On the weekend of August 19, 2010 I went squatching with Woodrat in the Eastern Sierra in an area we're where we're keeping the location private. Around 2 AM a Sasquatch specimen approached our tent stealthily but I was awake and on my right side facing the tent wall. The shadow of It as I will call him was cast against the wall from a kerosene lantern we had left on low about 40 feet from the tent.
It was apparently aware I was awake as it moved behind a large tree next to our tent and peered down from above. The top of Woodrat's tent is an open mesh construction so it's fairly easy to see out above or in. It didn't exhibit any form of intimidation behavior so I was wasn't overly concerned by its' presence there at the time.
I believe that It spent the next 3 hours communicating with me by symbols and a great deal that was communicated can't be properly interpreted. We don't have a common core of experience to understand the meaning of the symbols.
I would seriously consider the experience as a possible hallucination except for the fact that I'm certain of the moving Shadow against the tent wall and what Woodrat and I found in the morning. The duff of the pine tree next to the tent showed the distinctive outline of the species footprints and they were fresh.
The experience is not something I wish to repeat because the species has quite powerful minds. I did get the distinct impression they've done this before to others under like circumstances. It seems they're trying to communicate in a way they understand.
Some of what I sensed we already understand either by our study of the species or by comparison to us or other primates. Here's a list of what I think I can understand from It:
1) The species is quite old going back before the rise of homo sapiens. They are uncertain of their own origin and an extraterrestial origin can't be ruled out.
2) They view us with some contempt and at the same time are quite curious about us and our technology. They consider our efforts to find them and/or photograph them as inept and comical. They have intimidation of us down to almost a science anytime we engage in irritating behavior. Their best defense is avoidance which they're pretty good at.
3) They've got a defined set of mores among themselves and for their reactions to intrusions by humans. This includes a nearly absolute taboo against killing their own kind or killing humans. They have an unfathomable respect for life except what they need to live and I can't grasp the symbols.
4) Their measurement of time is by seasons and our sense of time has no meaning to them. Their view is continuation of their species and all other issues are subordinate to this. Children have a special meaning to them and they'll defend not only their own children but human children as well so long as they're not engaged in what they view as irritating behavior.
5) They are opportunistic when it comes to food and would just as well take it from us as get it from the wilderness so long as they can remain hidden.
Woodrat and I both have noticed that if you follow his guidelines for being in their territory you're unlikely to receive significant intimidation behavior. The species will come up within yards or feet of your location and study you. They may toss a few items like pine cones, sticks or rocks in your general direction to let you know they are there or measure your reaction to their presence.
It's best just to say hello, roll something in their general direction and just wait to see what they do. They may step out and give you a real treat of seeing one of them.
It's occurred to me that there's a simple test to see if the species is sentient and has an advanced intelligence. Set-up a simple math test near a baiting spot. If they complete the math test then my experience and the experiences of others with the species is correct and we've underestimated their intelligence. Mathematics has been proposed as the way to communicate with alien species and the idea may be correct. It does seem that any species capable of advanced thought would have an understanding of basic math. My best,
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Is It Ever Okay To Shoot A Sasquatch?
Being I have a background in photography the pun is intended but the subject of this post is quite serious.
This question besides the actual existence of the species is probably the mostly hotly debated question within the Bigfoot Community. It's been discussed on the Bigfoot Forum, the BFRO Forum and has been the topic of numerous radio and Internet programs. Almost all of the scientists involved with Bigfoot research have at one time or another touched on the subject.
It's generally accepted within the Bigfoot Community that only a specimen body will convince science to classify and accept the species as genuine. The late Dr Grover Krantz was the one who said in his book Bigfoot Prints, "we'll give a medal to the first person to shoot a Bigfoot and put the second one in jail".
The argument continues to rage as more and more people have Sasquatch encounters. On our website, www.sierrasquatch.net are to 2 very good examples of close or near encounters with the Sasquatch species. In both cases the species used maximum intimidation behavior against humans with the intent of frightening them away from their location or territory.
