Professional Student and Fan of Bigfoot
Eric Sean Pratt
American River College, Geography 350: Data Acquisition in GIS; Spring 2009
Abstract
If one wanted to search for bigfoot, one would have the best chance by mapping out the sightings of Bigfoot and seeing where the best places may be based on consistency. After coding sightings of Bigfoot from bfro.net, there were joins done and mapping of each counties' number of sightings. After perfoming the mapping, one simply needs to look at maps to see where their best luck lies in having a positive sighting of Bigfoot.
Introduction
Bigfoot has been a symbol of fear in campfire stories for years, and between the stories of campfires there have been thousands of sightings of Bigfoot. By comparing data of sightings of Bigfoot for over 50 years (1950-2009), I plan on seeing where there are consistent sightings of Bigfoot and purpose where researchers and hunters might want to go to find Bigfoot.
Background
The maps of bigfoot sightings in general were mapped by the “Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization” (bfro.net). Using this map alone though it is impossible to break down into decades, and also the type of encounters or signs of bigfoot. I intend to expand on this map with the map I've produced from breaking down the sightings of Bigfoot by decade and county.
http://bfro.net/GDB/state_map.asp?state=ca
Methods
It is important to note that I’m not counting reports of vocalization of Bigfoot, tracks, locating living quarters of Bigfoot or reports of the smell that is usually associated with Bigfoot (dead carcass mixed with fecal matter). These reports don’t hold as much ‘credibility’ since no one has proof that Bigfoot did actually make these, nor that another animal didn’t make them. The site where the sightings were mapped from was the “Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization” (bfro.net) who’s self-proclaim themselves as the “only scientific research organization exploring the bigfoot/sasquatch mystery”. Unlike other sites they have a form with detailed questions that help break down the story and look for holes in the story from the start. Some of the questions are “Were there any drugs involved?”, “Were there any other witnesses?”, “Have you heard of other incidents in this area?”, and finally ‘human check’ question to make sure they don’t get spammed with fake reports from hackers. They then follow up each report with a personal call and if need be they set out to explore the area where the report was done to first check for how legit the story may be, and also for possible sightings of bigfoot themselves.
For data analysis I used a txt file to code all the sightings between 1950 and 2009 into 6 different files.I then performed a join to a shapefile obtained from GEO 334 that showed California broken into counties. It originally had census data in its attribute table which was deleted with the exception of the following fields; county name, shape, FID, and the FIPS codes. This shapefile was then copied seven times. One for showing California with no sightings broken into countys, while the other six were each used for a different decade of Bigfoot sightings. Once deletion was finished a Join was performed to combine the shapefile with the txt file of Bigfoot sightings in the 1950s. The fields in each txt file were Name of the county, and number of sightings for that county in that decade. A thematic map was made using the following legend.
Results
The only county that had consistent sightings for every decade between 1950 and 2009 was Humboldt county. Siskiyou, and Del Norte were almost as consistent except for a sighting in the 1950s. This data would seem to suggest that if one wanted the highest chance of catching Bigfoot in California they would head north to those counties.
Maps of Bigfoot Sightings
Bigfoot Sightings in the 1950s
Bigfoot Sightings in the 1960s
Bigfoot Sightings in the 1970s
Bigfoot Sightings in the 1980s
Bigfoot Sightings in the 1990s
Bigfoot Sightings in the 2000s
Analysis
By only counting sightings of Bigfoot I have discredited reports of vocalization, campsites, tracks, and smells possibly made by Bigfoot. There is no reason to not believe that these are bigfoot related, and by leaving these out on the data analysis there may be more locations where one could yield a positive sighting of Bigfoot and/or capturing bigfoot in California.
Also with the invention of the internet there is more ease in reporting encounters of bigfoot without facing a social stigma of being crazy. One can note that the frequency of sightings jump in the period of 1990-2009. I was originally going to cite that this was also partly because of the influx of media attention to Bigfoot (Henry and the Hendersons, and numerous videos claiming to have debunk the 1970 famous Patterson’s video), which would cause people to be more open to the suggestion of seeing bigfoot in the forest when camping. This is still possible, but legends of bigfoot apparently have been around since before the colonys, so people would have been just as open to the idea of bigfoot when camping as they were before in theory.
Conclusion
The only county that had consistent sightings for every decade between 1950 and 2009 was Humboldt county. Siskiyou, and Del Norte were almost as consistent except for a sighting in the 1950s. This data would seem to suggest that if one wanted the highest chance of catching Bigfoot in California they would head north to those counties.
References
The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization, Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization. 2009. Available at: http://bfro.net/, Date Accessed: 11/25/2009