Speaker 1: Big Food and Beyond.
Speaker 2: With Cliff and Bobo. These guys, are you fav It's
Speaker 2: so like say subscribe and rade it five star and
Speaker 2: me greatest on Quesh today listening watching limb always keep
Speaker 2: it's watching.
Speaker 1: And now you're hosts Cliff Berrickman and James Bobo Fay.
Speaker 2: Hey, everybody, welcome back to another episode of Bigfoot and
Speaker 2: Beyond with Cliff and usually Bobo. Bobo is not in today.
Speaker 2: The doctor is not here, so anyway, Yeah, he's got
Speaker 2: some other more pressing issues at the moment, including flat
Speaker 2: tires and I don't know this crazy Bobo stuff. You'll
Speaker 2: have to hear it directly from him when he gets back.
Speaker 2: So this is another opportunity for us to do an
Speaker 2: episode with Matt Pruitt. The lovely and talented Matt Prue
Speaker 2: will be subbing. Hi, Matt, how you doing today?
Speaker 1: I'm great because this marks a historic first because I'm
Speaker 1: looking at the clock and this is the first time
Speaker 1: that we've ever hit record in the minute that we
Speaker 1: were scheduled to start in five and a half years,
Speaker 1: So congratulations to us. Yeah, I had a lot of
Speaker 1: great updates for Bobo, so I will miss him a
Speaker 1: lot because I was really looking forward to reading some
Speaker 1: sentiments that were sent in for him to him, so
Speaker 1: we'll save that for next time. So, Bobo, you'll be
Speaker 1: missed and you'll be pleasantly surprised when you rejoin.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, I understand a lot of people wrote in
Speaker 2: condolences about his trailer. Is that correct? Is that why
Speaker 2: he's getting condolences?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I think he got more sympathy for losing the
Speaker 1: trailer than maybe he did for either his dog or
Speaker 1: his bird.
Speaker 2: So, oh my gosh, Monkey and Sergio didn't get as
Speaker 2: much love as the trailer did.
Speaker 1: Yeah. When Sergio transitioned to the other side, you know,
Speaker 1: Bobo was talking about I love that bird so much, dude,
Speaker 1: he was so great. So I went back through a
Speaker 1: bunch of our old raw files to try to find
Speaker 1: instances of him talking to the bird to sort of
Speaker 1: support that everyone, and was like, Sergio shut up. So
Speaker 1: Bobo's he's got a very particular way of showing love.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, and it makes me think he must really
Speaker 2: like me for all the cliff that I get from him.
Speaker 1: So yeah, he's told me to shut up many times,
Speaker 1: so he must adore us. He's probably doing it right.
Speaker 1: Now because I know he's listening to.
Speaker 2: This probably probably, yeah, he does listen to every single
Speaker 2: episode and as a member, a member, and of course
Speaker 2: if you want to become a member, you can always
Speaker 2: go to Bigfoot and Beyond podcast dot com and it
Speaker 2: hit that member link and I'll tell you all about it.
Speaker 2: You get good stuff for an extra hour of Cliff,
Speaker 2: Bobo and Matt. Every single week, you get this episode
Speaker 2: with zero commercials at all. Matt Proud goes in and
Speaker 2: edits out even the ones that we do live reads
Speaker 2: on to make sure that your listening experience is what
Speaker 2: you pay for. And what else do you get? Matt? Oh?
Speaker 2: You know, Matt, you know, you and I were talking
Speaker 2: earlier in the week and there's a couple of things
Speaker 2: that we've noticed from our audience. You know that we
Speaker 2: wanted to bring attention to number one, One of our
Speaker 2: most ihard fans ever was completely unaware that every once
Speaker 2: in a while we put out little snippets and things
Speaker 2: that you'll only get if you subscribe to the RSS feed. Matt,
Speaker 2: can you tell us a little bit more about that,
Speaker 2: because one of our most diehard fans was surprised that
Speaker 2: she's missing out on various things here, So we don't
Speaker 2: want anybody to be missing out. What can our listening
Speaker 2: audience do to make sure they don't miss anything, even
Speaker 2: the little five minute things that we put out every
Speaker 2: blue moon.
Speaker 1: So yeah, so when you join our Patreon account, Patreon
Speaker 1: is just an amazing platform. I can't say enough good
Speaker 1: things about They're just an amazing company and they provide
Speaker 1: a lot of tools to us as podcasters that just
Speaker 1: aren't offered on most of the platforms. And so when
Speaker 1: you join as a member, you're going to have access
Speaker 1: to our Patreon page, and so there is a feed there,
Speaker 1: and that feed is going to be essentially like a
Speaker 1: rolling blog that are updated posts. And so every Monday
Speaker 1: and every Thursday, I post whether there's supplemental images, supplemental videos,
Speaker 1: you know, whatever goes along with the episode you're hearing
Speaker 1: on that release. Because the main show comes out every
Speaker 1: Monday and the bonus show comes out every Thursday. And
Speaker 1: so some people will sign up for the app and
Speaker 1: only subscribe to the bonus podcast feed and not realize that,
Speaker 1: oh well, if you if you use the Patreon app,
Speaker 1: you're actually going to see all the images and or
Speaker 1: videos or you know, additional written text, written content that
Speaker 1: goes along with that discussion that you're hearing on the podcast.
Speaker 1: And then I think there's a number of people that
Speaker 1: tend to log into Patreon via a web browser, whether
Speaker 1: that's on a desktop or a laptop, or their you know,
Speaker 1: mobile browser on their smartphone or tablet. But Patreon does
Speaker 1: have a free app that in my experience, has a
Speaker 1: much better sort of user interface and offers a better
Speaker 1: user experience. And then it's easier through the app to
Speaker 1: send direct messages, you know, to communicate whether you want
Speaker 1: to submit questions for the members only Q and A episodes,
Speaker 1: And we also have community chats where you can chat
Speaker 1: with other members of the Bigfoot and beyond membership community.
Speaker 1: So there's always cool conversations going on there and people
Speaker 1: asking each other questions about books or documentaries or asking
Speaker 1: us questions. So it's a super cool experience and it
Speaker 1: really does generate a great sense of community.
Speaker 2: And Bobo logs in everyone, believe or not, Bobo is
Speaker 2: a member of our own podcast, so he logs in
Speaker 2: every once in a while and you know, shoots the
Speaker 2: poop with people and makes comments and all that sort
Speaker 2: of stuff too.
Speaker 1: So Bobo's better about interacting there, although he does that
Speaker 1: on our Facebook and Instagram accounts and things like that occasionally,
Speaker 1: but yeah, he's good about it on Patreon. So it
Speaker 1: makes it easy too. So if you are thinking about
Speaker 1: becoming a member, you can get the Patreon app for free. Again,
Speaker 1: it's really great, really easy to use and interact with.
Speaker 1: It just makes the whole experience a lot better than
Speaker 1: logging in when you get to your computer, because when
Speaker 1: we do video drops and things like that, those things
Speaker 1: play natively in the app, so you'll get a notification
Speaker 1: and you could watch whatever video we've posted. Cliff is
Speaker 1: kind enough to share a number of the ABC videos
Speaker 1: with us, So if an event happens that gets captured
Speaker 1: on video while close film and stuff for the ABC,
Speaker 1: after it goes out to NABC members through their Patreon
Speaker 1: account for a while, we'll put it out on the
Speaker 1: podcast side so people can see the visuals that went
Speaker 1: along with the podcast discussion we had, and you can
Speaker 1: do all that right through the app rather than having
Speaker 1: to wait till you get home and log in on
Speaker 1: your computer or whatever.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and just be clear that the North American Bigfoot
Speaker 2: Center the museum, I'm always talking about has a separate
Speaker 2: Patreon account. A lot of people think that they sign
Speaker 2: in for one, it's g get both, and I'm afraid
Speaker 2: that's just not the case. It's a separate entity, it's
Speaker 2: a separate job, it's a separate everything. So it just
Speaker 2: just heads up on that one. Although there is a
Speaker 2: lot of crossover obviously, because you know, I want to
Speaker 2: share whatever I can with people, so yeah, sometimes if
Speaker 2: it's pertinent or whatever, the NABC videos end up on
Speaker 2: the Bigfoot and Beyond video feed as well. But again,
Speaker 2: the NABC members they get two a month, and the
Speaker 2: podcast folks get won every blue moon. So but anyway,
Speaker 2: enough about all that stuff. But we're going to plow
Speaker 2: ahead anyway with our Q and A episode, which is
Speaker 2: what we had planned. We're just gonna kind of take
Speaker 2: out those questions that are more Bobo centric and kind
Speaker 2: of focus on the ones that are more Cliff and
Speaker 2: Matt centric. So so Bobo will still have a lot
Speaker 2: to talk about it our next Q and A, but
Speaker 2: in the meantime, we hop on and take the first voicemail.
Speaker 1: We got two voicemails that came in recently, so we'll
Speaker 1: get through those first and then move on to the
Speaker 1: written questions.
Speaker 3: Hey, Cliff and Bobo, this is Kyle coming at you
Speaker 3: from Bozeman, Montana. I was just wondering. You guys talk
Speaker 3: a lot about wildlife habitat. How much do you think
Speaker 3: a sasquatch, an omnivore would consume on a daily basis
Speaker 3: for vegetation and meat combined?
Speaker 2: We got I don't know. You know, that's a really
Speaker 2: good question because I don't know, But I'm not sure
Speaker 2: how good of an answer I can give on this one.
Speaker 2: Maybe Mattel had more insight, but you know, I've heard
Speaker 2: the number five thousand calories a day tossed around, but
Speaker 2: that's probably just based on mass or whatever. And of course,
Speaker 2: if we're basing that on maybe a two thousand or
Speaker 2: twenty five hundred calorie a day thing for human like
Speaker 2: an adult, say male, and I'm saying male just because
Speaker 2: males tend to be larger than females. There's a sexual
Speaker 2: dimorphism in humans, just like all the rape species. I
Speaker 2: think they're just basing it on just mass. But what
Speaker 2: they don't take into consideration is physiology. I think, like
Speaker 2: in general, because the apes seem to have a rather
Speaker 2: slow metabolism from what I understand, I could be wrong
Speaker 2: about that. There's a lot of things I'm wrong about,
Speaker 2: but from I understand, they have just generally slower metabolism.
Speaker 2: Maybe they don't need as many calories as people think.
Speaker 2: Maybe that that's kind of a human cage we're putting
Speaker 2: over the bigfoot as far as speculating how many calories
Speaker 2: a day they would need. And also when you think
Speaker 2: about how many calories a day, you got to think
Speaker 2: of that on average, I imagine there's plenty of days
Speaker 2: where sasquatches perhaps don't eat at all, or eat very
Speaker 2: very little, or really really low quality foods. There has
Speaker 2: been a lot of speculation about what kinds of foods
Speaker 2: sasquatches might be able to use on a regular basis.
