Speaker 1: Big Food and Beyond.
Speaker 2: With Cliff and Bubo. These guys are your favorites, so
Speaker 2: like Shay, subscribe and raid It, Lipstick and me greats
Speaker 2: on Yesterday and listening watching Limb always keep its watching.
Speaker 1: And now you're hosts Cliff Berrickman and James Bubo Fay.
Speaker 2: Greetings, bobes loll Cliff. What's happening man? Anything good, nothing great,
Speaker 2: nothing bad, just cruising saying old, nothing good, nothing bad,
Speaker 2: just cruising being the Bobs.
Speaker 3: Huh yeah, I know that's good stuff. I won my
Speaker 3: I won my Betsy game again last weekend. It was awesome.
Speaker 3: And then I did one little throwaway like twenty dollars
Speaker 3: cheeser with the Niners even though but I got twenty
Speaker 3: when I got twenty and a half points and they
Speaker 3: lost by like thirty five, so I was still lost.
Speaker 3: But I won my all my big bets.
Speaker 2: I go sports, yeah yy yay, go sports. I don't man,
Speaker 2: I don't get it. I don't get it at all.
Speaker 2: Sounds like a bunch of math. It also sounds like
Speaker 2: a dangerous way to lose a lot of money. Maybe
Speaker 2: not dangerous like physically or anything, but emotionally dangerous. Thing
Speaker 2: you know my life is stressful enough. Bobes, like, why
Speaker 2: are you doing this to yourself? You're like, is it
Speaker 2: the endorphan payoff when you win? Or is it the
Speaker 2: stress like you just don't know and you like right
Speaker 2: in the edge or what is it?
Speaker 3: What is it that part? Dude? If I didn't have
Speaker 3: had that vision, that divine intervention, I wouldn't have been betting.
Speaker 2: That's right, that's what This is more of a holy
Speaker 2: quest for you now right, not for me for God.
Speaker 2: Oh you're doing it for God.
Speaker 3: I'm just as conduit.
Speaker 2: We're getting the Bobes back together. We're in a mission
Speaker 2: from God.
Speaker 3: I got Patriots and Seahawks in the super Bowl, but
Speaker 3: I should have. I don't know. I'm not I'm not
Speaker 3: betting anymore. I don't think this season. I think I'm done.
Speaker 2: Oh please? Is that you're not going to bet on
Speaker 2: the Super Bowl?
Speaker 3: Maybe like twenty bucks, ten bucks, twenty bucks.
Speaker 2: Well that counts, that's a bet.
Speaker 3: Yeah, But I'm not going to be putting down like
Speaker 3: big bets like I've been putting down the last couple
Speaker 3: of weeks.
Speaker 2: The only bet I have writing at this very moment
Speaker 2: is a steak dinner with Todd Disstel sasquatches are proven
Speaker 2: to be real within five years.
Speaker 3: Dude, I've lost that bet so many times over the
Speaker 3: last twenty five years.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I might lose this one too. I'm being optimistic.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, I think the Darby thing is probably
Speaker 2: going to do it. You know, it's you know, keeping
Speaker 2: on track and all that stuff. I put in my
Speaker 2: faith in that at the moment, mostly because there's literally
Speaker 2: no one else. You know, it'd be great to have
Speaker 2: like five or six you know, teams working on it,
Speaker 2: but right now there's only one place to put your chips.
Speaker 2: You know, five years might be kind of close. But
Speaker 2: I bet, you know, whatever worst case scenario, I lose
Speaker 2: it and I have a steak dinner with some bourbon
Speaker 2: with doctor Todd Disstel. He's cool, he's funny, he's weird.
Speaker 2: I like him, you know, I'm cool with that. But yes,
Speaker 2: that's the only bet I have rolling right now. What
Speaker 2: did I talk to you last? I mean today, today's
Speaker 2: the twenty first of January. It's a Wednesday. I know
Speaker 2: that we did a podcast last week. I told you
Speaker 2: about finding tracks, right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, you sent some pictures and stuff that was
Speaker 3: pretty You found a foot in the hand Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Last week. I on Monday, I found about twenty or
Speaker 2: thirty foot prints in one location. They weren't very good,
Speaker 2: but they were sasquatch tracks. I went one drainage over,
Speaker 2: found a handprint man and followed that up into the
Speaker 2: woods before I lost it in the salal and whatnot.
Speaker 2: Discovered some new areas in an old in an old location,
Speaker 2: which is kind of neat. It's always That's one of
Speaker 2: the benefits of going to the same place frequently is
Speaker 2: that you know, you start exploring it more and getting
Speaker 2: to know the area more. I went on Monday and
Speaker 2: Wednesday and Friday, so I was out in the woods
Speaker 2: three days last week. And then on top of that,
Speaker 2: I'm for the rest of the week. I'm going to
Speaker 2: be preparing my presentation for squatch Fest, which is on
Speaker 2: the thirtieth and thirty first, So I'll be up there
Speaker 2: with Katy's strain that squatch Fest, but I am going
Speaker 2: to be talking about the nineteen ninety six five points
Speaker 2: trackway that Doctor Meldrum cast because I've got a lot
Speaker 2: of cool artifacts. If you're a museum member, you saw
Speaker 2: a video that I made at the end published at
Speaker 2: the end of December about that trackway. So I'm going
Speaker 2: to be doing a live presentation about it and taking
Speaker 2: questions and all that sort of stuff. So the video
Speaker 2: itself that I published was about twenty minutes long, is
Speaker 2: kind of a long one. It's like twenty minutes, so
Speaker 2: you're gonna get a full hour of it if you
Speaker 2: come to squadch Fest. So I'll be speaking about that,
Speaker 2: tipping my hat to my good friend doctor Meldrum. So yeah,
Speaker 2: should be good. Should be good.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: But Friday went out and found more tracks of that
Speaker 2: same animal in the same valley, And I'm going to
Speaker 2: go out again tomorrow, but this time Melissa's coming. She
Speaker 2: hasn't been out the woods for me for quite a while.
Speaker 2: And then one of our employees, Jill, she's gonna come
Speaker 2: out when she got hired. She told me, Cliff, I'm
Speaker 2: mostly taking the job. So I can see a track
Speaker 2: in the ground. I go, oh, and God. She's been
Speaker 2: working for me now for coming up on a year
Speaker 2: here in another month or two or three, and s
Speaker 2: ivin't had a chance to take her. So she asks, hey,
Speaker 2: if you Melissa are going one on it, go is
Speaker 2: So she's gonna come out with me tomorrow. I'm gonna
Speaker 2: show that really good track I sent you a photograph
Speaker 2: of and see if there's anything else because I haven't
Speaker 2: been there since Friday, so who knows what's been walking
Speaker 2: around in that valley or the adjacent valleys in the meantime.
Speaker 2: This is the time of year there, now and low.
Speaker 2: So if you're listening to this and you're a big
Speaker 2: footer and you want to go out and put the
Speaker 2: boots on the ground, here's the advice, best advice in
Speaker 2: the world I can give right now for bigfoot. Well
Speaker 2: two things, find where they've been seen before this time
Speaker 2: of year, and number two, stay below the snow line.
Speaker 2: It's as simple as that. Man, go there and just
Speaker 2: keep on going and you're gonna get something. Yeah, So
Speaker 2: I'm looking forward to that. I'm looking forward to that. Cool.
Speaker 1: I guess we got straighten some people out here with
Speaker 1: some guidance.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, Matt, Prue was tell me about a question, Matt,
Speaker 2: why don't you come on in and you can frame
Speaker 2: this up for us and we'll get on we'll get
Speaker 2: on the topic of the day.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I figured we'd do it. One of our above
Speaker 1: and beyond Bigfoot and beyond episodes, because sometimes a question
Speaker 1: comes in for Q and A and it's worth discussing length.
Speaker 1: And this was one of those questions that comes from
Speaker 1: a listener named Brian, someone who I've met in person,
Speaker 1: met him a couple of times, and he's a listener
Speaker 1: and a pigeon. But Brian had written in and said,
Speaker 1: a lot of time is spent discussing events that happened
Speaker 1: sixty plus years ago. And I understand why multiple people
Speaker 1: were researching the same events and writing down their findings.