In the case of SSRG Researcher BB he was finally able to convince the specimen that he wasn't leaving and it was best for her survival to leave. His final shot into the air away from her at 15 feet did the trick. She fled and is believed to have taken a baby with her which accounted for her unusual behavior.
The second case of John B involves a likely rogue specimen who on being intimated by the close approach of a human vehicle responded with maximum intimidation intended to frighten the witnesses away from the area.
However, in both of these cases the specimens involved did not use deadly force when they were obviously capable of doing so. In the first case the specimen was initially misidentified as a possible bear but when a warning shot was fired it didn't demonstrate typical bear behavior. A second incident occurred and again a warning shot was fired without a typical response. Finally after realizing the witness would not leave and would use deadly force did the BF specimen flee.
The witnesses in both encounters were armed and capable of inflicting injury or death to the specimens yet they did not shoot to kill. There are many reasons for this and they range from concern the weapons weren't sufficient to the almost humanness of the specimens.
I'm personally against shooting a Sasquatch unless the witness feels the specimen is going to use deadly force against them. In this case they are morally and legally allowed to defend themselves or others who may be present. Each witness in this situation must act on their own based upon their beliefs and feelings.
They should remember the species often travels in groups which may be spread out around an area. The killing of one specimen is very likely to invite attack by other members of their group. The best advice we can give in this situation is to reload.
I've discussed with several people including some professional guides and firearms experts what would be needed to stop a 7' 500 lb Sasquatch. The opinions vary but the minimum in handguns appears to be a .40 cal semiautomatic with 185 grain bullets, a 357 or a 44 magnum.
The experts suggest using a mixture of solid metal jackets and hollow point expanding bullets. The reasons given are you're going to want to inflict maximum damage in vital areas but you must cut through tough muscle and bone. A mixture of the 2 type of bullets will do this.
The reader is urged to remember that we don't have a single credible case where a Sasquatch has intentionally caused serious injury to a human being. However, there are several cases on record where humans have shot at or killed specimens of the Sasquatch species. In most of those cases their actions could not be justified as self defense.
I have given the reader 2 cases on my website http://www.sierrasquatch.net where in a court of law or public opinion the use of deadly force could be justified. The witnesses in both cases at the time of the encounter had reason to fear for their lives. This isn't always the case and as I stated earlier there are other cases where the use of deadly force would be questioned.
The bottom line for anyone going into rural and primitive areas is to go armed if you can lawfully do so. If you encounter a specimen of the Sasquatch species who attempts to intimidate you by aggressive behavior it's best to leave the area if it's all possible.
If you choose to stay and use deadly force you do so at your own risk and/or the risk of others with you. The species is incredibly fast and can either throw things as deadly missiles or simply attack and physically kill you.
They haven't done so to date that we know of but that doesn't mean they won't and they haven't. It does mean if they have we haven't yet found the evidence of a fatal attack. My best,
This question besides the actual existence of the species is probably the mostly hotly debated question within the Bigfoot Community. It's been discussed on the Bigfoot Forum, the BFRO Forum and has been the topic of numerous radio and Internet programs. Almost all of the scientists involved with Bigfoot research have at one time or another touched on the subject.
It's generally accepted within the Bigfoot Community that only a specimen body will convince science to classify and accept the species as genuine. The late Dr Grover Krantz was the one who said in his book Bigfoot Prints, "we'll give a medal to the first person to shoot a Bigfoot and put the second one in jail".
The argument continues to rage as more and more people have Sasquatch encounters. On our website, www.sierrasquatch.net are to 2 very good examples of close or near encounters with the Sasquatch species. In both cases the species used maximum intimidation behavior against humans with the intent of frightening them away from their location or territory.
In the case of SSRG Researcher BB he was finally able to convince the specimen that he wasn't leaving and it was best for her survival to leave. His final shot into the air away from her at 15 feet did the trick. She fled and is believed to have taken a baby with her which accounted for her unusual behavior.
The second case of John B involves a likely rogue specimen who on being intimated by the close approach of a human vehicle responded with maximum intimidation intended to frighten the witnesses away from the area.