Speaker 2: And you've probably heard me speaking before about deer versus elk.
Speaker 2: You know, you always see where the sunlight hits the
Speaker 2: forest floor, like road sides and meadows and power line
Speaker 2: cuts and railways and all that sort of stuff. Because
Speaker 2: deer need higher quality foods than say elk. Do elk
Speaker 2: can actually feed under the forest canopy in the shade
Speaker 2: where there's lower quality foods because they have an elongated
Speaker 2: intestinal track, so more time and more opportunity for the
Speaker 2: food product potential food product to have the nutrients extracted
Speaker 2: from it by retaining contact with the intestinal walls, right,
Speaker 2: and sasquatches very likely have that as well. In fact,
Speaker 2: I think it's a very very high probability that sasquatches
Speaker 2: can utilize very low quality foods, so that that would
Speaker 2: stop them from having to go out in the meadows
Speaker 2: and stuff all the time, which it might might be
Speaker 2: another small contributing factor about how or why they're seen rarely.
Speaker 2: And also I've talked about this before as well. When
Speaker 2: you look at the cranium that the skull of a sasquatch,
Speaker 2: and of course we don't have a skull, but if
Speaker 2: you look at the good pictures, like say that beautiful
Speaker 2: composite picture I think Bill Muns made, and there's a
Speaker 2: wonderful composite page photograph of all the different frames of
Speaker 2: Patty turning her head when she turned the head move
Speaker 2: and looked at Roger and Bob and then turned back.
Speaker 2: So you get this, I don't know, there's probably forty
Speaker 2: or fifty photographs in that one mosaic composite photograph, and
Speaker 2: you get a real, general good idea, generally good idea
Speaker 2: of what her head looks like and what you see
Speaker 2: there are chewing apparatz, you know. You see a big
Speaker 2: thick jaw, You see zygomatic arches, you see the sagital crest.
Speaker 2: You see that the majority of her head structure is
Speaker 2: for chewing, which also strongly points to her eating fibrous,
Speaker 2: low quality foods. But as far as calories per day,
Speaker 2: I imagine those low quality foods don't produce a lot
Speaker 2: of calorie but a lot of but rather a lot
Speaker 2: of bulk, you know, a lot of stuff the poop,
Speaker 2: but not a lot of calories. So I imagine, Hey, Matt,
Speaker 2: do you have to know how many like deer a
Speaker 2: week or a month mountain lions take down? Isn't it
Speaker 2: like one deer every week or two that they take
Speaker 2: down and that satisfies them?
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know what the averages. I'm sure
Speaker 1: you could look that up, and I'm sure it would
Speaker 1: depend on a number of other factors too, like the
Speaker 1: smaller game that they're taking in. If those are in abundance,
Speaker 1: it's probably fewer large game, you know, if there's more
Speaker 1: rabbits or you know, things have roughly that size for
Speaker 1: them to eat, then it's probably a lower number of
Speaker 1: deer versus in other areas where they're more reliant on
Speaker 1: the larger animals, et cetera. So it's a long winded
Speaker 1: way of saying I don't know, well.
Speaker 2: Long winded, and this is okay here because that's just
Speaker 2: because a little bit more informational, it's a little bit
Speaker 2: more thought process. But you know, like much is made
Speaker 2: about the sasquatch deer connection, of course, and I think
Speaker 2: that deer are probably a preferred food for saasquatches, but
Speaker 2: you know, deer can't be that easy to get, no
Speaker 2: matter how slinky and fast and strong you probably are.
Speaker 2: They're probably one of the more challenging prey items that
Speaker 2: are on the menu recent that are with any regularity. So,
Speaker 2: say that a sasquatch takes down a deer a week
Speaker 2: or every two weeks and supplements their their diet with
Speaker 2: all the other stuff that the stuff that not only
Speaker 2: the deer are eating, but maybe the stuff that the
Speaker 2: elk are eating as well, like the low, low quality foods.
Speaker 2: And then of course I find I have found, and
Speaker 2: I am aware of other people finding several sites where
Speaker 2: they sasquatches are feeding on rodents of various sorts, you know,
Speaker 2: mountain beavers or rats or you know, ground squirrels or
Speaker 2: any of these pikas or all that sort of stuff
Speaker 2: is on the menu. And I've also found were a
Speaker 2: juvenile and I say a juvenile with this is based
Speaker 2: on an eleven and a half inch footprint that was found,
Speaker 2: actually several trackway of eleven and a half inch footprints.
Speaker 2: These things are also tearing apart cedar stumps, you know,
Speaker 2: presumably going after grubs or termites or you know, whatever
Speaker 2: is living inside there. So those are probably the higher
Speaker 2: quality foods that are available readily, you know, more or
Speaker 2: less pretty much every day. They probably they can probably
Speaker 2: get insects, They can probably get all sorts of vegetation.
Speaker 2: I think rodents wouldn't be that big of a deal.
Speaker 2: You know, maybe not every day, but every couple days.
Speaker 2: Are probably snacking on some rats and stuff like that.
Speaker 2: And then deer are probably the more rare food items,
Speaker 2: is what I'm guessing. Deer and maybe small bear or
Speaker 2: small elk or something like that. You know, there's a
Speaker 2: woman on the kidsat Peninsula that wrote me years ago
Speaker 2: that has been living on the same property all of
Speaker 2: her life, and she has seen sasquatches on that property
Speaker 2: on a number of occasions, and she says, yeah, they're
Speaker 2: gone for a while, then they come back, and she says,
Speaker 2: one of the big indicators that they're back at all
Speaker 2: is that all the raccoons and skunks and possums go missing,
Speaker 2: and then she starts hearing them like a week or
Speaker 2: two later, so she can generally tell by the other
Speaker 2: animals that are not there that she usually sees. So
Speaker 2: I think when you're a sasquatch, anything is on the menu,
Speaker 2: because the calorie caloric needs of these animals must be
Speaker 2: pretty high, no matter how slow their metabolism is. So
Speaker 2: those are my general thoughts. And I know that's a
Speaker 2: you think your answer was long winded for I don't know.
Speaker 1: I just topped. So I don't know that we'd ever
Speaker 1: be able to accurately calculate or guestimate even a sasquatch's
Speaker 1: caloric requirements in the absence of observing living individuals feeding
Speaker 1: over a long period of time or without a specimen.
Speaker 1: But there is a general rule for mammalian body size
Speaker 1: and its coloric requirements, and it's called a Cliber's law
Speaker 1: basically states that an animal's metabolic rate scales twero point
Speaker 1: seventy five, or like three quarters of its three quarters
Speaker 1: of the power of its body mass, So meaning that
Speaker 1: basically larger animals have a higher overall energy need, but
Speaker 1: they actually generate lower energy expenditures per unit of body
Speaker 1: mass compared to smaller animals. So you can factor something
Speaker 1: like that in and come up with some rough number,
Speaker 1: you know, if you guestimated the weight of a sasquatch.
Speaker 1: But it depends on what you're comparing it to. I
Speaker 1: think comparing to humans in some regards is reasonable because
Speaker 1: we're bipedal and they're bipedal, and bipedalism is a much
Speaker 1: more energy efficient form of locomotion than quadrupedalism. But then
Speaker 1: and we have very large brains per our body mass,
Speaker 1: and the brain is a very resource intensive organ It
Speaker 1: uses up a lot of energy and a lot of
Speaker 1: metabolism requires a lot of energy, and so there's going
Speaker 1: to be trade offs there whether you're comparing the sasquatch
Speaker 1: to a gorilla and scaling it up or a human
Speaker 1: and scaling it up. So I just don't think we'll know,
Speaker 1: but I agree with you that in general would probably
Speaker 1: be pretty high, but certainly not any higher than the
Speaker 1: amount of energy that it would require animals of similar
Speaker 1: size or weight, So we might look towards things like
Speaker 1: elk or buffalo, or grizzly bears, or I mean, even
Speaker 1: some black bears in some regions have attained sizes of
Speaker 1: eight hundred pounds. Like the coastal North Carolina black bears
Speaker 1: tend to be significantly larger. I think the largest one
Speaker 1: there is well over eight hundred pounds. So there's comparisons
Speaker 1: to be made within the animal kingdom and even within
Speaker 1: North America. But I don't think any answer would be
Speaker 1: anything better than a gas, no matter how reasonable the
Speaker 1: gas might be.
Speaker 2: Stay tuned for more Bigfoot and beyond with Cliff and Bobo.
Speaker 2: We'll be right back after these messages. I think it's
Speaker 2: perhaps important or something at least keep in mind, is
Speaker 2: that when we think of five thousand calories a day
Speaker 2: or something like that, well you got to average that out.
Speaker 2: If they get two thousand one day, they're going to
Speaker 2: be hungry and they can get some more later. You
Speaker 2: know there's going to be an average of that amount.
Speaker 2: Don't get stuck in the human habit of very rigid thinking,
Speaker 2: where if they don't get that, then they're failing somehow.
Speaker 2: And that kind of goes back to the mountain lion
Speaker 2: and the deer an elk. Thing I was rambling about
Speaker 2: earlier is that if they bring down a deer, that's
Speaker 2: probably a couple of days worth of food, you know,
Speaker 2: until it starts going ran sid or something like that.
Speaker 2: Or you know, they could even be employing strategies like
Speaker 2: the grizzly bear it uses. Grizzly bears sometimes kill the
Speaker 2: deer or elk, they eat a little bit of it,
Speaker 2: perhaps some of the organs, because that's highly nutritious and
Speaker 2: that vitamins and all that jazz, and then they leave it.
Speaker 2: And then the grizzly bear continues to come back to
Speaker 2: the kill site to eat the maggots that are growing
Speaker 2: and breeding on the on the on the corpse. Maggots
Speaker 2: are very very high in protein and calori like everything
Speaker 2: good about it. You know, Maggots are a fantastic food.
Speaker 2: And grizzly bears figured it out somehow, you know, so
Speaker 2: they actually do that. They leave the corpse for flies
Speaker 2: to lay eggs, and then the larva to grow on
Speaker 2: them and then they eat the larva. So sasquatches are
Speaker 2: likely doing something like that as well. So anything's on
Speaker 2: the table as far as sasquatch diet goes, and I
Speaker 2: think that they have They're clever. Animals are really really smart,
Speaker 2: so they have probably figured out quite a few different
Speaker 2: ways to get the necessary nutrients that they need, you know,
Speaker 2: or that's redundant, but then the nutrients that they need.
