Well, what I stated was we (meaning the forest service). I'm sure there are ecologists / biologist that work in the winter, but we (FS in the Sierras), start crews when the snow melts and run them until it snows again. I'm not sure we have species that we are tracking (on the Threatened and Endangered Species list) that require snow surveys.
So
your spring/summer/fall crews don't find Bigfoot, and
their winter crews don't find Bigfoot either. It makes no difference what "target" species is being studied or surveyed - because the science of ecology for any animal is related to the context of all other animals within their ecosystem. Imagine someone doing a survey or study on snowshoe hares who doesn't give a rat's ass about Bigfoot. They find some hare remains surrounded by gigantic human-like footprints. They are following hare tracks in snow to see what they are feeding on, and suddenly come upon gigantic humanlike footprints crossing the trail left by the hare. They park themselves about 100 feet from a small group of hares that are interacting to observe their behavior. After an hour, they notice a red fox is stalking the group from downwind. He's getting closer and closer. Then a Bigfoot flies out of the nearby treeline at 30mph and snatches the fox and proceeds to tear it in half. A second Bigfoot behind the biologist picks up a rock and heaves it at the poor guy.
Why are these the kinds of stories told by a myriad of "common folk", and not by the countless field biologists working countless hours over centuries? You offered two accounts of scientists - one heard unidentifiable sounds and the other might have seen a Bigfoot but is not too sure about that. The mother and son must have already had Bigfoot-on-the-mind because they pretty much decided on the spot that that was what was making all the racket out there. The dead fawn and deer are easily explained as almost anything other than Bigfoot casualties. But yet there they are, both reports sitting in the BFRO database. Do those two reports count in those "thousands" that Bigfooters are often talking about? Is it these kinds of things that are the sand grains that make up the dune of Bigfoot evidence? Or are these possibly droplets of water in a pond that many see? For many others, a small shift of the eyes causes the pond to vanish, because it was only a heat mirage. Kathy, from my perspective you seem almost too smart and too cool to believe that Bigfoot really does exist. Maybe I've got you all wrong.
I'm not sure, personally, what a bigfoot does in the winter, but if they were out, yes footprints should be more easily seen.
Well we do know that they don't reveal themselves to professional field biologists working in winter. I think we can say that.
A long term study in the area of historical sightings...during the day, food resources could be cataloged or survey done for prints, hair, etc., setting up trap cameras or whatever other high-tech stuff is out there and at night doing whatever you could to bring one in.
Catalog food resources? For Bigfoot? Don't we already have functionally complete knowledge of biodiversity (animal & plant) for the PNW? Scads of people (professional and laypeople) have already coursed through the PNW for centuries with no confirmation of Bigfoot. I've mentioned before that high-tech searches for missing people never result in finding a Bigfoot instead.
If after a year, you got nothing...there you go!
There who goes? Since one can't really prove a negative (i.e. Bigfoot doesn't exist), then what are we left with after a fruitless search? As it is now, the BF evidence is not very compelling to many scientists other than Meldrum. Much of his thesis is based upon the PGF being the real deal. His mid-tarsal break is only a feature of the foot if Patterson didn't scam the world. Some footprints show dermals, but only if Chilcutt isn't wrong about that. Matt Crowley who?
Bigfootery is not about an animal; it's about beliefs in that animal and mostly about believing what others have to say about it. Nothing can be linked directly to this hypothetical creature. Given that, a failed search would probably only cause a temporary ripple through Bigfootery. During that year-long PNW search, we should expect to get more sightings in New York, Iowa, Florida, etc. The New Jersey believers will bitch and moan and say it was a waste of time and money, because THEY have got the biggies right there in the Garden State. Don't think so? Wanna call those guys liars, or near-sighted or something? Wanna do it to their faces? Hey, if the eastern sightings increase, it's because those PNW Bigfoots heard the search team coming and migrated towards the Atlantic. They might even go the other way, so station some team members on Vancouver Island to intercept the swimmers.
I don't think sightings happen anywhere at any time.
The reports suggest to me that that is almost true.
I don't think I suggested that funds be allocated to "survey" for range or ecology; what I meant by survey was finding the creature (I apologize...I tend to use terms that are archaeological...survey to me means physically being out in the field looking for something).
Understood. But the moment the creature is found with confirmation, much of its ecology will become self-evident. It's ecology should already be apparent even without a "finding", because large animals like that leave much evidence of their presence. We can't find that stuff right now. It's a kind of bizarre chicken-and-egg thing that doesn't make sense. Even if we find one tomorrow, at the rate we are going it could take another 400 years to find a second one. Are they all living in, or retreating to a valley that nobody ever goes to?
It does seem strange, doesn't it?
That's an understatement! But strong Bigfoot skepticism isn't strange at all. It's about the only thing making any sense.
The few that have stated to have shot one always seem to a) claim they buried the evidence or b) the animal got away. I have never dealt with a witness who made that claim, and honestly I wouldn't believe them if they did.
Why? Would you think they are liars?