However, in both of these cases the specimens involved did not use deadly force when they were obviously capable of doing so. In the first case the specimen was initially misidentified as a possible bear but when a warning shot was fired it didn't demonstrate typical bear behavior. A second incident occurred and again a warning shot was fired without a typical response. Finally after realizing the witness would not leave and would use deadly force did the BF specimen flee.
The witnesses in both encounters were armed and capable of inflicting injury or death to the specimens yet they did not shoot to kill. There are many reasons for this and they range from concern the weapons weren't sufficient to the almost humanness of the specimens.
I'm personally against shooting a Sasquatch unless the witness feels the specimen is going to use deadly force against them. In this case they are morally and legally allowed to defend themselves or others who may be present. Each witness in this situation must act on their own based upon their beliefs and feelings.
They should remember the species often travels in groups which may be spread out around an area. The killing of one specimen is very likely to invite attack by other members of their group. The best advice we can give in this situation is to reload.
I've discussed with several people including some professional guides and firearms experts what would be needed to stop a 7' 500 lb Sasquatch. The opinions vary but the minimum in handguns appears to be a .40 cal semiautomatic with 185 grain bullets, a 357 or a 44 magnum.
The experts suggest using a mixture of solid metal jackets and hollow point expanding bullets. The reasons given are you're going to want to inflict maximum damage in vital areas but you must cut through tough muscle and bone. A mixture of the 2 type of bullets will do this.
The reader is urged to remember that we don't have a single credible case where a Sasquatch has intentionally caused serious injury to a human being. However, there are several cases on record where humans have shot at or killed specimens of the Sasquatch species. In most of those cases their actions could not be justified as self defense.
I have given the reader 2 cases on my website http://www.sierrasquatch.net where in a court of law or public opinion the use of deadly force could be justified. The witnesses in both cases at the time of the encounter had reason to fear for their lives. This isn't always the case and as I stated earlier there are other cases where the use of deadly force would be questioned.
The bottom line for anyone going into rural and primitive areas is to go armed if you can lawfully do so. If you encounter a specimen of the Sasquatch species who attempts to intimidate you by aggressive behavior it's best to leave the area if it's all possible.
If you choose to stay and use deadly force you do so at your own risk and/or the risk of others with you. The species is incredibly fast and can either throw things as deadly missiles or simply attack and physically kill you.
They haven't done so to date that we know of but that doesn't mean they won't and they haven't. It does mean if they have we haven't yet found the evidence of a fatal attack. My best,
Monday, October 11, 2010
How To Photograph Sasquatch
This post goes along with my previous post about a new view of Sasquatch as a result of an expedition to the Eastern Sierra with Woodrat. The reader is encouraged to read this post first before proceeding beyond this point.
I've previously discussed the reason I think we have no photos of Bigfoot is we've vastly underestimated their intelligence and capabilities. They've demonstrated that for the last 50 plus years they're smarter than we are with our technology and they're right up to now.
Then how do we get photos of them if they dodge our cameras, vandalize equipment and disconnect plugs? We need to convince them we mean no harm and we need to show them what we are doing with the photos we are trying to take.
This is a tall order and I have a methodology to see if it will work. If it doesn't then we'll have to rethink the problem and try another method.
I suggest that first researchers find an area where they are fairly certain the species is active in. Our previously listed report has a methodology to accomplish this and the user is referred again to my previous blog post.
Next you should begin baiting areas where you believe the species is moving through. This could include game trails, watering spots, creeks or rivers, berry or edible plant locations, areas around rural residences or farms, locations where nests may have been observed or witness report encounter locations.
You should check back and look to see if the bait has been taken by your quarry. If so, then repeat the baiting and try leaving some photos or drawings of Sasquatch from different sources. These could include Messing With Sasquatch stills from the videos, BFRO drawings by Sybil and other artists, Patty from P & G frame 352 or any other reasonable representation of the species.
Your photos should include some pictures of game cam or regular cameras and people in your group of researchers installing or removing your camera equipment. The idea is to get them used to the technology of cameras and why we use them.