Speaker 1: So I think the best answer would just be.
Speaker 2: A lot, a lot, yeah, well the best the easiest
Speaker 2: answer is, like I don't know, probably a lot. Yeah,
Speaker 2: But you know, we have a podcast to do, so
Speaker 2: they're thinking and talking and doing, you know. Well before
Speaker 2: we go to the next question, you know, I was
Speaker 2: thinking while we were talking here that I want to
Speaker 2: point out a couple of things and maybe clarify something before.
Speaker 2: We have some pretty interesting listeners out there. I mean,
Speaker 2: all of our listeners are special, of course, and there's
Speaker 2: probably a lot of listeners that I know nothing about
Speaker 2: and know nothing about their qualifications. But I know that
Speaker 2: two of our listeners at least have have like advanced degrees,
Speaker 2: and they've both been guests on the show before. A
Speaker 2: doctor Hogan Chero, of course is a PhD in primatology.
Speaker 2: He listens all the time, so shout out to him
Speaker 2: and he I bring him up because a few weeks back,
Speaker 2: or maybe two months ago now, he was kind enough
Speaker 2: to send me a bunch of articles about the foot
Speaker 2: structure of paranthropists and and like, because I was speaking
Speaker 2: at the time about how not a lot is known
Speaker 2: about these things, and he sent me a lot of articles,
Speaker 2: and very little is known about paranthropist foot structure. I
Speaker 2: think there's I think of the articles he sent, he noted,
Speaker 2: I noted that one there was one partial foot fossil,
Speaker 2: if I remember right. And I don't need to call
Speaker 2: Hogan and talk to him about that. He invited me to.
Speaker 2: And of course, if God, if I have a PhD
Speaker 2: in primatology that wants to speak to me, I need
Speaker 2: to take advantage of that, of course, because I always
Speaker 2: learned so much. And this was brought to mind, of course,
Speaker 2: because just this past week I was corresponding with Darren
Speaker 2: Nashe who of course has been an on another episode
Speaker 2: and maybe Matt you can link these two episodes for
Speaker 2: our listeners in the show notes below. Yeah, but Darren
Speaker 2: nashe wrote to me, and he liked our conversation what
Speaker 2: we're having a few weeks ago about Homo fleuriesiensis, and
Speaker 2: he brought up some interesting articles about homofleuresiensis about how
Speaker 2: they seem to be more of an astrola pithesene than
Speaker 2: an early Homo as a lot of the paleoanthropologists are
Speaker 2: talking about now, and he sent him he brought up
Speaker 2: a recent paper that was presented at a conference about
Speaker 2: how Homo nalidi some are arguing that they belong in
Speaker 2: the paranthropists camp as opposed to Homo at all. Really
Speaker 2: really interesting stuff, but one of the He also noted
Speaker 2: that he pointed out that I was incorrect about something,
Speaker 2: and I think that it was just a miss I
Speaker 2: must have misspoke or something like that, because what he
Speaker 2: corrected me on isn't something that I even think it
Speaker 2: is true, so I don't think I would have said it.
Speaker 2: So I want to clarify that his takeaway when listening
Speaker 2: to our podcast, his takeaway of what I said was
Speaker 2: that bonobos are more closely related to humans than they
Speaker 2: are to chimpanzees. And if that was the idea that
Speaker 2: I communicated, I apologize because what I was trying to
Speaker 2: say is that bonobos are more closely related to humans
Speaker 2: than chimpanzees are related to humans.
Speaker 1: That is what you said. I mean, I was on
Speaker 1: the call, and you know, when I edit it, I
Speaker 1: listened to it basically three times, and then when I'm
Speaker 1: done with the edit, I put it in my headphones
Speaker 1: to walk around and listen to the final product to
Speaker 1: see if there's anything that distracts me. So I heard
Speaker 1: that four times that you said the right thing.
Speaker 2: So well, yeah, just for whatever it's worth, that's what
Speaker 2: I intended to say, and if there is anything if
Speaker 2: I so, I apologize if I wasn't clear with my language,
Speaker 2: but I wanted to make sure that that I don't
Speaker 2: think bonobos are more closely related to humans than they
Speaker 2: are to chimps, all right, So anyway, I just want
Speaker 2: to make sure that my intent, what I intended to communicate,
Speaker 2: is actually out there, just in case there's any other misunderstandings.
Speaker 2: I'm wrong a lot, but occasionally when I am right,
Speaker 2: I want to make sure that I say the right things.
Speaker 2: Because even if I am right and I say it incorrectly,
Speaker 2: you know, it doesn't help anybody. So but anyway, why
Speaker 2: don't we hop onto the next question.
Speaker 4: Hi Cliff and Bobo. This is Robert, currently living in Pittsburgh,
Speaker 4: originally from Scotland. You've always said you should read a
Speaker 4: lot about Bigfoot, and I've done exactly that, And in
Speaker 4: one of the books I was reading, it mentioned that
Speaker 4: people used to use seismic detectors to see if any
Speaker 4: big Foot were passing. Has this happened or been forgotten
Speaker 4: or is this something we should be doing maybe to
Speaker 4: triangulate movement. Look forward to hearing her answer.
Speaker 2: Thank you all right, Robert, thank you for that question,
Speaker 2: and I hope you're enjoying Pittsburgh. My wife is there
Speaker 2: right now, although she's actually driving to Virginia. Our niece
Speaker 2: is getting married this coming weekend, so I am in
Speaker 2: a bachelor situation right now, which means not a lot.
Speaker 2: Really my life doesn't change very much, but anyway, so Robert,
Speaker 2: thank you for that question. Yes, seismic detectors have reportedly
Speaker 2: been used before, most notably by the peter Burn Projects,
Speaker 2: a big Foot research project. I think back in the
Speaker 2: nineties they were using something to that effect. I know
Speaker 2: a few other people kind of in the peter Burn
Speaker 2: camp that love that sort of technology. But I've often
Speaker 2: thought like, even if we did use it, what is
Speaker 2: to differentiate a sasquatch from say an elk or an
Speaker 2: animal of similar body weight? And the way I mean,
Speaker 2: I've been around sasquatch is a fair amount. You know,
Speaker 2: I've heard them walking around and doing stufft least I
Speaker 2: think I have. That's why I interpret, and they're pretty
Speaker 2: light footed in a lot of ways. But even if
Speaker 2: you get a hit on one of these things, and
Speaker 2: you have reason to believe it's a sasquatch, how is
Speaker 2: that much better than a siding report When a siding
Speaker 2: report will also tell you that a sasquatch was at
Speaker 2: a certain place at a certain time, you know what
Speaker 2: I mean? And I guess one is real time and
Speaker 2: you have to be out in that particular area to
Speaker 2: get the information and the data and stuff. But I
Speaker 2: don't know, I don't know. That technology is not something
Speaker 2: that has really appealed to me because I don't see
Speaker 2: that I don't see it as being a very high
Speaker 2: value technology for the information that you get out of it.
Speaker 2: But having said that, you know, in bull Run Watershed,
Speaker 2: which I'm always talking about, which is a few ridges
Speaker 2: over from my house here, it's an off limits watershed
Speaker 2: gives Portland it's water supply. It's also, from what I understand,
Speaker 2: where Peter and and the gang, Peter Burn and the
Speaker 2: gang for the Bigfoot Research Project put these sensors in.
Speaker 2: I understand that they deploy those at various obvious entrance
Speaker 2: points into the water shed, so the cops and the
Speaker 2: securities and folks and all that stuff can intercept people
Speaker 2: who are going into the watershed. I don't know if
Speaker 2: that's true or if that's just some sort of rumor,
Speaker 2: you know how rumors are. Yeah, the seismic thing was
Speaker 2: actually on my radar recently because just a few weeks
Speaker 2: ago I went to the memorial service, the celebration of
Speaker 2: life for Henry Franzoni. I was one of the only
Speaker 2: bigfooters there. Suzanne Fahrenjack was there, she flew all the
Speaker 2: way from Ohio, being a dear friend of Henry's. And
Speaker 2: also Tom Powell and his wife were there. But other
Speaker 2: than that, we're the only bigfooters there. And Tom Powell
Speaker 2: went had the microphone for a minute or two and
Speaker 2: talked about some of Henry's contributions to the Bigfoot thing,
Speaker 2: which is probably a little mind blowing for a lot
Speaker 2: of people there, and they knew Henry was into bigfoot,
Speaker 2: but Henry was best known as musician, an eccentric thinker.
Speaker 2: I think that's what I gathered from his friends there.
Speaker 2: But he brought up the seismic thing. He brought up
Speaker 2: the seismic study. So that's kind of funny that Robert
Speaker 2: asked this question today because it was just recently on
Speaker 2: my radar because of Henry friend Zoni.
Speaker 1: But I don't know.
Speaker 2: I mean, Matt, what are your thoughts on seismic detectors
Speaker 2: and their deployment and what good if any, could come
Speaker 2: from them.
Speaker 1: I personally don't think it would make a whole lot
Speaker 1: of sense to employ those because to me, the only
Speaker 1: context within which they would make sense is as a
Speaker 1: predictive measure to lead to more evidence. So, for example,
Speaker 1: if you had enough seismic sensors to cover a significant
Speaker 1: portion of an animal's home range, and let's say for
Speaker 1: the sake of argument, that we could put a sasquatch
Speaker 1: within a home range of somewhere between like fifty or
Speaker 1: eighty square miles, which is pretty large, but for an
Speaker 1: animal of that size would be small ish. You'd need
Speaker 1: a lot of seismic sensors, and I think the utility
Speaker 1: of something like that is that if you were watching
Speaker 1: a map with a grid real time, and then you
Speaker 1: knew that something was moving through an area in real time,
Speaker 1: that you could respond to either to deploy personnel with
Speaker 1: cameras or you know, at least respond to rapidly enough
Speaker 1: to hopefully find or document tracks if you're not trying
Speaker 1: to document the animal itself. The expenditure of resources that
Speaker 1: you would need to have that many seismic sensors and
Speaker 1: to install those in the ground in a way that's
Speaker 1: not going to disturb the environment such that it actually
Speaker 1: hinders the animal from moving the way it would normally
Speaker 1: move through the environment, because you can imagine it would
Speaker 1: take either one person a very long time or a
Speaker 1: lot of personnel moving through an area to plant these
Speaker 1: things in the ground. So to me, it just seems
Speaker 1: like a tremendous amount of work and time and energy
Speaker 1: and resources for very little gain unless you had enough
Speaker 1: coverage and the ability to watch it in real time
Speaker 1: so that you could respond in real time. So I
Speaker 1: think there's much better ways to go about aiming for
Speaker 1: photographic or video graphic evidence and or trying to find
Speaker 1: tracks then to employ something like that. So even if
Speaker 1: I had unlimited resources, I wouldn't put them into seismic
Speaker 1: sensors personally.