Speaker 1: You all have a passion for the history of the topic,
Speaker 1: and because those things were published, there's a shared pool
Speaker 1: of knowledge to discuss those events. But why don't we
Speaker 1: have the same level of enthusiasm for contemporary events. We've
Speaker 1: got the same critters out there doing the same things
Speaker 1: they were doing sixty years ago, but nothing is generating
Speaker 1: excitement and researchers the same way. So what's changed? Did
Speaker 1: the novelty wear off? Has the expectation for what we
Speaker 1: find exciting moves so far that it takes something outrageous
Speaker 1: to get folks to care. Do we lack someone like
Speaker 1: John Green willing to head out for all these stories?
Speaker 1: And I think there's a whole lot to be said
Speaker 1: for all those points and a whole lot of other
Speaker 1: ones that weren't listed in that question.
Speaker 3: Yeah's well, I mean I totally understand where is coming from.
Speaker 3: I think I think that was sometimes too, you know,
Speaker 3: I'm like, wait, what, like we're still you know. But
Speaker 3: a lot of it for me is that I think
Speaker 3: other and other people too, is that there was like
Speaker 3: nowadays you can read I mean I see some of
Speaker 3: the reports coming into just AI you know, or just
Speaker 3: you know, like it's so easy to fake a report
Speaker 3: now before like you could, like people did, there was
Speaker 3: so much knowledge out there, and like when John Green
Speaker 3: was putting his stuff together, there wasn't like there's there
Speaker 3: was no database to go to or you know, a
Speaker 3: bunch of books or it was just you could it
Speaker 3: was a lot more pure, you know. It was you
Speaker 3: were getting just what people like, more unadulterated, like I
Speaker 3: didn't like, not as influenced by pop culture and this
Speaker 3: and that reports. And John Green was a pretty thorough
Speaker 3: guy and pretty good at sewing people out. So that's
Speaker 3: why those are important to me and a lot of
Speaker 3: other people. I mean, I guess it's the main thing
Speaker 3: is that it wasn't like a lot of cutting paste,
Speaker 3: copycat stuff going on, you knows, really, like you can
Speaker 3: count on the being not as false applied as a
Speaker 3: lot of other ones like later on.
Speaker 1: Well, most of the people in this field, like everyone
Speaker 1: on this call, has driven tens of thousands of miles,
Speaker 1: maybe over one hundred thousand miles in some cases, like
Speaker 1: solely to investigate siding reports, to follow up on tracks,
Speaker 1: to be proactive and investigate viable habitat. You know, when
Speaker 1: I first got the question, my sarcastic thought was like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: it would be really cool, Like maybe if Cliff and
Speaker 1: Bobo did go around looking for witnesses and following up
Speaker 1: on evidence and looking for tracks, and you know, maybe
Speaker 1: maybe you guys could like document that somehow, and hell
Speaker 1: maybe you could go to Canada or Vietnam or Australia
Speaker 1: or China.
Speaker 2: Oh wait a.
Speaker 1: Minute, you know, but we've all done that. I mean,
Speaker 1: most of the people I know who've got skin in
Speaker 1: the game and years in the game have all done that.
Speaker 1: But I think what we all end up arriving at,
Speaker 1: and what a lot of those other old timers arrived
Speaker 1: at is you know, you go through a phase in
Speaker 1: your interest where you're very active and you hear about
Speaker 1: something and you want to follow up on it. You
Speaker 1: want to go look for signs or evidence or meet
Speaker 1: up with those witnesses. But after you've gotten so many
Speaker 1: of those under your belt, you eventually get to a
Speaker 1: point where you take that knowledge and shift it into
Speaker 1: being proactive and you know you're not waiting for a
Speaker 1: report to come in. And god knows how different that
Speaker 1: was in the nineteen fifties, when there were basically no
Speaker 1: reports coming in because there was nowhere to come in too.
Speaker 1: There was no centralized hub, no BFRO or database, and
Speaker 1: so someone like John Green, who was solictening reports and
Speaker 1: who had the time and money to go follow up
Speaker 1: could drive down to northern California. But eventually he started
Speaker 1: being more proactive there. But I don't think the idea
Speaker 1: that there are no John Green's in the world anymore,
Speaker 1: people that don't follow up on things, Like everyone on
Speaker 1: this call and most of the guests we've had who
Speaker 1: are researchers all fit that bill well.
Speaker 2: And also I think Bubbo said, I think his word
Speaker 2: was pure, like those reports were more pure at that time,
Speaker 2: And there's lots of different ways to say that. One
Speaker 2: of the ways I think about that is that they're
Speaker 2: less influenced because nowadays, anybody, anybody can make up a
Speaker 2: fake siding report and there'd be no way to find
Speaker 2: out if it's real or not. You know, Like I
Speaker 2: saw one. I was driving down Highway twenty six up
Speaker 2: by Sylvan and one ran at two o'clock in the morning.
Speaker 2: One ran across the car. It looked like a dude.
Speaker 2: It was this tall blah blah blah, and there's no
Speaker 2: way to verify that. We can just go to the BFRO.
Speaker 2: We can go to anybody's website, like any of these
Speaker 2: bigfoot researchers who love siding reports and publish them. We
Speaker 2: just go there. We can listen to any of a
Speaker 2: half dozen or a dozen podcasts and get a great
Speaker 2: siding report. Whether it's true or not. We have no idea,
Speaker 2: you know, and we can replicate another one. But back
Speaker 2: in the day, they didn't have that, they didn't have
Speaker 2: that template that they can use. And there's so many
Speaker 2: other examples that are parallel of this that I find
Speaker 2: extraordinarily compelling. And it's beyond siding reports. You know, Paul
Speaker 2: Freeman's stuff for example, he gets such a bad rap
Speaker 2: because there's a small group of people that think that
Speaker 2: he faked a bunch of stuff based on the word
Speaker 2: of other people, you know, instead of looking at the evidence.
Speaker 2: But when you look at the evidence, like the nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty two knuckle track or a knuckle print for example,
Speaker 2: that thumb position, you have to realize there were two
Speaker 2: other handprints in the world at that point two, and
Speaker 2: they were both collected in like seventy I think or
Speaker 2: something like that, seventy or seventy one, and they at
Speaker 2: the same time, in same place. And so like, what
Speaker 2: did Paul build that? How did Paul build that that
Speaker 2: hand structure? You know, how did he know about the
Speaker 2: thumb position and whatnot? When Paul was largely illiterate, honestly,
Speaker 2: and he was introduced to the Sasquatch subject six days
Speaker 2: before he found that. I don't think he tracked down
Speaker 2: Grover Krantz's research paper in Northwest Anthropological Research Notes reddits,
Speaker 2: which is probably beyond his ability anyway, and figured it
Speaker 2: all out and then replicated some sort of prosthetic stomper
Speaker 2: to put inside of an off limits watershed and not
Speaker 2: have the other guy who was with them observe him planet.
Speaker 2: You know what I mean, It's a similar parallel to
Speaker 2: this what are they basing it on? So I think
Speaker 2: these older reports are are frankly more valuable than the
Speaker 2: stuff that we get today as a general database. Now,
Speaker 2: mind you, we've had so many more observations of sasquatches
Speaker 2: since that time. We have so many more glimpses in
Speaker 2: this odd behaviors that they might be doing. We know
Speaker 2: a lot more than we did. And so I'm not
Speaker 2: saying that nowadays the stuff is garbage and it is
Speaker 2: easily faked. I'm saying that the early stuff is extraordinarily
Speaker 2: precious because they had no influence, and it's also the baseline.
Speaker 2: It's the foundation on which a lot of the other
Speaker 2: stuff that we know now was built. What I'm finding, see,
Speaker 2: I'm starting to slowly scratchuate a book right now as well.
Speaker 2: Right I'm trying to finally get that out of my life.
Speaker 2: I owe it to doctor Meldrum to do this thing right.
Speaker 2: So what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to
Speaker 2: rely more heavily on the older reports. And frankly, when
Speaker 2: I say older, what I kind of mean is pre
Speaker 2: finding Bigfoot, because finding Bigfoot changed the landscape a little bit.
Speaker 2: And that's not to say that Mysterious Encounters didn't do
Speaker 2: it before that. I mean, that is the first series
Speaker 2: on Sasquatches. You know, we have to tip our hat
Speaker 2: to the good folks over there at that show. But
Speaker 2: at the end end of the day, it wasn't quite
Speaker 2: as large a hit as finding Bigfoot was. So finding
Speaker 2: Bigfoot changed the landscape. Who I mean, how many people
Speaker 2: in the civilian population knew that sasquatches not before finding Bigfoot?
Speaker 2: Not many. Right, as I'm proceeding forth with this thing
Speaker 2: I'm trying to write, I'm relying more heavily on the
Speaker 2: early reports and also the fact that nowadays, like knocking
Speaker 2: is a good example, we have lots and lots of
Speaker 2: reports of knocks, Like I literally got two or three
Speaker 2: on my email today, you know, like they're very common.