You can then try leaving your cameras pointed toward the bait and see if the species can make the connection between the photos you leave out and the cameras. I specifically suggest you place them along side routes of travel but not aimed directly at where they must go. This technique should reduce any chance they may view your efforts as deliberately harmful or intimidating.
Based on our research in the Eastern Sierra it now appears the species can distinguish between different humans and their intentions for being in the woods. We've discovered that while we are tolerated as curious interlopers others such hunters and/or loggers tend to draw intimidating behaviors from the species.
This could be a significant development in Bigfoot research and could lead to a further understanding of the behavior of the species.
We will be trying this ourselves next year during the summer and fall months. It doesn't appear to require much more effort than has already been expended in other efforts and resulting in zero. Those researchers in Texas and down South will have the first opportunity to try this as they have more access to their woods and rural areas during late fall and winter months.
This idea for a new methodology isn't mine alone. Credit must be shared with Woodrat, Professors Meldrum and Coleman, Matt Moneymaker, Craig Woolheater, Daryl Colyer, Mike Rugg, BB, Kathy Strain, Brandon Keil, Bill Brewer and several other member of the Bigfoot Community.
These ideas are presented for your consideration and action. It's not my intent to dictate to anyone how to get photos of the species but rather to suggest a different path and the reasons for it. I would suggest that you give it a try and if it works let us know. It would be great to have a methodology of getting photos of the species that most researchers could use.
The reader should remember that a couple of good photos of a Sasquatch will have very limited impact in the long run for the species. However, a reproducible methodology of obtaining photos of the species will very quickly get the attention of the scientific community. Exactly how they will respond may not be predictable given the amount of hoaxing that has occurred. My best,
I've previously discussed the reason I think we have no photos of Bigfoot is we've vastly underestimated their intelligence and capabilities. They've demonstrated that for the last 50 plus years they're smarter than we are with our technology and they're right up to now.
Then how do we get photos of them if they dodge our cameras, vandalize equipment and disconnect plugs? We need to convince them we mean no harm and we need to show them what we are doing with the photos we are trying to take.
This is a tall order and I have a methodology to see if it will work. If it doesn't then we'll have to rethink the problem and try another method.
I suggest that first researchers find an area where they are fairly certain the species is active in. Our previously listed report has a methodology to accomplish this and the user is referred again to my previous blog post.
Next you should begin baiting areas where you believe the species is moving through. This could include game trails, watering spots, creeks or rivers, berry or edible plant locations, areas around rural residences or farms, locations where nests may have been observed or witness report encounter locations.
You should check back and look to see if the bait has been taken by your quarry. If so, then repeat the baiting and try leaving some photos or drawings of Sasquatch from different sources. These could include Messing With Sasquatch stills from the videos, BFRO drawings by Sybil and other artists, Patty from P & G frame 352 or any other reasonable representation of the species.
Your photos should include some pictures of game cam or regular cameras and people in your group of researchers installing or removing your camera equipment. The idea is to get them used to the technology of cameras and why we use them.
You can then try leaving your cameras pointed toward the bait and see if the species can make the connection between the photos you leave out and the cameras. I specifically suggest you place them along side routes of travel but not aimed directly at where they must go. This technique should reduce any chance they may view your efforts as deliberately harmful or intimidating.
Based on our research in the Eastern Sierra it now appears the species can distinguish between different humans and their intentions for being in the woods. We've discovered that while we are tolerated as curious interlopers others such hunters and/or loggers tend to draw intimidating behaviors from the species.
This could be a significant development in Bigfoot research and could lead to a further understanding of the behavior of the species.
We will be trying this ourselves next year during the summer and fall months. It doesn't appear to require much more effort than has already been expended in other efforts and resulting in zero. Those researchers in Texas and down South will have the first opportunity to try this as they have more access to their woods and rural areas during late fall and winter months.
This idea for a new methodology isn't mine alone. Credit must be shared with Woodrat, Professors Meldrum and Coleman, Matt Moneymaker, Craig Woolheater, Daryl Colyer, Mike Rugg, BB, Kathy Strain, Brandon Keil, Bill Brewer and several other member of the Bigfoot Community.