Speaker 2: Now, who knows how much these things cost anyway, you know.
Speaker 1: And who knows? Like you said that, you might get
Speaker 1: false positives because something is of a significant size or weight,
Speaker 1: and then you deploy the team and you wind up
Speaker 1: with a bear or an elk or something like that,
Speaker 1: false alarm. But now you've just disturbed the area further
Speaker 1: because let's say that happens at night, and you've got
Speaker 1: to infiltrate an area with lights or get close with
Speaker 1: vehicles or whatever the case may be. So you're fundamentally
Speaker 1: changing the environment. You know, if you're trying to test
Speaker 1: a certain hypothesis about a very rare, elusive, furtive animal
Speaker 1: and then you inundate that animal's environment or habitat with
Speaker 1: the stimulus of human sounds and smells and lights and
Speaker 1: all those things, then well you might not have just
Speaker 1: had a false positive, but you might have just ensured
Speaker 1: that nothing positive is going to happen there the way
Speaker 1: that you want it to for the next however many
Speaker 1: hours or days, wherever the case may be, so I
Speaker 1: don't seem much positive use for technology like that.
Speaker 2: Now, and even a cursory glance here, most seismic detectors
Speaker 2: are for earthquakes sort of things. And I see price
Speaker 2: ranges from one hundred and fifty to several thousand dollars
Speaker 2: here by doing a quick web search, And of course
Speaker 2: some of these are probably very high end sort of
Speaker 2: geologic gear. But at the same time, what are you
Speaker 2: going to get out of that? You know, game cameras
Speaker 2: might do something similar, you know, you know, thread could
Speaker 2: do something very very similar. I mean at Area X,
Speaker 2: and they deploy thread between trees to figure out which
Speaker 2: way animals are walking.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we deployed these things. You know, they did it
Speaker 1: for years before I joined the organization. So you know,
Speaker 1: when I say we, I was continuing a a sort
Speaker 1: of research tradition that they had long started. So I
Speaker 1: certainly can't take any credit for that. But you know,
Speaker 1: areas around the base camp where activity would occur, they
Speaker 1: were trying to sort of parse out which directions that
Speaker 1: things might have been coming in from or heading out to,
Speaker 1: coming to or from this central location, and so Alton
Speaker 1: Higgins had put up these we colloquially called them string traps.
Speaker 1: And you know, sewing thread is pretty hard to break,
Speaker 1: surprisingly so and so you can fix it to one
Speaker 1: tree and then string it across a gap and then
Speaker 1: wrap it around another tree a time or two, and
Speaker 1: it'll stay in place for a very very long time.
Speaker 1: And then when something moves through it, rather than the
Speaker 1: thread breaking, it'll usually just unravel the thread, and if
Speaker 1: you have enough surplus thread, it'll unravel it in the
Speaker 1: direction that the animal was moving. And so then you
Speaker 1: can check those in the morning, and you want to
Speaker 1: set those at heights that they're not going to be
Speaker 1: moved by something smaller and lower to the ground, like
Speaker 1: a bear or a deer. So you set those at
Speaker 1: certain heights and then if there's activity and go look
Speaker 1: in the morning and like, oh, wow, something walked through
Speaker 1: heading in this particular direction. And you have a perimeter
Speaker 1: of those around camp and there's you know, one that's
Speaker 1: unraveled into camp and one that's unraveled going out of camp.
Speaker 1: You kind of have an idea that, well, something came
Speaker 1: in this vector and then was inside this perimeter and
Speaker 1: then exited through this vector. So it's a really useful
Speaker 1: tool that is very cheap and inexpensive and easy to deploy.
Speaker 2: There, and you get directionality, which is something I'm not
Speaker 2: so sure you would get with the most seismic sensors, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean again, to get directionality with seismic sensors,
Speaker 1: you would have to have so many of them evenly spaced,
Speaker 1: which you know that's a really hard thing to do. Too,
Speaker 1: is that when I was in the NAWAC, we had
Speaker 1: this camera trap project called Hadrian's Wall, and one of
Speaker 1: our brilliant members, a guy named Ed Harrison, had laid
Speaker 1: out this excellent design to have them all sort of
Speaker 1: equidistant in such a way that you know something would
Speaker 1: move through this trap line of cameras and at any
Speaker 1: given point, you know they should be captured by two,
Speaker 1: sometimes three cameras at a time. And so of course
Speaker 1: that's all great when you grid it out on paper,
Speaker 1: but then you get boots on the ground there and
Speaker 1: you're like, oh, well, the trees didn't conveniently grow at
Speaker 1: all the right distance from each other for us to
Speaker 1: always have a perfect overlap, so you have to make
Speaker 1: some concessions. And the same would be true that if
Speaker 1: you've got a host of seismic sensors that needed to
Speaker 1: be in a grid let's say, you know, twenty by
Speaker 1: twenty square feet apart, you know, whatever the case may be.
Speaker 1: And then you get to the point where it needs
Speaker 1: to be and well, now there's a rock. You can't
Speaker 1: dig in the ground there and put it there. Or
Speaker 1: there's a tree there, and so what are you going
Speaker 1: to do? Well, you have to put it somewhere around
Speaker 1: the tree. So there's probably gonna be places where they're
Speaker 1: not overlapping, little gaps in your system where something can
Speaker 1: get through. And so the number of headaches that I
Speaker 1: could envision with seismic sensors just keeps growing and growing
Speaker 1: the more I think about it. Yeah yeah, yeah, and
Speaker 1: again for what so that you would find out that like, oh,
Speaker 1: something heavy moved through here, and that maybe that's all
Speaker 1: the information you get, and so it's like, well, we
Speaker 1: did all that work for something that no one cares about.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, So, Robert, that's I guess you didn't really
Speaker 2: ask for about our thoughts necessarily, you asked if they
Speaker 2: actually did it and whatever, But that's what you get
Speaker 2: from us more.
Speaker 1: No, he did, he asked, He asked if this is
Speaker 1: something we should be pursuing.
Speaker 2: Oh, oh, very good, was very good. I thought it
Speaker 2: was just like, had they actually done this and what
Speaker 2: results were there? I guess you always hear the question
Speaker 2: you wish you were asked, right, But yeah, that's our
Speaker 2: thoughts on that. I'm not sure that as far as
Speaker 2: bang for the buck and effort and stuff like that,
Speaker 2: I'm not sure there's much there. I mean, a lot
Speaker 2: of people deploy them. Well not actually almost nobody deploys them,
Speaker 2: but I know a couple people that have deployed them
Speaker 2: or have them, but I'm not sure they've gotten anything
Speaker 2: at all from it except for just the joy of
Speaker 2: saying I got some technological toys that I put out there,
Speaker 2: and for a lot of people in bigfoot Land, that's enough,
Speaker 2: you know, And that's fun. And I'm not saying don't
Speaker 2: try it, but I think that we're both saying that
Speaker 2: we don't. And those are the reasons why. But if
Speaker 2: that tickles your fancy, you know, if that is something
Speaker 2: that you want to pursue, by all means, do it
Speaker 2: and maybe maybe you'll get something amazing from it, and
Speaker 2: you know, publish something in the RhI or write some
Speaker 2: up and you know, maybe is there something we can
Speaker 2: learn from that? I don't know, but for me, not
Speaker 2: worth the hassle, not worth a hassle, and not worth
Speaker 2: the money, and not worth the time. Stay tuned for
Speaker 2: more Bigfoot and Beyond with Cliff and Bogo. We'll be
Speaker 2: right back after these messages. And you know, as far
Speaker 2: that thread thing, I was thinking, You know, you have
Speaker 2: to put it at a certain level to avoid deer,
Speaker 2: and gosh, deer are pretty big and they've got to
Speaker 2: be five feet tall or more. Oftentimes you have to
Speaker 2: put it probably six and a half seven foot up
Speaker 2: and catch the sasquatch across the face or something like
Speaker 2: that with the thread. But that brought to mind that
Speaker 2: a good friend of mine, the guy named Alan, saw
Speaker 2: a sasquatch a couple of weeks ago and he saw
Speaker 2: the most frightening kind a three footer. So, and of
Speaker 2: course Alan's also a listener, so shout out to Alan there.
Speaker 2: Alan was down on the coast. He saw it in
Speaker 2: Cummin's Creek Wilderness area, which is a really really neat
Speaker 2: wildernes area just north of Florence, Oregon. I went on
Speaker 2: years and years and years ago, probably twenty thirteen or
Speaker 2: something like that my good friend and excellent bigfoot or
Speaker 2: Chris Minier ran an expedition for the BFRO out of Florence,
Speaker 2: and he asked if I could come down. And I
Speaker 2: hadn't seen Chris for a while, so I came down
Speaker 2: for a night and hung out with him, and I
Speaker 2: took a group out into the Common's Creek wilderness area
Speaker 2: on this trail and we ran into a sasquatch out there,
Speaker 2: banged a bunch of trees at us and ran and
Speaker 2: heard it running off, and it was a cool It
Speaker 2: was a cool event. So I said he was going
Speaker 2: to be down in Florence and I said hey, or
Speaker 2: he says to me, Hey, like, where should I go
Speaker 2: down in Florence area? I go, well, I don't know.
Speaker 2: I don't get down there very often, but I did
Speaker 2: take a group into there and we ran across one
Speaker 2: He goes, oh, great, we'll go there. And it's kind
Speaker 2: of a funny story. And because he went to the
Speaker 2: ranger station when he was down there and he says,
Speaker 2: I want to go hiking in the Cummins Creek Wilderness
Speaker 2: area and the rangers like, oh that's great, that's great
Speaker 2: here blah blah blah, here's how you get in there.
Speaker 2: And there's a trailhead and this and that, and Alan goes, non,
Speaker 2: I want to go in that road the other trail
Speaker 2: and the guy and the ranger goes, no, No, you don't.
Speaker 1: Want to do that.
Speaker 2: The trees are down, it's a terrible road, the road's
Speaker 2: blown out, there's flooding damage, blah blah blah, hard to get,
Speaker 2: hard to get anywhere in there. You don't want to
Speaker 2: go in there. And he goes, it's exactly where I
Speaker 2: want to go. And the ranger goes, well, why do
Speaker 2: you want to go there? And he goes, well, I
Speaker 2: want I'm going to go squatch it. I'm want to
Speaker 2: go look for sasquatches. And the guy laughed, and then
Speaker 2: Alan goes, no, No, they're real, they're really, you know. And
Speaker 2: the guy kind of stopped laughing and said, well, I
Speaker 2: guess if they're going to be anywhere, that's where they're
Speaker 2: going to be, because no one goes in there, you know.