Speaker 2: But it would mean so much less, I think if
Speaker 2: the knocking things started with finding Bigfoot. But yet we
Speaker 2: can go back to nineteen fifty eight or fifty nine.
Speaker 2: I think it was fifty eight that Bob Tipmas was
Speaker 2: following a Sasquatch. He was following a trackway of Sasquatch tracks,
Speaker 2: at Bluff Creek and he said he thought he was
Speaker 2: just behind the animal, and he reported hearing a sound
Speaker 2: like taking a log and beating it against another and
Speaker 2: it would reply to him when he did it. You know,
Speaker 2: like that's extraordinary. That's why those old reports are so fascinating.
Speaker 2: That the fact that nobody knew that back then, and
Speaker 2: it really set the foundation for what we're doing now.
Speaker 2: And if they were reporting it then, and we're obviously
Speaker 2: we'd probably still be getting it now, which we are,
Speaker 2: But it's the stuff that we're getting now that wasn't
Speaker 2: reported then that I think we need to take a
Speaker 2: good hard look at six structures, for example, paranormal claims,
Speaker 2: all that sort of stuff. If people are saying it
Speaker 2: now and it wasn't at all being reported, then it
Speaker 2: deserves a second look or more. Stay tuned for more
Speaker 2: Bigfoot and Beyond with Cliff and Bobo will be right
Speaker 2: back after these messages.
Speaker 1: Well, I think another big part of that question about
Speaker 1: like getting in the car and bouncing up and going
Speaker 1: somewhere is that there were so few people back then
Speaker 1: and those of us that have been doing this for
Speaker 1: a long time, like we all sort of share one
Speaker 1: big plugged in network. I mean the network that you
Speaker 1: two guys have is massive, and I'm semi plugged into that.
Speaker 1: But you know, if something happens in Oregon, I don't
Speaker 1: need to go there because Cliff is there. And if
Speaker 1: something happens in the Southeast, Cliff doesn't need to go
Speaker 1: there because I'm there, And the same with Bobo in California.
Speaker 1: And so we do have good people around the country
Speaker 1: that we trust and communicate with and network with. And
Speaker 1: you've heard the if you're listening to this podcast, like
Speaker 1: you've heard us have Joel Thomas on to talk about
Speaker 1: things he's found in Oklahoma, and you've heard us have
Speaker 1: Larry Anderson recently, and that subset of the Cascades in Washington,
Speaker 1: and on and on and on all around the country.
Speaker 1: And so there really isn't a need to say, hey,
Speaker 1: there were tracks found in Texas. Craik your cars, Cliff
Speaker 1: and Bobo, I'll meet you there in two days. You know,
Speaker 1: they just we have people there to go handle those things.
Speaker 1: And so that doesn't mean that there aren't exciting things happen,
Speaker 1: or that we're not excited about what's happening now. It
Speaker 1: just means that there are other people who can handle
Speaker 1: those things that we trust and would defer to to
Speaker 1: document and collect that evidence. If you look at it
Speaker 1: from a bird's eye view of space and time, it
Speaker 1: seems like a lot. It's like, how many photographs or
Speaker 1: casts documentation have you seen of tracks from around the
Speaker 1: country in the last five years? Probably a lot, you know.
Speaker 1: Now if you zoom in on, like, well, how many
Speaker 1: were found in Texas in the last five years, Well,
Speaker 1: it might not seem like that many. Or how many
Speaker 1: have we featured from Texas on this one podcast, It
Speaker 1: might not seem like that many. So I think there's
Speaker 1: a difference between what you're seeing and interpreting as the
Speaker 1: excitement of today's researchers about today's events and what's actually
Speaker 1: happening communication going on behind the scenes. You know, a
Speaker 1: lot of people finding stuff that don't necessarily want to
Speaker 1: come on the podcast or any podcast and talk about it.
Speaker 1: They're just doing their work quietly, communicating a networking and
Speaker 1: that's totally fine. And so it's just a very different
Speaker 1: landscape than it was back then, when they were literally
Speaker 1: only maybe half a dozen people on the entire North
Speaker 1: American continent who were looking into these things.
Speaker 2: It often baffled me. Why was Roger from you know,
Speaker 2: who is from Yakama in Tampico, Washington. Why was he
Speaker 2: bothering with Bluff Creek. I mean, there's Washington has lots
Speaker 2: of bigfoots. And then of course that was an active
Speaker 2: area that they were familiar with, and that's where all
Speaker 2: the news was circled around because of the Jerry Cruse stuff. Right.
Speaker 2: I was thinking that I remember in my earlier days
Speaker 2: of big footing before I kind of understood what I
Speaker 2: just said, you know, like that's the area that was
Speaker 2: active at the time, and they didn't know about the
Speaker 2: other stuff for the most part. Is this a long drive?
Speaker 2: It's a long drive. It's like twelve hours or something
Speaker 2: from yakim to Bluff Creek or more, you know, And
Speaker 2: why would you do that?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 2: Like, man, you have to press me pretty hard to
Speaker 2: drive more than two hours for a big foot nowadays,
Speaker 2: you know, because there's i know, like four spots within
Speaker 2: two hours for me. Like, why would I go? I mean,
Speaker 2: I go to Bluff Creek in the same sort of
Speaker 2: way that people might go on some sort of pilgrimage.
Speaker 2: I love the spot, I love the history that the
Speaker 2: history is a big part for me, because I think
Speaker 2: the history is important. I would go to bluff creep.
Speaker 2: I'm not going to go I mean, for the most part,
Speaker 2: it's gonna like I'm gonna go to the Olympics in February,
Speaker 2: but that's because I'm going to some cool people. You know,
Speaker 2: I'm not gonna I wouldn't just go necessarily unless I
Speaker 2: was actually taking some sort of vacation. But if it's
Speaker 2: just for bigfoot stuff, I've got areas, Man, I don't
Speaker 2: need to go that far. If I'm going to be
Speaker 2: a reactionary bigfoot guy, like it's going to be because
Speaker 2: that sighting is less than a week old or maybe
Speaker 2: two weeks or something like that, I'm not going to
Speaker 2: travel like if somebody saw one a month ago, that
Speaker 2: what does that do for me. I'm looking for evidence,
Speaker 2: and they were too, I think, and that's probably why
Speaker 2: they went a lot of these places. But I just
Speaker 2: don't see the point of driving that far. Well.
Speaker 1: The other thing about historical reports is that they're very
Speaker 1: much alive, and you know, just to look back at
Speaker 1: historical things we've covered very recently, you know, you and
Speaker 1: I did a whole episode about the Blue Creek Mountain tracks,
Speaker 1: and that was essentially settled and set in stone, set
Speaker 1: in print, the way it was for decades until Ray
Speaker 1: Waller died and his family produced pictures of the stompers,
Speaker 1: and then you can associate features on those stompers with
Speaker 1: features that are seen in the tracks on the ground,
Speaker 1: and so that changes the history. It brings it back
Speaker 1: to life and revivifies it. Now it needs new discussion,
Speaker 1: and Mark Marcell's done that with Ape Canyon. He's going
Speaker 1: to do that with Thompson Flats. I mean, there's a
Speaker 1: number of cases that we've talked about on this podcast
Speaker 1: that you've looked into, Cliff that were quote unquote settled
Speaker 1: for a very long time that like what's this, what's
Speaker 1: this in Mildrem's archives, or what's this that walked in
Speaker 1: the door of your museum? That changes things? That updates things.
Speaker 1: It's worth revisiting and recasting history in a way. So
Speaker 1: all those cases, like, none of those cases are dead
Speaker 1: and gone and like, oh that we if you want
Speaker 1: to know about it, just go read this book. Like no,
Speaker 1: they're worth ongoing conversation and ongoing energy and investigation.
Speaker 2: Well, one hundred percent absolutely, Like I don't think there
Speaker 2: are cold cases. You know, there are some cases that
Speaker 2: have cooled off because everybody has put their attention somewhere else.
Speaker 2: But much every time I have taken a good deep
Speaker 2: dive into some sort of cold case, new things have surfaced.
Speaker 2: And that has taught me a couple of things. Number
Speaker 2: one is that my time in the history realm is
Speaker 2: definitely worth it. I'm expanding or at least that the
Speaker 2: historical record is expanding, and I think that's important. Whether
Speaker 2: I'm participating in that or not. It doesn't even matter.