These ideas are presented for your consideration and action. It's not my intent to dictate to anyone how to get photos of the species but rather to suggest a different path and the reasons for it. I would suggest that you give it a try and if it works let us know. It would be great to have a methodology of getting photos of the species that most researchers could use.
The reader should remember that a couple of good photos of a Sasquatch will have very limited impact in the long run for the species. However, a reproducible methodology of obtaining photos of the species will very quickly get the attention of the scientific community. Exactly how they will respond may not be predictable given the amount of hoaxing that has occurred. My best,
Eastern Sierra Sasquatch, A New View
Over the weekend of August 17th I went Bigfoot researching with my friend Woodrat. He had discovered an area back in 2005 that was being frequented by at least 1 family group with perhaps as many as 12 individuals in the group.
When he contacted me in the late winter of 09/10 and informed me of his finding I was at first a little skeptical. However, after viewing photos he has taken of the areas and discussing with him at length the species we agreed to meet and have a joint weekend expedition using my truck.
When a species specimen came walking up to our tent about 2 o'clock in the morning over the weekend and cast a huge shadow against the tent I got a little concerned. However, it didn't exhibit any intimidating behavior and seemed curious who we were and why we were in the woods they consider their territory. It moved behind a tree next to our tent and stayed just watching us until about 5 AM when it started to get light. Woodrat rolled over in his cot and it squeaked and the specimen tried to use opportunity to leave but did make a crunching noise on the duff.
Woodrat's finding is rather remarkable and the area does exist as he described it. I've realized since then after doing some more reading on the subject that there are several areas around North America like this and they are there for the finding. The process isn't really difficult but it is time consuming. Please see our report at http://sierrasquatch.net/EasternSierraSasquatch.aspx
The experience has changed my opinion of the species. I've realized that if the species is not under human induced environmental stress then its' general reaction to human intrusion into their territory may be significantly different than what's been previously observed.
It now appears we've vastly underestimated the species intelligence and capabilities. We've believed we were dealing with a bipedal member of the ape family or perhaps an existing descendant of one of our own ancestors with a limited intelligence geared toward survival. The reader is encouraged to do some reading on the subject of Hominology.
If we consider for the last 50 plus years we've been trying to get photos or video of this species and except for the 1967 P & G Film our efforts have resulted in zero. Now what could possibly be wrong considering our level of technology especially in the last few years?
It easily could be that the species doesn't want to be photographed and goes out of their way to deliberately avoid any type of cameras. They use their advanced senses in the wilds to detect our photographic efforts and avoid any and all attempts. This extends even to damaging the cameras or in some cases disconnecting plugs on the equipment.
These actions would explain some of the things that happened to researchers from the TBRC and others who have gone back to retrieve their equipment and found it malfunctioned.
If this is the case then we should consider the fact we might be dealing with a species whose intelligence rivals or exceeds our own. We most likely do not know the species full capabilities or potential.
One question to ask about this situation; is this a learned or an instinctive behavior? We may not be able at this time to answer this question but my next post on this blog will give you an idea of how to possibly get photos of the species. If the technique works it may help answer the above question. My best,
LL
When he contacted me in the late winter of 09/10 and informed me of his finding I was at first a little skeptical. However, after viewing photos he has taken of the areas and discussing with him at length the species we agreed to meet and have a joint weekend expedition using my truck.
When a species specimen came walking up to our tent about 2 o'clock in the morning over the weekend and cast a huge shadow against the tent I got a little concerned. However, it didn't exhibit any intimidating behavior and seemed curious who we were and why we were in the woods they consider their territory. It moved behind a tree next to our tent and stayed just watching us until about 5 AM when it started to get light. Woodrat rolled over in his cot and it squeaked and the specimen tried to use opportunity to leave but did make a crunching noise on the duff.