Speaker 2: And so he Alan went in there with his wife.
Speaker 2: But he was walking in there and he said, on
Speaker 2: the side of the road there were thirteen inch impressions,
Speaker 2: but they weren't very clear or anything like that, but
Speaker 2: there are space forty two inches apart, which is spot on.
Speaker 2: That's textbook right there, you know, from you know, heel
Speaker 2: to heels forty two inches, that's textbook bigfoot there. And
Speaker 2: of course thirteen inch impressions right in there as well,
Speaker 2: no big deal thirteen fourteen inches. And you can think, well,
Speaker 2: but he says, I didn't know. I didn't didn't think
Speaker 2: that much of him, and not really sure.
Speaker 1: Yea.
Speaker 2: I think he also heard a mountain lion yowl at
Speaker 2: the trailhead. I think that may or may not be
Speaker 2: important as well, And I'll get to that in a second.
Speaker 2: So he's going in there, and about a mile and
Speaker 2: a half in he's ahead of his wife, and then
Speaker 2: he sees something black in color upright on two legs
Speaker 2: and about three feet tall or so, just rush across
Speaker 2: the road and then drop over the precipice the edge
Speaker 2: on the side, and like he was startled. He took
Speaker 2: a couple of steps back and he goes, oh my god,
Speaker 2: what the the His wife says, what's wrong, honey, you know,
Speaker 2: you know, I think I just saw this, and you know,
Speaker 2: and they went and looked over the edge and they
Speaker 2: didn't see anything. And of course the thing was probably
Speaker 2: just hunker down waiting for him to leave. They did
Speaker 2: a recreation photograph and that sort of stuff, and he
Speaker 2: was very, very bugged out. I spoke to him that
Speaker 2: night when he got back to the hotel room in Florence.
Speaker 2: I spoke to him, and he kept going, I don't
Speaker 2: know what I saw. I just don't know what I saw.
Speaker 2: I mean, I said, well, dude, it was it was
Speaker 2: upright and black in color. You know, that's probably a sasquatch.
Speaker 2: You probably saw a sasquatch, a three footer. And he said, so,
Speaker 2: I don't know. I maybe I just don't know what
Speaker 2: else it could have been. It's like, I'm not going
Speaker 2: to try to convince you saw one only you know,
Speaker 2: of course, but but you know, so I thought that
Speaker 2: was pretty interesting. And then the next day they went
Speaker 2: to the other trailhead, the more easily accessible one, and
Speaker 2: they got there at pretty much at daybreak, you know,
Speaker 2: right at dust or dawn, rather the opposite of dusk.
Speaker 2: And the second they got out of their car from
Speaker 2: one direction, they heard another mountain lion yell. And by
Speaker 2: the way, this trailhead, I guess is basically at the
Speaker 2: base of the ridge that he saw the thing on
Speaker 2: the day before. You know, we're very very close, not
Speaker 2: far away. So he heard another mountain lion yell and
Speaker 2: it was that's odd, And then he heard one from
Speaker 2: the opposite direction. He goes, well, what's even odder, you know,
Speaker 2: And then then he heard a power knock from in
Speaker 2: between the two, and he goes home, and they actually
Speaker 2: were so scared they got back in the car, and
Speaker 2: I believe it was his wife who basically said, we
Speaker 2: got to not be whimps about this.
Speaker 1: We got to go.
Speaker 2: And then they went for a long, grueling high mostly uphill,
Speaker 2: et cetera, and whatever had to day. But now I'm wondering,
Speaker 2: of course, I'm like thinking back to one of our
Speaker 2: witnesses we had on the podcast a long time ago,
Speaker 2: who went by the name of Lance. He actually observed
Speaker 2: a sasquatch like he had his eyes on it when
Speaker 2: it made a mountain lion call, which is really interesting
Speaker 2: as far as like mimicking and all that stuff goes.
Speaker 2: But I'm wondering where those mountain lions at all.
Speaker 1: That's a good question. And I would say if there's
Speaker 1: any sasquatch researchers in that area, that's exactly where you
Speaker 1: want to go, because if you take any lessons from
Speaker 1: analogous mammals, you would know that an animal occupies a
Speaker 1: home range. Within that home range, it has a territory,
Speaker 1: and within that territory, it will have a core area.
Speaker 1: And the best way to identify core areas of most
Speaker 1: species that are analogous would be to figure out where
Speaker 1: the females and especially the juveniles are. And so if
Speaker 1: you needed like a codex for finding sasquatch core areas,
Speaker 1: you would pay attention to where sightings of females occur,
Speaker 1: and especially of juveniles. So if I was in an orgon,
Speaker 1: that's exactly where I'd be spending my time. Of recent
Speaker 1: juvenile siding is a very good sign, especially from a
Speaker 1: source that you know, you trust and find reliable.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, Allen's a good guy and he certainly wouldn't
Speaker 2: be making anything up. Worst case scenario and misidentified something.
Speaker 2: But he kept saying it was on two legs, and like,
Speaker 2: what else do you have? What else? He said? I said, Well,
Speaker 2: you have grandchildren. I mean, how old would this kid be?
Speaker 2: You know, if it was a I don't know, maybe seven,
Speaker 2: I think is what he said, seven years old and
Speaker 2: just running across a trail mile and a half up
Speaker 2: in a desolate sort of a wilderness area. I don't know.
Speaker 2: I think he saw one. I think he saw one,
Speaker 2: and again I ran into one there, and he went
Speaker 2: there on my recommendation and saw one. How cool is that?
Speaker 2: And then heard other weird things. Yeah, if I lived
Speaker 2: in the Florence area, that's where I would be spending
Speaker 2: a lot of my time, a lot of my time
Speaker 2: because it's public land, easily accessible, and you know, co
Speaker 2: strange people here in I love the Coast Range, and
Speaker 2: I love the people that live there, but they're kind
Speaker 2: of like people in Maine. They don't want anybody around.
Speaker 2: They live in a very isolated area to kind of
Speaker 2: keep people away. A lot of the area's private lands,
Speaker 2: so no one's allowed to be on it except in
Speaker 2: the sayas Law National forests and places like the wilderness
Speaker 2: areas and that sort of thing. So that to me
Speaker 2: just shouts go there, go there frequently. Because looking back
Speaker 2: on his first day, not only did he see that
Speaker 2: three footer, he found thirteen or so inch footprints. I
Speaker 2: mean he didn't say footprints, he said impressions, but they
Speaker 2: were probably footprints. They were spaced appropriately. Yeah, that's probably
Speaker 2: mom and the kid right there. So go there. And
Speaker 2: of course if you do find anything cool, let me know.
Speaker 2: Let us know. Emailed the podcast. You Know the count
Speaker 2: be on podcasts at gmail dot com. Let us know
Speaker 2: what you're finding them there. And of course all the
Speaker 2: bigfooters who actually are working that area are probably really
Speaker 2: pissed at me right now. But sorry, as far as
Speaker 2: I know, no one's working it.
Speaker 1: You know, what's really funny is that people will reach
Speaker 1: out to me, very often, people I've only interacted with
Speaker 1: online or total strangers, and they'll be like, Hey, I
Speaker 1: live in this particular area. Where do you think I
Speaker 1: should go? And I'll give them places that I'm comfortable
Speaker 1: talking about. You know, hey, I think you should check
Speaker 1: out this area. And then we'll get a question like
Speaker 1: that on the podcast and I'll recommend the same area.
Speaker 1: And then those people will reach out to me the
Speaker 1: initial question askers and they'll be like, hey, why are
Speaker 1: you telling people about my spot? I'm like yours spot. Like,
Speaker 1: first of all, I had no qualms telling you, and
Speaker 1: so I have no qualms telling someone else. And second
Speaker 1: of all, like you don't go out to those places.
Speaker 1: So it's a funny thing that happened. So I guess
Speaker 1: I can't fault people for that, but it is just
Speaker 1: a funny observation to have that happen so many times
Speaker 1: over the years. It's that they'll ask me for input
Speaker 1: and then get upset that I gave the same input
Speaker 1: to someone else.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, here's a news flash for everybody listening. Every
Speaker 2: every single official designated wilderness area in the United States
Speaker 2: is perfect bigfoot habitat. Go there, Okay, there you go.
Speaker 2: If you live anywhere near a wilderness area, go there.
Speaker 2: It's as simple as that. I'm not giving anything away.
Speaker 1: And most public lands, and you know, if you were
Speaker 1: to look at a map, don't even worry about sasquatch reports.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's helpful to have, but you know, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of great places to where very few people go,
Speaker 1: and so you should not expect there to be sasquatch reports.
Speaker 1: But look at a map, what's close to you and
Speaker 1: what looks like good habitat, And especially if you research
Speaker 1: other animal populations, like what's the bare density and what's
Speaker 1: the ungulate density, et cetera, et cetera, And you know,
Speaker 1: but if you're asking for input, I'll give it to you.
Speaker 1: And if someone else asked me for input and they're
Speaker 1: in the same general area, I'm going to give it
Speaker 1: to them too. And my favorite spots I'm not going
Speaker 1: to tell you about.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I don't give away my fishing spots. You know.
Speaker 2: That's how I found one of my best spots is
Speaker 2: I just I was looking at apps and stuff like,
Speaker 2: oh wow, wow, that looks like it they should be there,
Speaker 2: And I started going there and shure up they were.
Speaker 2: We're getting Knox, we're getting calls. There's been a couple
Speaker 2: of sidings, there's been a couple of footprint finds there.
Speaker 2: I found a footprint there just a few weeks ago. Actually,
Speaker 2: So yeah, one of my favorite spots had no sidings,
Speaker 2: no reports from it whatsoever. It just looked like they
Speaker 2: should be there. Which is a wilderness areas by the way,
Speaker 2: Cumm's Creek Wilderness Area. It doesn't really matter. Yeah, bull
Speaker 2: the woods down there on the Cala Wash. Of course
Speaker 2: they're in there. Of course they are. You know, you
Speaker 2: just look at a Forest Service map, any designated wilderness
Speaker 2: area or any area a big chunk of land with
Speaker 2: suitable habitat that there are no roads into. Yeah, that's
Speaker 2: where they are. Go there, it's not a secret. If
Speaker 2: you didn't know that by now, then you don't. You
Speaker 2: don't deserve the specific locations. So exactly, stay tuned for
Speaker 2: more Bigfoot and Beyond with Cliff and Bogo will be
Speaker 2: right back after these messages. All right, well, anyway, should
Speaker 2: we go onto the written questions?