Speaker 2: If anybody looks into cold cases, they usually find something
Speaker 2: that's pretty cool. I mean, look at these people online
Speaker 2: who are still scrambling about the Patterson Gimmin film for
Speaker 2: God's sake, and that there's there's daily discussions on that
Speaker 2: film and it's too much for me personally. I think
Speaker 2: we should just like admire it and go get another
Speaker 2: one personally. But if they're into that, that's great. Like
Speaker 2: some of the cold cases I've looked into that there's
Speaker 2: been new discoveries on because I was poking around. Is
Speaker 2: the Bossburg case like the Cripplefoot cast, you know, through
Speaker 2: a series of events and having you know, an Intenda
Speaker 2: that's out. People contacted me. I've located the SUSA Milk
Speaker 2: casts which have been hidden for I mean, I still
Speaker 2: haven't seen him, but I know where they are, and
Speaker 2: I know the family personally who has the Susan mil cast.
Speaker 2: And of course for the I imagine a lot of
Speaker 2: our listeners know. But just in case you don't. The
Speaker 2: two footprints set everybody sees, the one that doctor Krantz,
Speaker 2: you know, drew the bone structure on and stuff. Those
Speaker 2: were cast by Ivan Marks and then they were copied
Speaker 2: by Rende Hinden and Fine Sand And those are the
Speaker 2: ones that are largely you know, traded. For example, Krantz
Speaker 2: licensed his molds to bones, Clones and Skeletons and limited.
Speaker 2: I think, you know, you can actually purchase those on Amazon,
Speaker 2: I believe now. I don't know if they're still up there,
Speaker 2: but they were at one time resin copies of those casts. Well,
Speaker 2: there's another set of casts that were obtained at the site.
Speaker 2: See you would think that like a famous site, a
Speaker 2: famous situation like that, a famous case, there would have
Speaker 2: been dozens of footprint casts taken, and there weren't. There weren't.
Speaker 2: There were There were four No. Five five casts, right,
Speaker 2: two of the ones that everybody knows about because they're
Speaker 2: in all the books. Those are the ones that I
Speaker 2: think reneede to Hindon. His sons probably have the originals
Speaker 2: if they're in Mark's collection. Who knows what happened to them.
Speaker 2: Last thing I heard Biscardi had his hands on the
Speaker 2: Ivan marks stuff, so we'll probably never see that stuff.
Speaker 2: But John Seussi Mil was a Border Patrol agent who
Speaker 2: was patrolling the opposite side of the river at the time.
Speaker 2: It's the Columbia River. They called Lake Roosevelt up there
Speaker 2: because they dammed it up. He was patrolling the opposite
Speaker 2: side of the river about five miles up from Bossburg,
Speaker 2: behind lock Gates on private logging land, and he ran
Speaker 2: across that same animal's trackway and he cast two of them.
Speaker 2: So those prints were recently rediscovered, as well as some
Speaker 2: other replicas. Nobody knew that was there. And on top
Speaker 2: of that, a new photograph, or it's not even a
Speaker 2: new photograph, I mean a photograph of John Susi Mil,
Speaker 2: the Border Patrol agent in his uniform holding those footprint
Speaker 2: casts was uncovered. Didn't know that existed, right, That's cool,
Speaker 2: by the way. That's hanging up in the NABC if
Speaker 2: you ever want to see it, and you can come
Speaker 2: in and check it out, as well as some of
Speaker 2: the artifacts from the Bossberg stuff. A footprint cast taken
Speaker 2: in snowy doctor Grover Krantz of the Bossberg Critters footprints.
Speaker 2: There's a there's a wonderful photograph that we have at
Speaker 2: the museum as well of doctor Krantz leaning down, pointing
Speaker 2: out a print in the ground, lifting up this piece
Speaker 2: of cardboard. It is that cast. That is also the
Speaker 2: cast that put doctor Krantz on the trail of Sasquatches.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 2: So like those artifacts were either lost or unidentified or
Speaker 2: the significance wasn't being spoken about. Those came about because
Speaker 2: of some act. You know, some email I got about
Speaker 2: six or seven years ago. Another great example is the
Speaker 2: Barbara Wasson stuff the NABC. I think I told this
Speaker 2: story in the air too. The NABC got an email saying, hey, man,
Speaker 2: there's this guy selling these fake stompers on eBay. After
Speaker 2: a few weeks, we managed to get them from the
Speaker 2: guy at a dramatically reduced price. Because I wasn't going
Speaker 2: to pay that much money for that. I can't don't
Speaker 2: have that kind of much money, so it's easy not
Speaker 2: to pay it if you don't have it. But anyway,
Speaker 2: that got the stompers, and the guy said that I
Speaker 2: can interview him about when he used them, and long
Speaker 2: and short, he's telling me the story. And as oh
Speaker 2: my god, that's the first chapter of Barbara Wahson's book.
Speaker 2: And of course, since the NABC has the Barbara Watson
Speaker 2: collection in their archives, I went to the archives. I
Speaker 2: pulled the personal letter to Barbara Wasawson out that put
Speaker 2: her down in that shake mill in rent and where
Speaker 2: she cast this footprint that was made by those stoppers
Speaker 2: and she never knew it, you know. So these cold cases,
Speaker 2: there's always something you can get out of them, and
Speaker 2: I think that those are not only fascinating to kind
Speaker 2: of set the record straight. In the case of Barbara
Speaker 2: Wasson's track, you know, and how would she know she
Speaker 2: it was fake? You know, there were like a dozen
Speaker 2: footprint casts in the world at that point or twenty
Speaker 2: or something. They didn't have a big data set like
Speaker 2: we have now. Of course they wouldn't know. But these
Speaker 2: cold cases, all of them are worth looking into because
Speaker 2: there's always something else to learn, and sometimes it's disappointing,
Speaker 2: like oh, like that track was fake, okay, But sometimes
Speaker 2: there's cool stuff like, oh my god, look at this
Speaker 2: picture of doctor Krantz literally pointing at the footprint. That
Speaker 2: can then some sasquatches are real, literally pointing at that
Speaker 2: cast or that that footprint of the ground before he
Speaker 2: cast it, like a snapshot in history that changed the
Speaker 2: course of everyone's life. If you're interested in Bigfoot, that
Speaker 2: stuff is significant, like the weight of history is never
Speaker 2: lost upon me.
Speaker 1: Well, there's also the issue that a a lot of
Speaker 1: these books are out of print, and of the books
Speaker 1: that are still in print, many people aren't reading them, unfortunately,
Speaker 1: not as many people as we would like from the
Speaker 1: Bigfoot interested general public, you know. And so who else
Speaker 1: is talking about this? Who is going to inform the
Speaker 1: audience that such things exist or inform the audience about
Speaker 1: what things happened the past, if not the researchers who
Speaker 1: actually are familiar with those things. So that's I think
Speaker 1: the first level is that, well, if you're into this subject,
Speaker 1: and you're naturally into the history, and you speak publicly
Speaker 1: about the subject, then there is a bit of an
Speaker 1: obligation and an opportunity to lay out that history for
Speaker 1: people who wouldn't be confronted with it otherwise. But then also,
Speaker 1: you know, if you do find these new revelations about
Speaker 1: old cases, well of course you have to talk about
Speaker 1: it because otherwise it'll remain in that quote unquote settled category.
Speaker 1: But that's a big part of what we do with
Speaker 1: this podcast is so that if such a thing does
Speaker 1: come up around the campfire, let's say somewhere, someone could go, oh, actually,
Speaker 1: did you know that Cliff Berckman found X, Y and
Speaker 1: Z about that? Yeah, let me share the episode with you.
Speaker 1: Check this out, you know, because you're not going to
Speaker 1: write a book every time something gets overturned or changed, right,
Speaker 1: So this is the most direct efficient way to keep
Speaker 1: people up to date about new revelations with the history
Speaker 1: and to educate people about the history in general, because
Speaker 1: most of the content related to this subject is just
Speaker 1: modern encounter stories you know, on YouTube and other podcasts.
Speaker 1: There's not a lot of other places digging into that history.
Speaker 1: So you know, I would say to Brian, like, that's
Speaker 1: why you hear us at least talk about it so often,
Speaker 1: is like, that's kind of the job. It's kind of
Speaker 1: the obligation, like we we love the history, and you
Speaker 1: would not want me to assume that you have read
Speaker 1: everything that I've read, because then half of what I
Speaker 1: say won't make sense to you. You know what I mean,
Speaker 1: there's not the same If we haven't read all the
Speaker 1: same information, have the same familiarity with the history, then
Speaker 1: there's not a common language to draw upon or borrow from.