Woodrat's finding is rather remarkable and the area does exist as he described it. I've realized since then after doing some more reading on the subject that there are several areas around North America like this and they are there for the finding. The process isn't really difficult but it is time consuming. Please see our report at http://sierrasquatch.net/EasternSierraSasquatch.aspx
The experience has changed my opinion of the species. I've realized that if the species is not under human induced environmental stress then its' general reaction to human intrusion into their territory may be significantly different than what's been previously observed.
It now appears we've vastly underestimated the species intelligence and capabilities. We've believed we were dealing with a bipedal member of the ape family or perhaps an existing descendant of one of our own ancestors with a limited intelligence geared toward survival. The reader is encouraged to do some reading on the subject of Hominology.
If we consider for the last 50 plus years we've been trying to get photos or video of this species and except for the 1967 P & G Film our efforts have resulted in zero. Now what could possibly be wrong considering our level of technology especially in the last few years?
It easily could be that the species doesn't want to be photographed and goes out of their way to deliberately avoid any type of cameras. They use their advanced senses in the wilds to detect our photographic efforts and avoid any and all attempts. This extends even to damaging the cameras or in some cases disconnecting plugs on the equipment.
These actions would explain some of the things that happened to researchers from the TBRC and others who have gone back to retrieve their equipment and found it malfunctioned.
If this is the case then we should consider the fact we might be dealing with a species whose intelligence rivals or exceeds our own. We most likely do not know the species full capabilities or potential.
One question to ask about this situation; is this a learned or an instinctive behavior? We may not be able at this time to answer this question but my next post on this blog will give you an idea of how to possibly get photos of the species. If the technique works it may help answer the above question. My best,
LL
Thursday, October 7, 2010
My First Encounter
My first Sasquatch encounter happened in the spring of 1958 just as I turned 9 and was in the 4th grade at Muscoy Elementary School. My teacher was a Mr. Wilson and I and my friends probably were a menace.
Muscoy at the time was a suburb of San Bernardino and our home was a 2 story lighthouse trailer that my father had bought in 1953 when he went into carpentry. I believe our address was 2384 Blake Street and at that time zip codes were something the postal service was thinking about.
I had helped my dad pour a concrete slab for our trailer on 5 acres he had bought and hoped someday to turn into a mobile home park. That never happened but behind that 5 acres was a huge wash which was bordered on the south by Highland Ave and over toward the east by what is now known as the I-15 Devore Cutoff. There's some scattered developments and a golf course adjoining the wash but it's essentially a flood control zone for the San Bernardino Mountains and when it rains heavily it can and does really flood.
There was a pig farm next door to us and an older couple owned it and had lived there since the end of WW II. I only knew them casually as they didn't have children but they used to complain about losing many piglets all at once. Now I realize their complaints were justified and who was most likely taking the piglets.
Around 3/4 of a mile behind our mobile ran a creek with spring runoff from the mountains. This wash was made for a young boy and since both my parents worked and my sister was in junior high school I had it made. I spent many hours alone exploring various parts of the wash and seldom met anyone except a few hunters, an occasional motorcycle rider and the usual collection of equestrian riders on the weekends.
One spring day we had a half day of school and I got home and headed off to the wash. I went down by the creek to see if there were the usual rabbits or frogs and what might be there with the creek running. There was a bend in the creek and a couple of big holy hock bushes growing there along with some manzanita bushes. One thing I did notice as I walked toward the bend that there wasn't much of anything moving around on this beautiful spring day.
As I approached the bend the holy hock bush branches began to shake really hard. I realized this wasn't normal and after several seconds of watching I followed another game trail towards home. Nothing followed me and I remember telling my best friend, Scott Tonn, at the time but he didn't get much of a chance to go to the wash. His father was a retired CMSgt from the USAF his mom was a homemaker so he was kept pretty close to home.
I don't remember ever seeing any Bigfoot prints in the wash but there are reports from this area and the Lytle Creek Watershed to the west. Most of the area is hard packed gravel sand or loose sand with some vegetation but not a lot of trees except near streets or homes. Strong winds will erode prints in a matter of a few days or weeks and the wind does constantly blow through this area.