Speaker 1: Let's do?
Speaker 2: Okay? The first written question comes from Neil and Marnie.
Speaker 2: Shout out to them, by the way, a long time listeners.
Speaker 2: They realterally enjoy the podcast, and thank you so much
Speaker 2: Neil and specifically to Marnie for listening. We really really
Speaker 2: do appreciate your ears on the podcast every single week,
Speaker 2: and then we're happy that we can give you some
Speaker 2: sort of some sort of smile on a weekly basis. Anyway,
Speaker 2: the question is what do you three think about coastal
Speaker 2: environments as they relate to Sasquatch habitat and activity. Oh, well,
Speaker 2: you know, Bobo's not here obviously, so it's what do
Speaker 2: we too think? But Bubo lives on the coast, and
Speaker 2: I think that says a lot right there. He lives
Speaker 2: in the Arcada area of northern California and Humboldt County,
Speaker 2: and he moved there from southern California because it is
Speaker 2: bigfoot habitat. His best spot, or some of his best
Speaker 2: spots are like right on the coast up in the
Speaker 2: Redwood National Park and at Redwind National or State Forest.
Speaker 2: I think it's called our state park up there. Some
Speaker 2: of his best spots are virtually hugging the ocean, and
Speaker 2: I think that says a lot about coastal habitat.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it be funny if we just lamited not giving
Speaker 1: away our best spots, But we just decided to give
Speaker 1: away all of Bobo's best spots since he's done here.
Speaker 1: I mean, no, we're not saying specifics, but we could
Speaker 1: you hear that, Bobo?
Speaker 2: We could tell him, well, he said, yeah, we could. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you don't show up to a podcast and it's our rules,
Speaker 2: not yours, sorry Bobs. Yeah, but Bobo said several times
Speaker 2: in the podcast that he goes up to the Redwoods
Speaker 2: to go big footing. So I don't think I'm giving
Speaker 2: too much away here, but yeah, but I think that
Speaker 2: says a lot. So even though Bobo is not here
Speaker 2: to give his two cents about coastal habitat here. But
Speaker 2: I think that that says a lot. He specifically moved
Speaker 2: there to see sasquatches because he he took logging jobs
Speaker 2: on the coast to do that. He started taking fishing
Speaker 2: jobs as how. He became a crab fisherman because he
Speaker 2: was hearing that these people were seeing him from the
Speaker 2: boats sometimes like on shore. That's why he did all
Speaker 2: these things. So that says a lot from Bobo, even
Speaker 2: though his voice is not on the air today. But
Speaker 2: as far as I'm concerned, I mean, that's where the
Speaker 2: food was, you know. I mean, if things went sideways,
Speaker 2: and I mean for humanity, the coast would be the
Speaker 2: place to be because the ocean is just an abundant
Speaker 2: resource of food. I know, years and years and years ago,
Speaker 2: I went I met I flew down to Baja California, Mexico,
Speaker 2: and met some of my friends who were down there.
Speaker 2: They were down there for six months doing research for
Speaker 2: a sea kayak guide to book. You know, these are
Speaker 2: like outdoors, these sort of folks. Obviously they're writing books
Speaker 2: about various sea kayak routes to take and stuff in Baja.
Speaker 2: And I met him down there, and you know, and
Speaker 2: We camped on the beach for a week, and virtually
Speaker 2: every day we kind of went swimming for lunch and dinner. Yeah,
Speaker 2: we went to the store and got carrots and some
Speaker 2: vegetables and that sort of stuff. But and some beers,
Speaker 2: of course, But for the most part, the meat that
Speaker 2: we ate that week we got from the ocean that day,
Speaker 2: you know, whether we were fishing, or we were clamming,
Speaker 2: or you know, picking scallops and whatever off the rock,
Speaker 2: we went in the water and pulled the food out.
Speaker 2: So Baja is, of course exceptional, but in northern California
Speaker 2: or you know, Oregon and Washington, there is so much
Speaker 2: food on the beach. I remember one time I was
Speaker 2: fishing in Redwood National Park, I think it is, and
Speaker 2: it was a gold Bluff beach, great little campsite on
Speaker 2: the ocean there. It's generally too crowded and you know,
Speaker 2: popular to get in most of the year, but I was.
Speaker 2: I was there in the winter or something like that,
Speaker 2: you know, so I got a spot in there. And
Speaker 2: I don't usually pay for camping anyway, but back then
Speaker 2: I did at that this night, because it's such a
Speaker 2: great campsite. There's elk everywhere pushed up against the cliffs
Speaker 2: would be a lot easier to catch and kill if
Speaker 2: I didn't, you know, if I were a sasquat to
Speaker 2: that sort of thing. But I remember I was fishing.
Speaker 2: I was fishing for a barred surf perch. No, no, no,
Speaker 2: for a redtail surf perch at the time. And you know,
Speaker 2: so I was fishing in the ocean in the waves,
Speaker 2: you know, like probably kneedy water, that sort of stuff
Speaker 2: coming in and out. And I was casting or whatever.
Speaker 2: A big wave came in and I stepped back, and
Speaker 2: that wave literally deposited a dungeness crab on the beach,
Speaker 2: not fifteen feet from me. And I just thought to myself,
Speaker 2: as I'm looking up and down this coast where there's
Speaker 2: absolutely zero people as far as the I could see
Speaker 2: except for me, but in beautiful redwoods and dense forests,
Speaker 2: like right there on the cliffs above me. Yeah, and
Speaker 2: somebody the ocean literally deposited a dungeness crab virtually at
Speaker 2: my feet as I was standing there. And think, think
Speaker 2: how many times a day that happens within ten miles
Speaker 2: of that spot, you know, or up and down the
Speaker 2: coast in general. But like the ocean gives. I didn't
Speaker 2: need it a course, but I wasn't into it, you
Speaker 2: know at the time, and I didn't want to it
Speaker 2: and deal with it and get pinged and everything. But still, like,
Speaker 2: think about a sasquatch just roaming up and down the
Speaker 2: beach looking for things that the ocean deposited on the shoreline.
Speaker 2: There's there's kelp. Most kelp is edible, of course, there's
Speaker 2: you know, uh dungeon is crab. There's various crabs of
Speaker 2: various source. You know, if you know where to look,
Speaker 2: you can put you can scoop your hand under the
Speaker 2: sand and come up with thirty or forty mole crabs.
Speaker 2: That's what I was doing as using those for bait
Speaker 2: at the time. You know, occasionally a dead seal or
Speaker 2: a dead whale gets deposited on the shore and of
Speaker 2: course all the other animals take advantage of that, and
Speaker 2: human beings did as well for many, many long years.
Speaker 2: So yeah, the ocean is where it's at as far
Speaker 2: as easy food goes, So of course sasquatches utilize that.
Speaker 2: And of course we've also heard the stories of them
Speaker 2: digging clams and whatever else on you know, on those
Speaker 2: low tides, especially up in PC. I know that doctor
Speaker 2: Bindernoggle was really interested in that aspect of it, as
Speaker 2: well as doctor Rob Allley. So, yeah, ocean, the ocean
Speaker 2: environment where the land meets the ocean is just a
Speaker 2: bountiful resource of food of virtually every kind you can imagine.
Speaker 2: So they would be a fantastic habitat for them. Yeah.
Speaker 1: The BC Sunshine Coast and all that Pacific Coast is
Speaker 1: just incredible and obviously has a very long, very rich
Speaker 1: history of encounter and observation reports and incredible habitat. I
Speaker 1: would love to go up there if people are interested
Speaker 1: in reading about that region specifically. We had John Zada
Speaker 1: on a little while back in his book in The
Speaker 1: Valleys of the Note Beyond. It's all focused on that
Speaker 1: particular region of British Columbia and it's amazing, and so
Speaker 1: once again I would highly recommend that or Rob Alley's
Speaker 1: Raincoast Sasquatch.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, yeah, Like all that stuff was around Ketcha
Speaker 2: Can and the islands offshore. So the Sasquatch is on islands.
Speaker 2: It tells you a lot. You know, there's a lot
Speaker 2: of food there and they take advantage of everything from
Speaker 2: the inland stuff like the deer and elk and I
Speaker 2: just mentioned elk are on the beach. They're on the beach,
Speaker 2: you know, so there's food of plenty. So yeah, any
Speaker 2: of these resources would be great. The Rob Alley book
Speaker 2: or the is that a book? All these things I
Speaker 2: really like this next question, All right, well you want
Speaker 2: to read it?
Speaker 1: Sure, I can read it. So this comes from our
Speaker 1: listener Nathan Craig, and he asks what things have been
Speaker 1: made easier and or more difficult when it comes to
Speaker 1: squatching in the last fifteen to twenty years or more.
Speaker 2: You want to go first? Yes, I know you're chomping
Speaker 2: at the bid here.
Speaker 1: You know. I think there are some things that have
Speaker 1: been made easier via the Internet, like being able to
Speaker 1: communicate and network with other researchers and share information and
Speaker 1: coordinate field efforts together. I mean, most of my field
Speaker 1: research partners are they live hours and hours and hours
Speaker 1: from me, and so you know, we're working on areas
Speaker 1: together that are central to us, and so they're nowhere
Speaker 1: close to home. And that's all facilitated by the Internet
Speaker 1: and by the ability to you know, find information quickly
Speaker 1: about these habitats and about the history of reports and
Speaker 1: places to access and all of the above, and then
Speaker 1: obviously other technological advances. So there's a lot of things
Speaker 1: that have been made easier that I cannot imagine how
Speaker 1: hard it would have been if I was a sasquatch
Speaker 1: researcher in the fifties or sixties, in the early days
Speaker 1: of the four Horsemen and those types. I think the
Speaker 1: things that have made it more difficult are related to
Speaker 1: a lot of the same issues, and specifically with the
Speaker 1: interconnectivity of people and the Internet and the speed at
Speaker 1: which information moves in that we're in this environment that
Speaker 1: you know, there's a lot of people that are involved
Speaker 1: in this subject that their primary focus is about their
Speaker 1: presence online. Now they might have communities they've built by
Speaker 1: which you know, we're no different, although you know, you
Speaker 1: guys built a community in a different way, you know,
Speaker 1: through years of research and networking and then through a
Speaker 1: television series, and then by the time we launched this podcast,
Speaker 1: you know, there was already an existing community around that.