Speaker 1: You know, if Cliffs says, oh, yeah, this is this
Speaker 1: is like you know, the Glenn Thomas site, But well,
Speaker 1: if no one knows what that is, it's not going
Speaker 1: to make any sense to them in a conversation. So
Speaker 1: our job is to inform the audience about every one
Speaker 1: of these cases and instances and the foundational events and
Speaker 1: the foundational literature that we all stand upon without even knowing.
Speaker 1: Half of the audience not even knowing that they're standing
Speaker 1: on a foundation, you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the history of the I have a degree in music,
Speaker 2: right and I'm a jazz guitarist. I study jazz, so
Speaker 2: I can play whatever, but I play modern music. I
Speaker 2: played twentieth century and whatever music like. But nonetheless, when
Speaker 2: I got a degree in my instruments, I had to
Speaker 2: go back and learn about Gregorian chant had I had
Speaker 2: to go back to the beginnings of written music, and
Speaker 2: we don't know anything about the music before that because
Speaker 2: it wasn't written, you know, I mean, so we had
Speaker 2: to go back to the beginning of the literature and
Speaker 2: start studying from there. I had, you know, five hundred years,
Speaker 2: six hundred years of you know, music education, so I
Speaker 2: can better unders understand my guitar, my guitar, you know.
Speaker 2: And and I think that being a semi professional speaker
Speaker 2: on the subject of sasquatch, that's my responsibility. It's my
Speaker 2: responsibility to the subject because whether I like it or not,
Speaker 2: a whole bunch of people are now Bigfooters because of
Speaker 2: the show that Bobo and I were on right and
Speaker 2: and it would be a disservice to the subject if
Speaker 2: we didn't give background and thoughts and and and and
Speaker 2: share the foundation of our our subject of study. It
Speaker 2: would be a disservice. Stay tuned for more Bigfoot and
Speaker 2: Beyond with Cliff and Bobo will be right back after
Speaker 2: these messages. I don't go online very often, but when
Speaker 2: I do, I see a lot of people who are
Speaker 2: self professed experts, people actually literally claiming to be experts,
Speaker 2: which is silly, I think. And then if they're not
Speaker 2: claiming it, they have podcasts, or they produce blogs, or
Speaker 2: they're on YouTube doing something. And all these people are
Speaker 2: putting themselves in a position of being somewhat of an
Speaker 2: expert on Sasquatches. And I have to wonder how many
Speaker 2: of those people really know who the you know, who
Speaker 2: who Archie Buckley is or somebody like that, you know,
Speaker 2: just throwing a name that you know. Forty years ago
Speaker 2: everybody in Bigfoot would know, and nowadays you gotta wonder.
Speaker 2: I've spoken to people at the conferences in the museum,
Speaker 2: how oh, they're really into the subject and they love
Speaker 2: this and now they spend their time doing this. But
Speaker 2: maybe heard of John Green. It's like, what you're not
Speaker 2: you have it?
Speaker 3: What?
Speaker 2: And And I don't know. I feel that if I
Speaker 2: wasn't doing if we weren't talking about this, because all
Speaker 2: three of us are big fans of the history of
Speaker 2: the subject, if we weren't doing this, I don't know
Speaker 2: who else would be. I mean there's very I mean
Speaker 2: Todd Prescott, I mean, he does a great job with
Speaker 2: his Sasquatch archives. There's a couple people out there but
Speaker 2: not nearly as many as I think there should be.
Speaker 2: And I think that that is why that we are
Speaker 2: emphasizing the historical stuff, perhaps even more than the modern stuff,
Speaker 2: because the discoveries the vanguard of the subject was then,
Speaker 2: because not as much stuff is really happening now. I
Speaker 2: have a hard time thinking of really anything off the
Speaker 2: top of my head. I'm sure there's stuff I'm just
Speaker 2: not thinking of it that that's really important that has
Speaker 2: been pushed ahead in the last say five years or
Speaker 2: ten years, even you know, in the sat in the
Speaker 2: Sasquatch Field, I don't know what that would be beat.
Speaker 2: But yet back then they were all new discoveries, which
Speaker 2: also brings up another thing that I think we I've
Speaker 2: said a couple of times the early guys, as great
Speaker 2: as they were, weren't that great. I know that's sacrilege
Speaker 2: to say. I mean, it's super sacrilegious to say for
Speaker 2: some people. But you know, Renee de Hinden didn't know tracks,
Speaker 2: He didn't know about footprint tracks. You know, Bob Timmas,
Speaker 2: who knows what he knew? He didn't write anything down,
Speaker 2: who knows. We only have rumors in what little he
Speaker 2: did right on the back of footprint casts. Krantz knew
Speaker 2: his stuff. He was a respected anatomist and an anthropologist
Speaker 2: and the specializing in bones and stuff like that, you know,
Speaker 2: But on John Green he was very good at the
Speaker 2: interviewing stuff and writing things down and chronicling that sort
Speaker 2: of thing. Very good about that stuff. Peter, I don't
Speaker 2: who knows.
Speaker 1: Who knows.
Speaker 2: He did some good work on the history of the
Speaker 2: Patterson Gimlin film trying to find some stuff. But beyond
Speaker 2: that is I don't know. We just don't know. And
Speaker 2: this old stuff that we have been looking at that
Speaker 2: we are that we enjoy talking about here on the podcast.
Speaker 2: Because they were the first, they can't be the best.
Speaker 2: Does that make sense? Like they were the first, so
Speaker 2: how could they be expected to be the best there
Speaker 2: is at this And that means their work can be
Speaker 2: improved upon? And my argument at the cold cases, but
Speaker 2: every time I look into one there's new stuff. That's
Speaker 2: an example of that. That's evidence for the sacrilege I'm
Speaker 2: slinging right now is that they were the first. They
Speaker 2: did not have the benefit that we have of standing
Speaker 2: on their shoulders. We're only as good as we are now,
Speaker 2: and we know so much more than they do than
Speaker 2: they did. It's because we're standing on their shoulders and
Speaker 2: it's interesting to look at what they were doing at
Speaker 2: the time with the context of our present day history
Speaker 2: of the subject.
Speaker 1: I think the other big thing that we try to
Speaker 1: push a lot. I know we've talked about it on
Speaker 1: the Members episodes multiple times, so I'm certain we've talked
Speaker 1: about it a lot here since this side of the
Speaker 1: show has been running for years longer, is that we're
Speaker 1: always trying to empower people, you know, because every one
Speaker 1: of us spent years chasing stories and chasing reports and
Speaker 1: chasing track findes and things like that. And you do
Speaker 1: have some successes doing that. In a lot of times
Speaker 1: you get out there and they turn out to be
Speaker 1: bear tracks or they turn out to be boot tracks,
Speaker 1: or whatever the case may be. But you also, once
Speaker 1: you start being really proactive, I think you get to
Speaker 1: a point where when you get a phone call from
Speaker 1: two states away, or you know, a day and a
Speaker 1: half's drive away, you say, like, you know, there's nothing
Speaker 1: I can do that you can't do, So let me
Speaker 1: walk you through how best to photograph these and you
Speaker 1: know how best to place your tape measure or your
Speaker 1: scale item in these photographs and let me walk you
Speaker 1: through where to go get plaster or how to mix
Speaker 1: it up, or let me send you some links or
Speaker 1: some YouTube tutorials. And so it doesn't really require a
Speaker 1: John Green to be on the scene. To quote Tommy Amerone,
Speaker 1: it doesn't require that anymore. Is that, like you know,
Speaker 1: anybody can go do this, and so like, if you
Speaker 1: were to find something somewhere, the best thing you could
Speaker 1: do is do your very best to document it instead
Speaker 1: of placing a call to a sasquatch research sure and
Speaker 1: hoping that one of them will show up. And may
Speaker 1: be great if you had someone in your area and
Speaker 1: if there was something that was like if the timing
Speaker 1: worked out and it was near enough to me, but
Speaker 1: I'd love to see it. But for the most part,
Speaker 1: what I've been telling people for over a decade now,
Speaker 1: when I stopped really investigating witness reports, was just saying like, well, hey,
Speaker 1: here's the audio recorder I would suggest you invest in.
