for the type of vegetational zone in which the BF can still live, for the most part unhindered by the presence of humans.
Until humans move into these areas in sufficient numbers or destroy them, these areas constitute (to paraphrase Sanderson) 'the last retreat on land where the most primitive and rugged hominids can survive'.
It will be interesting to see how this information develops over time.
Keep the stats and interpretation coming Jud. Very interesting discussion.
Jan

Jud i was just wondering with all the buzz about Alaska. What is the precep. for Alaska i was thinking rain not the snow i know they get alot of that.I've never heared anything about the rainfall. I don't even know if you can seperate the two. I would look myself but i don't even know were to start.






Zeus

Zeus,

Here is the Alaska precip map. I'd stick to the coast, as it also seems to be a fruitful area for BC sasquatch. Temperatures swings tend to be milder on the coast than inland and somewhat mirror Washington State in their low volatility (not magnitude!)

Alaska Precip Map

Thanks Jud




Don't seem to be any shortage of percep. there.



Cool wet summers and cold snowy winters sass don't have to worry about me being there. Oh ya 24hr darkness in the winter not for me.