Speaker 1: But like, here's a good example. So very recently, a
Speaker 1: friend of mine was on a field excursion and something
Speaker 1: occurred and phone calls were made between people who were
Speaker 1: also there and then someone who wasn't there posted about
Speaker 1: it and made claims about what had happened that bore
Speaker 1: little to no resemblance to what actually happened. And then
Speaker 1: before anyone could correct the record, a number of people
Speaker 1: with their own platforms, podcasts, YouTube channels, social media outlets,
Speaker 1: et cetera, were reporting on the claims that this person
Speaker 1: who wasn't there made at all, saying like that they
Speaker 1: basically had an inside scoop and that if you wanted
Speaker 1: to learn more and follow for updates, you know, make
Speaker 1: sure that you like and subscribe and keep a close
Speaker 1: eye on their channels because they would bring you the
Speaker 1: news as it broke. And so of course I got
Speaker 1: inundated with messages from people like, hey, do you know
Speaker 1: anything about this? And I was having to be very
Speaker 1: careful because I don't want to compromise the people that
Speaker 1: were actually there and in this situation, because it's their
Speaker 1: story to tell I equally was not there. But I
Speaker 1: was saying, well, you know, I do have a friend
Speaker 1: who was there, and what's being said is not exactly
Speaker 1: what happened. And then I was able to review the
Speaker 1: evidence that was collected and come to a conclusion about
Speaker 1: what actually happened, so beyond just hearing the claims of
Speaker 1: my friend who was there, I actually saw what was
Speaker 1: collected in that case. But the news, the sensational version,
Speaker 1: had spread so quickly and so many people had bent
Speaker 1: it to serve their own goals in terms of entertaining, captivating,
Speaker 1: or motivating their own audiences, that if I were to
Speaker 1: go and try to correct the record, well it would
Speaker 1: have taken, you know, one hundred times more energy than
Speaker 1: I was willing to expend on it. And also, again
Speaker 1: I think it's the responsibility of the people who are
Speaker 1: actually there to lay out what happened. That's just one
Speaker 1: example of something I see happening over and over again,
Speaker 1: and that the vast majority of things I read online
Speaker 1: in the Sasquatch space are just so wildly inaccurate, and
Speaker 1: most of it is not malicious, The vast majority of
Speaker 1: it is not. It's well meaning people with good intentions
Speaker 1: reporting what they heard or what they think they heard.
Speaker 1: And I just come from a different school of thought
Speaker 1: and of action in that, you know, I've been very
Speaker 1: fortunate I have a bit of a different life than
Speaker 1: many of these other people in that, you know, I've
Speaker 1: always had the energy and the time and the bandwidth
Speaker 1: to devote serious attention and energy to all these things.
Speaker 1: And so many times people will tell me, oh, well,
Speaker 1: here's the deal with such and such, you know, pick
Speaker 1: a case out of a hat, and I'll be like, okay, well,
Speaker 1: why do you think that it's something that they heard
Speaker 1: third hand on a podcast channel? And very often in
Speaker 1: these cases it just happens to be the case that like,
Speaker 1: oh no, well, I actually know those investigators, and I
Speaker 1: know that witness, and I've been to that property and
Speaker 1: I spent a lot of time there. Here's what actually happened.
Speaker 1: Or nope, you know, have you ever read this book? No,
Speaker 1: I've never read it. Okay, well, here's what actually occurred
Speaker 1: according to the people that were there, not the sixth
Speaker 1: hand version that you heard in you know, a forty
Speaker 1: five second reel on a social media platform. And so
Speaker 1: all of that makes it very difficult where the facts
Speaker 1: have been so obscured or lost that you could imagine that,
Speaker 1: you know, we're in this field of sasquatchery, you know,
Speaker 1: and if you used an analogy like okay, this is
Speaker 1: a territory, a geographical space, Well, we have this center
Speaker 1: that existed for so long. That's the sort of like
Speaker 1: established facts as the best we know them. And then
Speaker 1: as you get more familiar with that center, you get
Speaker 1: better and better at being able to go out to
Speaker 1: the frontier into the what we don't know yet or
Speaker 1: what we're trying to know, and encounter new things and
Speaker 1: responsibly discern those against information that's not necessarily related to
Speaker 1: useful and bring that back to the center. And I
Speaker 1: feel like with the advent of social media and the Internet,
Speaker 1: we've completely lost the center, and I spend more time
Speaker 1: trying to re establish that center so that people know
Speaker 1: where we are here in twenty twenty four. I mean,
Speaker 1: I think we all do that, Like that's part of
Speaker 1: why I wrote the book. I think that's part of
Speaker 1: why Mark Marcell digs into Ape Canyon. That's part of
Speaker 1: why you reinvestigated the Bosberg events or the Freeman evidence
Speaker 1: or the Blue Mountains evidence, etc. Is that we're trying
Speaker 1: to re establish that center because these things that were
Speaker 1: known not that long ago now seem to be so
Speaker 1: lost in the wind, and people don't have the same
Speaker 1: foundation that they used to have. And I think a
Speaker 1: lot of that is driven by this social media environment.
Speaker 1: Where people are competing with not only each other, but
Speaker 1: with these algorithm in order to drive visibility, in order
Speaker 1: to grow their audiences, et cetera. And that has made
Speaker 1: a lot of this endeavor so much more difficult than
Speaker 1: it used to be. So I know that's a very
Speaker 1: long answer, but that's what I see happening. It's very frustrating.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, yeah. Social media is a plague. Yeah it is.
Speaker 2: And it's not only social media that you're talking about,
Speaker 2: but we now live in a world of influencers as
Speaker 2: opposed to researchers essentially, and that's the Bigfoot community has
Speaker 2: kind of been taken over by that, unfortunately. And I
Speaker 2: know that people out there, but well, if you're an influencer, yeah,
Speaker 2: but I don't want to be. I don't care if
Speaker 2: anybody listens. You know, I'm doing this anyway, is what
Speaker 2: it comes down to. I would be doing this if
Speaker 2: nobody was watching. And I'm not sure that's true for
Speaker 2: a lot of the people who are out there on
Speaker 2: podcasts and websites and facebooks and things like that. You know,
Speaker 2: so social media I read this. I think this is
Speaker 2: a an approximate quote. Social media allows darkness to spread
Speaker 2: at the speed of light, you know, and that darkness
Speaker 2: comes in many forms like misinformation or hoaxes, or narcissism
Speaker 2: or any variety of things, you know. And I think
Speaker 2: that's probably the most difficult thing that has happened the
Speaker 2: big footing in the last fifteen to twenty years. To
Speaker 2: get back to Nathan's question, but also at the same time,
Speaker 2: every curse has a blessing, and vice versa, every blessing
Speaker 2: has a curse. John Green was commenting on the advent
Speaker 2: of the Internet and how it would have affected his work.
Speaker 2: Because I don't have the exact numbers or anything like that,
Speaker 2: but I think by the time he wrote his book
Speaker 2: that I think was published in seventy eight, if I
Speaker 2: remember right, Sasquatch Apes among us, I think he has
Speaker 2: something like seventeen hundred sightings, sixteen hundred sightings or something
Speaker 2: like that. Well that's from nineteen, you know, fifty six,
Speaker 2: I think is when he started to nineteen seventy eight,
Speaker 2: you know, So that's just a few decades. That's nothing. Nowadays,
Speaker 2: that's nothing. I mean, I accrued that many sighting reports
Speaker 2: I think written siding reports in just like five or
Speaker 2: ten years, just by being out there, and I'm not
Speaker 2: the biggest platform by far, you know, so it did
Speaker 2: get easier to find sasquatch reports, to connect with other bigfooters,
Speaker 2: to find information networking in general, you know, and I know,
Speaker 2: for me personally, weather reports and snow depth maps and
Speaker 2: that sort of stuff, extremely valuable information available online. But
Speaker 2: at the same time, the dark side of that is,
Speaker 2: you know, the whole social media influencer folks jumping up
Speaker 2: and down saying look at me, look at me, look
Speaker 2: at me me, and very few people are left pointing
Speaker 2: at the sasquatch and saying look at them. So that's
Speaker 2: that's my biggest woe I think with bigfoot stuff is
Speaker 2: that it's always has been that way. You know, it's
Speaker 2: just a different form now and it's a lot faster
Speaker 2: now and the misinformation spreads much more quickly. The gossip
Speaker 2: essentially that bigfoot has always been a gossipy game, whether
Speaker 2: we're talking about the hindon the Green and Peterburn era,
Speaker 2: you know, or nowadays on Facebook, you know, that sort
Speaker 2: of stuff. But it's always been very gossip oriented because
Speaker 2: not a lot of bigfoot stuff goes on, you know,
Speaker 2: there aren't footprint finds, you know every day, or their
Speaker 2: new videos aren't being taken, new film, you know, that
Speaker 2: sort of stuff. There's not a lot of big breakthroughs.
Speaker 2: Scuokom cast level stuff is rather rare, and because of that,
Speaker 2: and people love the subjects so much, they want to
Speaker 2: talk about the other people instead of the animals. And
Speaker 2: I think it's just better for all of us to
Speaker 2: stay focused, stay focused on what's important. The Sasquatches are important,
Speaker 2: not the people who look into it, you know, And
Speaker 2: it's the evidence, it's not the people again, So that's
Speaker 2: my answer for you, Nathan.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree with all that, and I don't think
Speaker 1: it's restricted to the Sasquatch subject. I just see it
Speaker 1: everywhere that I look, you know, with all the subjects
Speaker 1: that I'm interested in and pursuits that I have and
Speaker 1: subjects that I follow, And so I think it's just
Speaker 1: a symptom of that particular environment, of the online environment.
Speaker 1: It drives certain behaviors and you know, it comes along
Speaker 1: with certain temptations, and you know, obviously we're in the
Speaker 1: same space. I mean, we have a podcast and we
Speaker 1: have an audience, and we would like for those things
Speaker 1: to grow, and we do our very level best to
Speaker 1: always be accurate, and so of course we're going to
Speaker 1: make errors and faux pause. And again, when I am
Speaker 1: speaking about the things that I see, I'm not attributing
Speaker 1: malice to those people. I think in most of those cases,
Speaker 1: a lot of the things that get passed around as misinformation,
Speaker 1: it's just you've taken an oral tradition and extended it
Speaker 1: to the internet. So it's just the spreading of folklore
Speaker 1: and mythology. But it's just in this digital format, and
Speaker 1: those people are not intending to mislead other people. They
Speaker 1: are reporting on what they believe to be true. Although
Speaker 1: the frustration is that, well, if more diligence was done,
Speaker 1: they could have easily come to their own conclusions that no,
Speaker 1: in fact, the story is much different than it's being reported,
Speaker 1: or the facts are not being presented, and what's being
Speaker 1: presented instead or counterfactual. But I think because of the
Speaker 1: need for speed in that environment, to be first to print,
Speaker 1: so to speak, first to publish, like they're competing with
Speaker 1: each other, so that their episode or video on this
Speaker 1: subject has that primacy effect and it's the first to
Speaker 1: talk about it, and so they don't have they're not
Speaker 1: affording themselves the luxury of doing the deep dive and
Speaker 1: diligence and things like that, and those are all just frustrations.