Speaker 1: If you say you're hearing these sounds every night, you
Speaker 1: can capture them. You can capture a lot better than
Speaker 1: I can for me having to drive ten hours to
Speaker 1: your place and set up an audio recorder or you know,
Speaker 1: here's how to photograph these things, or pour plaster into tracts,
Speaker 1: whatever the case may be. And so I think that's
Speaker 1: a big part of the reason that Brian or others
Speaker 1: might not hear that same. Like it's almost like the
Speaker 1: old documentaries presented it as if you remember, like Tom
Speaker 1: Buscardy had the vehicle that was wrapped with all the
Speaker 1: logos and everything, and so there's this vision that's been
Speaker 1: presented in the media of like the team scouring the country.
Speaker 1: I think there was a TV show that started in
Speaker 1: like twenty eleven about a team scouring the country chasing
Speaker 1: things down that might have contributed to some people's thoughts too,
Speaker 1: you know, with you guys wrote it around. But I
Speaker 1: think maybe that's what people think, is that bigfoot research
Speaker 1: as you know, a team in cool vehicles who are
Speaker 1: like ready to when the bat phone rings, you know,
Speaker 1: hop in the batmobile and go. But it's not like that,
Speaker 1: and it's not necessary because there's nothing that any of
Speaker 1: us can do that a person couldn't do on their own.
Speaker 2: You know. It just takes time and commitment. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 2: probably in a little bit of money, I guess, you know,
Speaker 2: as a bottom line, and.
Speaker 1: If I had time and endless resources, I'd love to
Speaker 1: hop and chase down a bunch of these things. It'd
Speaker 1: be so much fun. It's not because it's not fun
Speaker 1: or exciting. It's because the real world comes in. But
Speaker 1: I do think that there exists is sort of expectation
Speaker 1: because of that that media image you know of the
Speaker 1: team scouring the country, But I don't think that exists
Speaker 1: in reality, nor should it.
Speaker 2: Well, I think a lot of people tend to give
Speaker 2: their power away, you know, like they like you were saying,
Speaker 2: anybody could do this. It's not rocket science. You go there,
Speaker 2: you talk to somebody, you record what they say, you
Speaker 2: file it at the end of the day. What else
Speaker 2: is it sort to do? With a lot of sighting reports, really,
Speaker 2: you know, that's all I would do. I may have
Speaker 2: some interesting insights on what to ask or some patterns
Speaker 2: that they don't recognize or whatever, but that comes with
Speaker 2: time and there's no other substitute from actually doing it yourself.
Speaker 2: A lot of people are more than willing to pass
Speaker 2: on the expertise to somebody else, and sure there are experts.
Speaker 2: Doctor Meldrum was an expert in food anatomy for example,
Speaker 2: you know, there are there are literally experts and a
Speaker 2: lot of different things, but as far as the bigfoot
Speaker 2: like thing, there's are very few people should be considered
Speaker 2: an expert in this. In fact, arguably no one should
Speaker 2: be considered an expert in this because really what they're
Speaker 2: doing is copwork. You know, we're going out and interviewing people,
Speaker 2: we're talking, we're filing papers. That's kind of it.
Speaker 1: But you know, it can be an expert in the history.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's the thing you could be an expert in.
Speaker 1: It's like the history of claims, the history of the
Speaker 1: pursuit of the sasquatch, the history of evidence collection, all
Speaker 1: the analysis on record of said evidence. Like you can
Speaker 1: develop familiarity with all that stuff to the point of expertise,
Speaker 1: so you can be an expert in sasquatchery. Now, no
Speaker 1: one's an expert in the animals themselves, obviously, as people
Speaker 1: you know say ad nauseum. But that doesn't mean, oh well,
Speaker 1: I don't need to read a book because there are
Speaker 1: no experts. It's like, no, if there's anything you can
Speaker 1: be an expert in, it's at least the history.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think part of giving away one's power
Speaker 2: in this field is depending on other people to come
Speaker 2: and do your research for you. It's like, oh, I'm
Speaker 2: going to call the BFRO because they've got top notch people,
Speaker 2: and yeah, they're they're like they're they're kind of like
Speaker 2: everybody else. Man, They're gonna call you on the phone,
Speaker 2: or maybe go out to the spot if it's recent,
Speaker 2: that kind of thing, take some pictures, write some notes,
Speaker 2: and guess what they're gonna do. I They're gonna file
Speaker 2: it at the end of the day. You could do that.
Speaker 2: You could do that about your own bigfoot encounter and
Speaker 2: then start looking ato other ones. You can go to
Speaker 2: the woods. Man, I'm not going crazy on the woods.
Speaker 2: I'm walking abandoned roads, that's it. And I'm finding good stuff. Man.
Speaker 2: I take pictures and I take video, and I take
Speaker 2: notes and I file it.
Speaker 1: That's kind of it. Man.
Speaker 2: I'm this. You know those crabs that like walk around
Speaker 2: the bottom of the ocean and they pick up things
Speaker 2: and put it on their shell. That's what I do.
Speaker 1: That's what I do.
Speaker 2: But you know, I pick up weird things in the
Speaker 2: woods and I file them. You know, I'm just one
Speaker 2: of those weird crabs or you know, I'm some glorified secretary.
Speaker 2: I'm putting things in their place after I discover them
Speaker 2: and seeing if I can figure out a pattern afterwards.
Speaker 2: And anybody, you know, if you consider yourself a sasquatch researcher,
Speaker 2: there's lots and lots of ways to research. Of course,
Speaker 2: you know, there's lots of good armchair researchers that do
Speaker 2: great things as well, lots of good ways to research.
Speaker 2: But you know, you just have to do it this.
Speaker 2: Don't depend on other people to do it for you.
Speaker 1: And if you're thorough, I mean, think about you. Remember
Speaker 1: when the big debate happened over the Skukum cast and
Speaker 1: you know, the John Green and I think the Derek
Speaker 1: Randall's side of that argument was like, we need to
Speaker 1: take this in a vehicle and go on tour from
Speaker 1: university to university and this two people to have it
Speaker 1: looked at. And the other side of the debate was like, no,
Speaker 1: it's kind of fragile. You know, it's pretty big. This
Speaker 1: is an important piece of evidence. We need to get
Speaker 1: people to come here and look at it. And that
Speaker 1: was the side of the argument that won, and ultimately
Speaker 1: almost no one looked at it. Well, today's world is
Speaker 1: mostly digital. You know, that was like twenty five, twenty
Speaker 1: six years ago. So in today's world, it's like, if
Speaker 1: you've done the things we just suggested about documenting something
Speaker 1: really well, well, if you want people to look at it,
Speaker 1: you could create a mold and poor copies of those
Speaker 1: casts and send them to you know, just a year ago,
Speaker 1: doctor Meldrim before he passed. You could send one to Cliff.
Speaker 1: You can send one to anybody who's willing to look
Speaker 1: at it. You can take three D scans and photographs,
Speaker 1: and you can send those to multiple experts without ever asking, hey,
Speaker 1: are you willing to pack up the car and drive
Speaker 1: eight hundred miles to come see these tracks in the
Speaker 1: ground like people used to do sixty plus years ago,
Speaker 1: And so you can still have the same effect that
Speaker 1: you're you're searching for. Is you know, if your thought is, well,
Speaker 1: I need to get a bunch of different researchers to
Speaker 1: ais on this. Well, the better you document it, the
Speaker 1: more people you're going to be able to convince to
Speaker 1: take a look at it, the easier you make it
Speaker 1: for them. And that's a lot of what we end
Speaker 1: up doing nowadays. If we're not in the field ourselves
Speaker 1: trying to, you know, proactively find evidence. We get sent
Speaker 1: things and evaluate things all the time, and like how
Speaker 1: much of what you have in your collection with things
Speaker 1: that people sent you, or like Joel, for example, finding
Speaker 1: that cast he sent it to you, you made a copy,
Speaker 1: et cetera. That didn't require you going to Oklahoma.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 2: No, I'd love to see the property, of course, but
Speaker 2: why you know, unless there's still stuff happening there. Which
Speaker 2: brings about another point I'd like to bring up is
Speaker 2: the halibut effect. It's this obscure term that very few
Speaker 2: people know about. Money Maker published it. I apparently said
Speaker 2: it to him at one point. He credits me with
Speaker 2: inventing it from when I was fishing in southern California.
Speaker 2: I would go fishing off the rocks, you know, and
Speaker 2: on the jetties and stuff. And I noticed for a
Speaker 2: long time, when I've caught halibit in a certain area,
Speaker 2: I'd catch a couple then like the bite would turn.