I still wonder what was shaking the bushes and I now have a pretty good idea but will never really know for sure.
LL
Muscoy at the time was a suburb of San Bernardino and our home was a 2 story lighthouse trailer that my father had bought in 1953 when he went into carpentry. I believe our address was 2384 Blake Street and at that time zip codes were something the postal service was thinking about.
I had helped my dad pour a concrete slab for our trailer on 5 acres he had bought and hoped someday to turn into a mobile home park. That never happened but behind that 5 acres was a huge wash which was bordered on the south by Highland Ave and over toward the east by what is now known as the I-15 Devore Cutoff. There's some scattered developments and a golf course adjoining the wash but it's essentially a flood control zone for the San Bernardino Mountains and when it rains heavily it can and does really flood.
There was a pig farm next door to us and an older couple owned it and had lived there since the end of WW II. I only knew them casually as they didn't have children but they used to complain about losing many piglets all at once. Now I realize their complaints were justified and who was most likely taking the piglets.
Around 3/4 of a mile behind our mobile ran a creek with spring runoff from the mountains. This wash was made for a young boy and since both my parents worked and my sister was in junior high school I had it made. I spent many hours alone exploring various parts of the wash and seldom met anyone except a few hunters, an occasional motorcycle rider and the usual collection of equestrian riders on the weekends.
One spring day we had a half day of school and I got home and headed off to the wash. I went down by the creek to see if there were the usual rabbits or frogs and what might be there with the creek running. There was a bend in the creek and a couple of big holy hock bushes growing there along with some manzanita bushes. One thing I did notice as I walked toward the bend that there wasn't much of anything moving around on this beautiful spring day.
As I approached the bend the holy hock bush branches began to shake really hard. I realized this wasn't normal and after several seconds of watching I followed another game trail towards home. Nothing followed me and I remember telling my best friend, Scott Tonn, at the time but he didn't get much of a chance to go to the wash. His father was a retired CMSgt from the USAF his mom was a homemaker so he was kept pretty close to home.
I don't remember ever seeing any Bigfoot prints in the wash but there are reports from this area and the Lytle Creek Watershed to the west. Most of the area is hard packed gravel sand or loose sand with some vegetation but not a lot of trees except near streets or homes. Strong winds will erode prints in a matter of a few days or weeks and the wind does constantly blow through this area.
I still wonder what was shaking the bushes and I now have a pretty good idea but will never really know for sure.
LL
Friday, April 9, 2010
Bigfoot Migration Theory
This will be the first post regarding a theory we are putting forward that the BF species migrates with the seasons. We believe they move from lower elevations to higher elevations and back with deer migration and food supply.
It's a known biological fact that animals will migrate with the seasons and their food supply. This fact cannot be contested and has been proven many times by wildlife biologists.
We will through a series of posts attempt to prove the theory that the BF migrate with the seasons and food supply. This will be done with research reports or parts of, photos and an occasional map. The posters will be myself, our technical advisor and Woodrat. Guest posts are welcome and you can contact us via this site or the SSRG site.
The reader is referred to http://www.seriasasquatch.info/migration.htm for a good discussion by Woodrat on what is migration and the types of migration.
Thank you for visiting and please return.
LL
It's a known biological fact that animals will migrate with the seasons and their food supply. This fact cannot be contested and has been proven many times by wildlife biologists.
We will through a series of posts attempt to prove the theory that the BF migrate with the seasons and food supply. This will be done with research reports or parts of, photos and an occasional map. The posters will be myself, our technical advisor and Woodrat. Guest posts are welcome and you can contact us via this site or the SSRG site.
The reader is referred to http://www.seriasasquatch.info/migration.htm for a good discussion by Woodrat on what is migration and the types of migration.
Thank you for visiting and please return.
LL
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Welcome Brad Flom
The SSRG is glad to welcome into our mutual groups Woodrat and his group Ssquatch Searchers. He has been doing research for many years and has several encounters including one close encounter. He's an expert woodsman and with his fellow researchers will add experience to our groups. Welcome Woodrat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)