Speaker 1: So again, I'm not castigating anyone as much as I'm
Speaker 1: just lamenting the state of affairs that is brought about
Speaker 1: by social media and all those drivers and incentives that
Speaker 1: people have. It just makes it a difficult game.
Speaker 2: You kids, get off my lawn.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And you know, if this technology had been
Speaker 1: around when I first got into the subject, I would
Speaker 1: be doing the same thing. Because when I first got
Speaker 1: into the subject and was young, you know, it took
Speaker 1: me years to find another researcher that I could speak with. Honestly,
Speaker 1: I mean I would reach out to people, nobody would respond,
Speaker 1: you know, because I was some young kid from Georgia basically,
Speaker 1: and you know, I wasn't in the Pacific Northwest, and
Speaker 1: I didn't have experience, and I didn't have people who
Speaker 1: could vouch for me in the field, and so you know,
Speaker 1: if I could have built my own online thing and
Speaker 1: talk to people about it, I would have. You know,
Speaker 1: It's just that YouTube didn't exist back then and social
Speaker 1: media didn't exist back then. So you know, the only
Speaker 1: thing that separates me from those people of a younger age,
Speaker 1: is that, like, well, they have access to a technology
Speaker 1: that I didn't. So I'm again, I'm not making any
Speaker 1: sort of moral judgments or value judgments as much as
Speaker 1: I'm just trying to explain to Nathan, like that's it's
Speaker 1: a frustrating thing to see, because man, I love details,
Speaker 1: like I want to know anyone who knows me personally
Speaker 1: will tell you, like the things that I love, I
Speaker 1: will obsessively learn every single thing I can about it,
Speaker 1: Like if I fall in love with the band, I
Speaker 1: will get obsessed with their entire catalog and everything they've
Speaker 1: ever done. I'm either I don't like it or I'm
Speaker 1: obsessed with it, Like I'm not a casual fan of
Speaker 1: many things, and so I guess part of me expects
Speaker 1: that people who are into the Sasquatch will be as
Speaker 1: into all the digging and searching and foraging for information
Speaker 1: and trying to get to the bottom of things as
Speaker 1: I am. And that's just an unrealistic expectation. I have
Speaker 1: to keep that in mind that like, oh, well, you know,
Speaker 1: for other people, they're just having fun and there's nothing
Speaker 1: wrong with that, but for me, like it it tears
Speaker 1: me up when something' is like, oh no, you were
Speaker 1: so close, but you missed it this that or the other.
Speaker 1: And you know, I'm trying to preserve again that center
Speaker 1: of reliable information because we are trying to get somewhere.
Speaker 1: You know, no one's proved that these things are real,
Speaker 1: and no one's accurately tested these hypotheses to a conclusion,
Speaker 1: and so it's it's frustrating to see missed opportunities like that.
Speaker 1: But oh well, such as the nature of life, I suppose.
Speaker 2: I still struggle with the idea that there are casual
Speaker 2: fans of Bigfoot, not that I don't realize they're there.
Speaker 2: You know, I have, but I forget all the time
Speaker 2: because I'm just so over the top and obsessed. And
Speaker 2: you know, if I'm not in the woods, I have
Speaker 2: I fear of missing out Foma pretty bad. Just yesterday,
Speaker 2: I was like, going, gosh, darning, you know what I thought,
Speaker 2: Uh see, I thought our podcast was yesterday. And when
Speaker 2: I figure, oh, shoot, I could have gone to the
Speaker 2: woods today, I didn't go, And then I wonder if
Speaker 2: I can go tomorrow after No, I got to go
Speaker 2: to work tomorrow after, you know, and I'm thinking, oh,
Speaker 2: I got to go and I realized, oh, well, you
Speaker 2: know what, this will be the first week that I
Speaker 2: can remember that I didn't go Bigfoot at least once,
Speaker 2: you know. I mean, i'd have to think all the
Speaker 2: way back to like spring or fall or something, and
Speaker 2: with my memory, that's that's kind of stretching it, you know.
Speaker 2: But then I realized, wait, I was out on Monday.
Speaker 2: I did go this week, So I thought I was
Speaker 2: going to take a week off, and that didn't even
Speaker 2: work out because I'm just so obsessed with it. So
Speaker 2: the fact that people would like, oh, I like Bigfoot.
Speaker 2: You know, I know Roger Patterson's name, and I know
Speaker 2: Bob Gimlin was with them, and I watched the TV
Speaker 2: shows and you know, and that sort of stuff. I
Speaker 2: forget that are people like that instead of people like
Speaker 2: you and I, who like, we're calling people to try
Speaker 2: to find out these nitty gritty details from you know,
Speaker 2: decades ago, and are there any photographs of this? Like
Speaker 2: oh my god, and like when we score a photograph
Speaker 2: or a piece of footage of a footprints in the
Speaker 2: ground or something, I'm just over the top and like
Speaker 2: I'm riding high for like two weeks on that, you know,
Speaker 2: I forget that there are people out there who just
Speaker 2: are interested in the subject. And I should know better
Speaker 2: because I'm at the museum a lot, and when people
Speaker 2: tell me, you know, generally speaking, most stuff I hear
Speaker 2: is like sound events, and I'm a hunter and fishermen,
Speaker 2: and I've never heard such a thing. And so I
Speaker 2: and yeah, I'm thinking to myself, yeah, they're real. And
Speaker 2: I usually said, yeah, it turns out the real animals,
Speaker 2: and then they go on a lengthy five or eight
Speaker 2: minute explanation about how nothing else could have made that noise.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, yeah, yeah, so, and but that's that's
Speaker 2: a consequence of being a casual fan, is that you're
Speaker 2: still stuck in the are they real? Question?
Speaker 1: And that's the beauty of like when you find like
Speaker 1: minded people. I mean, people might be shocked to find
Speaker 1: out that because you know, we record all the time,
Speaker 1: but like you and I, for example, speak on the
Speaker 1: phone for at least a couple of hours a week
Speaker 1: about sasquatch stuff, sometimes more, you know, like we're always
Speaker 1: getting into the weeds and that stuff. So it's not
Speaker 1: like we only talk when we're recording this show. We're
Speaker 1: always talking squatch. And you know, it reminds me of
Speaker 1: like there's bands that I love that they've never really
Speaker 1: crossed into the mainstream, and so, you know, I'll do
Speaker 1: all this searching as I've moved around the country and
Speaker 1: people talk about music, and I'll be like, oh, what
Speaker 1: about this band? Like ninety nine percent of the people
Speaker 1: you encounter like I never heard of them, you know,
Speaker 1: or oh, I remember that one song on the radio
Speaker 1: because they might have had like one minor hit. And
Speaker 1: then you know, they'll play like a reunion show and
Speaker 1: you go there and you're in a room with three
Speaker 1: thousand other people who know every single word to every song,
Speaker 1: and this thing matters to everyone in that room as
Speaker 1: much as it matters to you, and it's like, Oh,
Speaker 1: you found your people there for a moment, you know.
Speaker 1: And I feel the same way with certain researcher friends,
Speaker 1: where it's like, like we've mentioned before, Oh, he's a lifer,
Speaker 1: she's a life Like that's someone who really gets it,
Speaker 1: you know, and it's so few and far between, and
Speaker 1: so it's a it's a special thing. But yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that's again the costs and benefits. The benefit of
Speaker 1: all this social media and internet stuff is that it is.
Speaker 1: It does make it easier to find your people in
Speaker 1: that regard too. You know, there's all sorts of people
Speaker 1: I met as a consequence of this and the online
Speaker 1: connectivity that I wouldn't have met otherwise that I've learned
Speaker 1: so much from, you know, So I'm equally grateful as
Speaker 1: much as I am frustrated by this thing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, but all the goods man, that sigal noise
Speaker 2: ratio is just off the charts as far as the
Speaker 2: internet goes.
Speaker 1: Well, speaking of our people, I think we have some
Speaker 1: great questions that came in from the members for the
Speaker 1: members only Q and A, which you know for new listeners.
Speaker 1: We always record the members episodes as soon as we're done,
Speaker 1: we're recording me. So if you're a new member, you're
Speaker 1: going to get this. This is Monday hopefully when you're
Speaker 1: hearing this when it's released and the bonus episodes come
Speaker 1: out on Thursdays. But so, I think this would be
Speaker 1: a good time to pivot and answer some questions from
Speaker 1: our people there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so. I think so. I mean, and
Speaker 2: you know what, we've didn't get through a lot of questions.
Speaker 2: I think we had a lot of good discussions in
Speaker 2: this episode, and Boba will be back with us as
Speaker 2: soon as he's able to sin as he gets through
Speaker 2: the quagmire, this temporary quagmire that he's stuck in. So yeah,
Speaker 2: why don't we go on to do the members episode
Speaker 2: right now? And of course people can be members by
Speaker 2: going to the website, hitting that membership button and learning
Speaker 2: all about it if they're into it, and if not,
Speaker 2: that's cool too. We have casual listeners, I bet too,
Speaker 2: but for the diehards, we got a membership section, so well,
Speaker 2: I guess with that, then why don't we get out
Speaker 2: of here? And thank you very much for listening. We
Speaker 2: really do appreciate every single ear and every pair of
Speaker 2: ears that is put on our podcast every single week.
Speaker 2: And I mean otherwise we just be sitting around talking
Speaker 2: about Bigfoot without you, by the way, which we would
Speaker 2: be doing anyway. Again, everybody on this podcast, Bobo, Matt
Speaker 2: and I are all lifers. We would be sitting around
Speaker 2: having very similar conversations. The only difference is that you,
Speaker 2: most important person on this call, would not be with us.
Speaker 2: So thank you very much for being with us, and
Speaker 2: until next week, keep a squatchy. Thanks for listening to
Speaker 2: this week's episode of Bigfoot and Beyond. If you liked
Speaker 2: what you heard, please rate and review us on iTunes,
Speaker 2: subscribe to Bigfoot and Beyond wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 2: and follow us on Facebook and Instagram at Bigfoot and
Speaker 2: Beyond podcast. You can find us on Twitter at Bigfoot
Speaker 2: and Beyond that's an N in the middle, and tweet
Speaker 2: us your thoughts and questions with the hashtag Bigfoot and Beyond.