Speaker 2: If it went back the next week or the same tide,
Speaker 2: and a couple days later or something, I would catch
Speaker 2: more hal of it there, Like that was a spot
Speaker 2: for hal of it, And so I was commenting to
Speaker 2: Moneymaker one time about how sasquatches appear at the the
Speaker 2: same places again and again and again. I mean, this
Speaker 2: is a long time ago. This is, you know, thirty
Speaker 2: years ago. I was probably talking Tom about it, or
Speaker 2: almost thir twenty thirty years ago. He coined the term.
Speaker 2: He credited me with it, which is really nice. But
Speaker 2: he's the first guy to publish it for sure on
Speaker 2: his website. If a spot had bigfoots once, they'll have
Speaker 2: bigfoots again, unless that area has changed dramatically, like has
Speaker 2: been paved or something like that. And so these older
Speaker 2: reports are kind of cool in that sort of way
Speaker 2: that you can see the ongoing activity after all these years. Man,
Speaker 2: I think that alone makes them interesting from a historical perspective,
Speaker 2: because if their sasquatches there today, then certainly there must
Speaker 2: have been sasquatches there fifty sixty eighty years ago. Stay
Speaker 2: tuned for more Bigfoot and Beyond with Cliff and Bobo
Speaker 2: will be right back after these messages. I think we
Speaker 2: mentioned this last year at some point on the radio
Speaker 2: about that article. I think Warren Thompson wrote it. I
Speaker 2: think it was Warren Thompson who wrote it, and it
Speaker 2: was the state of Sasquatchry today or something like that
Speaker 2: anybody seventy one, I think, and I was commenting about
Speaker 2: how virtually nothing has changed since nineteen seventy one. Not
Speaker 2: a whole lot of new knowledge has been added to
Speaker 2: the board since that time. It could have been written
Speaker 2: yesterday and it would be a good article even still,
Speaker 2: So I have to ask if the gentleman who asked
Speaker 2: the question, whoever it was, is arguing that we should
Speaker 2: be continuing that tradition of doing it, I have to
Speaker 2: ask where did that get us? It got us to
Speaker 2: the point where we were in nineteen seventy one, and
Speaker 2: not much further since then. And of course we all
Speaker 2: start our bigfooting careers like that in a reactionary sort
Speaker 2: of way, chasing down siding reports and doing that stuff.
Speaker 2: But look at the people who did that for decades,
Speaker 2: Like Peter Burrne told me several times he spent six
Speaker 2: million dollars of other people's money chasing down bigfoot reports.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, where did that get him? Like one
Speaker 2: track find that that not even sure is real, and
Speaker 2: maybe he's been around Bigfoot twice or something like that,
Speaker 2: and eventually come to the conclusion that they went extinct
Speaker 2: in twenty two, two thousand and six, until because there
Speaker 2: were no incredible reports after that, Like, I don't know,
Speaker 2: I mean, where did that get you where? I mean,
Speaker 2: it didn't make It doesn't make sense to me. So
Speaker 2: that reactionary sort of thing. Yeah, yeah, it's in my
Speaker 2: back pocket. If a report came in today that somebody
Speaker 2: saw one right now on you know, on whatever road,
Speaker 2: you know, on Lusted Road over something or something like that,
Speaker 2: I would run out one hundred percent. But what do
Speaker 2: you do in the meantime? You just can't sit around
Speaker 2: and wait for a call to come in. Man, you
Speaker 2: got to I think that the most important thing to
Speaker 2: do is go out there and start building a model
Speaker 2: of what you think these animals are doing. And that's
Speaker 2: why I do that. That of course, that's also probably
Speaker 2: why I think is the most important thing, because I'm
Speaker 2: doing it is something I'm actually I feel that is
Speaker 2: for furthering the subject and furthering at least my own
Speaker 2: understanding or at least my model of what the sasquatches
Speaker 2: are up to. And I think that has value. But
Speaker 2: I do have a lot of incoming information. I'm very
Speaker 2: lucky that if somebody does see a sasquatch, I'll probably
Speaker 2: hear about it, and not too long, you know, or
Speaker 2: maybe not probably, but I might hear about it. I
Speaker 2: have a better chance of hearing about it than a
Speaker 2: lot of other people do because at the museum and whatever,
Speaker 2: you know, just how accessible I am. But I would
Speaker 2: say I would argue that back in the day, they
Speaker 2: were doing the best they had with what the best
Speaker 2: they could with what they had. But we have so
Speaker 2: much more now. And maybe that's his argument. It's like, well,
Speaker 2: we should be paying more attention to what's going on now,
Speaker 2: but where is it? Where's the results of that? I
Speaker 2: don't see it, So I don't know. I don't know.
Speaker 2: I'm hoping for something good, like another piece of footage
Speaker 2: or something like that, or I'd love to see one
Speaker 2: that's just for my own personal benefit. It wouldn't help
Speaker 2: the subject necessarily. But you know, what else are we
Speaker 2: going to be doing here? I mean, if it's not
Speaker 2: DNA or you know, carrying around a high powered rifle, Like,
Speaker 2: what else? What else are we trying to do here? Well?
Speaker 1: I think we are out there paying attention, but mostly
Speaker 1: in our areas. You know, there are study sites. I'm
Speaker 1: interested to hear on what's going on in you know,
Speaker 1: Texas or Arizona or New Mexico, but I'm not interested
Speaker 1: enough to pay incredibly close attention to it and be
Speaker 1: like hyper vigilant about it because this is just too
Speaker 1: far from me. And so I think nowadays, like I
Speaker 1: mentioned earlier, we all have a big enough network collectively
Speaker 1: with friends that we know and trust, colleagues that we
Speaker 1: like and trust that you know, a lot of that
Speaker 1: stuff's covered and doesn't require us to crank the car
Speaker 1: and drive that far.
Speaker 2: It is surprising, though, how many people think a lot
Speaker 2: in kind of oblique ways about that. I've gotten several
Speaker 2: emails just over the last maybe six months or year,
Speaker 2: just because I get a lot of emails, likely, but
Speaker 2: the attitude on the other end seems to be and
Speaker 2: sometimes they come out and straight say this, saying like, look,
Speaker 2: I've got them on the property. I know all about
Speaker 2: this stuff. If you really cared about the subject, you
Speaker 2: would come out here. But you're not here, so you're
Speaker 2: just a hack.
Speaker 1: And you want to tell them like yeah, and I've
Speaker 1: got like ten of you saying the same thing, so
Speaker 1: you know you want to draw straws, you know, like.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what kind of thing is like, if you cared,
Speaker 2: you would be here. It's like, what were you talking
Speaker 2: about it? If I if I didn't care, what I have?
Speaker 2: You know, like what I have devoted my life to this?
Speaker 2: You know, like I can't. It's hard for me to
Speaker 2: remember a day that I didn't do something bigfooty. But
Speaker 2: yet here's this person I've never met judging me from
Speaker 2: across the country or something, or just across a continent
Speaker 2: or something like if you really cared, you'd be out here.
Speaker 1: Now, I think where the empowerment comes in where you
Speaker 1: try to really tell them like, well, hey you can
Speaker 1: document this, you don't need me, Like you'll be so
Speaker 1: much more proud of it, you know if you document something.
Speaker 1: But yeah, it got to a point towards the end
Speaker 1: of me working with a lot of witnesses where that
Speaker 1: was like a very common sentiment is that you know, oh,
Speaker 1: they're here every night. Then I would spend several nights
Speaker 1: there and not much would happen, and I would try
Speaker 1: to walk them through how to document it themselves, and
Speaker 1: then you know, you get a late night call or
Speaker 1: eleven pm text like hey, they're here. Now are you
Speaker 1: going to come here? And like, no, I live five
Speaker 1: hours away. I can't really come there right now, And like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: I thought you were serious. I thought you were a
Speaker 1: serious researcher. After a while, you're like, I'm not doing
Speaker 1: that anymore.
Speaker 2: Now. If I want to argue with crazy people, I'll
Speaker 2: just stay alone, you know, I'll go for a walk
Speaker 2: with my own head. You know.
Speaker 1: Another thing I was thinking about is I think in
Speaker 1: those early days it wasn't naivity. It's just there was
Speaker 1: no reason for as much cynicism as there is maybe nowadays,
Speaker 1: or at least pessimism, if not cynicism. But back then
Speaker 1: it was really important to document every track. And nowadays
Speaker 1: it's like, well, there's a massive repository of tracks, almost
Speaker 1: all of which are now with you, Cliff, that we
Speaker 1: have a pretty detailed track record, and you're active in
Speaker 1: your areas to add to that. But you know you
Speaker 1: can understan that. Back then it was like, well, you
Speaker 1: don't know when or if you'll ever see or hear
Speaker 1: about another track, so you are willing to drive, you know,
Speaker 1: eight hundred miles to go try to find them and
Speaker 1: cast them. But you know, after many hundred of examples
Speaker 1: of tracks from around the country, and that not constituting proof.
Speaker 1: It's like, well, no, I'll drive eighty miles, but I
Speaker 1: don't have to drive eight hundred miles, you know. Whereas
Speaker 1: I think something different would be if there was a
Speaker 1: really credible report or a potentially credible report that involved remains, well,
Speaker 1: then yeah, I think there are still levels of things.
Speaker 1: Because I was thinking about Brian's question when he said,
Speaker 1: has the expectation for what we find exciting moved so
Speaker 1: far that it takes something outrageous to get folks to care.
Speaker 1: It's like, no, we all we care about tracks, and
Speaker 1: we care about you know. I still care a lot
Speaker 1: about siding reports of you know, certain kinds, siding reports
Speaker 1: of a certain nature, siding reports from certain areas. But again,
Speaker 1: I don't think it would take something outrageous to get
Speaker 1: the quote unquote community to care, but something really substantial
Speaker 1: that it's like, oh, this really could make a difference
Speaker 1: versus like, I don't know that me driving eight hundred
Speaker 1: miles and casting a track is going to make much
Speaker 1: of a difference when A I probably know someone who
Speaker 1: can go do that who's closer, or b I can
Speaker 1: instruct witness, how to cast it, all the things we've
Speaker 1: already previously discussed. But yeah, I do think there are
Speaker 1: levels to that. You know, if if Cliff and Bobo
Speaker 1: heard a credible report from like central California remains, I'm
Speaker 1: sure you guys would make the drive. You know, Well,
Speaker 1: that's just it.
Speaker 2: It's got to be worth it. Last week alone, I
Speaker 2: probably saw two or three dozen tracks last week alone
Speaker 2: in three days that I was out there, because I know,
Speaker 2: I found more than a dozen the first day out there,
Speaker 2: so the other and I've found two spots on Wednesday
Speaker 2: and I won two three three year spots on Friday.
Speaker 2: You know that many hundreds of yards apart each one.
Speaker 2: I've found small little snippets of trackways you know that
Speaker 2: I just lost and I couldn't find after that. They
Speaker 2: didn't disobear, they didn't you know, that whole paranormal nonsense.
Speaker 2: I just I'm not a good enough tracker to follow them.
Speaker 2: Lost them. No big deal. But it's got to be
Speaker 2: something special or I'm not going to go that distance.
Speaker 2: And back then everything was special because you know, it
Speaker 2: took John Green until like nineteen what seventy eight when
Speaker 2: he published Apes among Us it is that seventy eight
Speaker 2: and I think it's seventy eight. It might be seventy six,
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter. It took him till the late seventies
Speaker 2: to get together. You know, sixteen hundred sighting reports, sighting reports,
Speaker 2: you know, and I mean sixteen hundred sighting reports nowadays
Speaker 2: is a lot, but it's not that many. There's probably
Speaker 2: several researchers who are diligent and pulling reports that have
Speaker 2: documented and written down follow up reports on that many.
Speaker 2: There's probably you know, Charlie Raymond or somebody like that
Speaker 2: probably has something like that. I have no idea, but
Speaker 2: looking back, the last time I drove any reasonable distance
Speaker 2: was a couple of years ago because there were snow
Speaker 2: tracks down and where was that southern Oregon, somewhere at
Speaker 2: north of Klamath. Where was that? Doesn't matter where it was. Yeah,
Speaker 2: so I had to drive four hours to go try
Speaker 2: to get snow tracks that appeared the night before. And
Speaker 2: I probably would have done that for a fresh set
Speaker 2: of tracks anyway, but snow tracks for something special because
Speaker 2: I was hoping to get e DNA out of them.
Speaker 2: You take e DNA out out of the forest, you're
Speaker 2: gonna get DNA of squirrels and deer and bear and
Speaker 2: elk and everything else that lives there. But if you
Speaker 2: have fresh snow tracks that have been laid down in
Speaker 2: the last day or two, pretty much the only thing
Speaker 2: that you're gonna get DNA out of from that snow
Speaker 2: is the thing that made the track. And that's why
Speaker 2: I went down there. It was an effort to try
Speaker 2: to get DNA of the species so we can prove
Speaker 2: them without killing one. See, that would push things forward
Speaker 2: quite a bit, quite a bit. But just a track
Speaker 2: or something in the duff, or a siding report or
Speaker 2: somebody saw one across the road. Yeah, I'd probably drive
Speaker 2: an hour or two or three maybe, you know, But
Speaker 2: I'm not going to drive seven or eight or ten
Speaker 2: most likely, you know. If the good tracks, I might
Speaker 2: do that, but just because I'm kind of a track
Speaker 2: guy and I think they're cool, but not for a
Speaker 2: sighting report to go look around and probably not find anything.
Speaker 2: I've done that lots and lots and lots of times for.
Speaker 1: The right things. I mean, I've drive to Georgia all
Speaker 1: the time. That's where I go do field research. That's
Speaker 1: five hundred miles round trip. I can't say how many
Speaker 1: times I've made that drive since I've lived in Tennessee
Speaker 1: for the last twelve years. When I lived in Seattle,
Speaker 1: I was out in the field all the time in Washington, Oregon,
Speaker 1: but I would still fly back to Georgia all the
Speaker 1: time when I was working with the NAWAC and spending
Speaker 1: time in the field with Daryl and Mike Mays. I
Speaker 1: went to Area X twenty four times. That's a thousand
Speaker 1: mile round trip for me. So that's twenty four thousand
Speaker 1: miles right there in a seven year period, you know.
Speaker 1: So it's not like we're not doing those things.
Speaker 2: It's just got to be worth it, you know. I'll
Speaker 2: go to Bluff Creek this year, probably because I like
Speaker 2: the vacation I like the area, I like the bigfoot stuff,
Speaker 2: and I like vacationing. I'll go there, But that's not
Speaker 2: my research spot. You know. That might be Bobo's research
Speaker 2: spot because he lives close, but that's not mine. I
Speaker 2: just like to go there if I find something that's great,
Speaker 2: and if I don't, I still had a good time.
Speaker 2: No big deal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, head out there Monday.
Speaker 2: Oh good, Well, I know that before we go, I
Speaker 2: should probably put a plug in for squatch Fest, which
Speaker 2: is this weekend. I'm going to be there, Like I said,
Speaker 2: Kathy Strain's going to be there, a bunch of UFO folks,
Speaker 2: some paranormal bigfoot people are going to be there. But yeah,
Speaker 2: if you want to come out and hang out and stuff,
Speaker 2: I have a very very small number of those pigeon
Speaker 2: stickers left, So if you are a pigeon, you can
Speaker 2: come out and do the thing, and I'll give you
Speaker 2: the thing there. But yeah, squatch Fest is this weekend.
Speaker 2: I'm going to be talking about Doctor Meldrum's track Fine
Speaker 2: in nineteen ninety six and some of the historical consequences
Speaker 2: of that show you some things you've probably never seen,
Speaker 2: some historical artifacts and that sort of thing. It should
Speaker 2: be a good time, that generally is. Squatchfest is one
Speaker 2: of those gigs that I enjoyed doing, not only because
Speaker 2: it's close, because there's good people, you know, good people around,
Speaker 2: So hopefully I'll see you out there.
Speaker 3: All right, folks, there's a link in the notes down
Speaker 3: below for the squatch Fest. I recommend it highly. All Right, folks, Well,
Speaker 3: thanks for joining us. Thanks for support. Hit like, hit Share.
Speaker 3: Let your friends and family know coworkers. Everyone, let you
Speaker 3: enjoy the show and to check it out. And if
Speaker 3: you don't enjoy it, tell us somebody who don't like
Speaker 3: to listen to it. All right, well, until next week,
Speaker 3: keep it Squatchy.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to this week's episode of Bigfoot and Beyond.
Speaker 2: If you liked what you heard, please rate and review
Speaker 2: us on iTunes, subscribe to Bigfoot and Beyond wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts, and follow us on Facebook and Instagram
Speaker 2: at Bigfoot and Beyond podcast. You can find us on
Speaker 2: Twitter at Bigfoot and Beyond that's an N in the middle,
Speaker 2: and tweet us your thoughts and questions with the hashtag
Speaker 2: Bigfoot and Beyond.