My Newest Book

I am about to release my third book called "In Search of the Unknown" It is now available in kindle form and is the second in a series of ten books I am creating. It is available at amazon and sells for .99 cents.  The print version is now available at amazon. I have a few minor adjustments to make but wanted to make it available for readers.. Here is its description:

A young boy grew up in the shadow of Mount Rainier Washington. His life during the 1960’s and 70’s was filled with the normal activities of life on a small farm in a rural community, hunting and fishing with friends and the enjoyment of exploring the nearby forests of the Pacific Northwest. Little did he know that while he trekked the fields and forests in the bright summer sunshine, something unknown to him lurked in the shadows watching.
One cold winter day, while he and a friend walked to another friends home, they discovered something that shook the foundation of all they knew of the world around them. This discovery set into motion events that would lead this young man through the next forty years of adventure, close friendships and bone chilling fear.
This story is the stuff of fiction, but the story is true and the events really happened.

WARNING: It looks like you have unsaved changes that could be lost. Are you sure you want to leave the current section before saving?

Cancel

Yes

PODCASTS AND ORGANIZATIONS

During my many years as a Sasquatch investigator I have always had little interest in public attention of myself or my work in the subject.

In recent years I have been asked to be a guest on a number of radio shows, and have been treated very well by the hosts and audiences.

I wanted to show my appreciation to some of the hosts and groups around the country who have been so nice to me and encourage people interested in the subject of Bigfoot to listen to radio shows I mention here. I will be adding to this list over time to my website at Jevning Research, and I don't wish to forget anyone so check my sebsite perodically as this list is well worth checking out.

Here is a short list of podcasts and organizations I recommend:

The Bill Lee Show: "Inspired By Bigfoot" http://inspiredbybigfoot.wq4d.net/


The Bigfoot Tonight Show http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bigfoottonightshow


The Sharon Lee Show: http://www.bigfootlives.blogspot.com/


The North American Giants: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/north-american-giants/2012/12/16/north-american-giants

This is just a short list but these are great shows!

As I mentioned, I will be adding to the list of sites and organizations here:


Bigfootology: http://bigfootology.com/?page_id=95


Bigfoot buzz blog: http://www.bigfootbuzz.net/


The Georgia Bigfoot Society: http://georgiabigfootsociety.webs.com/


The History Channels show "America's Book of Secrets" http://www.history.com/shows/americas-book-of-secrets

　

FOOTPRINT CASTING

I have often been asked about casting footprints, here is a basic how to for anyone who has never cast animal (or Sasquatch) footprints:

Footprint casting:

 

Casting footprints is not as easy as one might think, or fast. Preparation can make casting a smoother process.

Here is a list of things I recommend, but you are not limited by this.

 

1: plastic bucket.

2: latex gloves

3: at least one 5 gallon water container.

4: plaster of paris

5: container to keep unused plaster in and dispense from

6: scoop for plaster

7: knife, I use a buck knife, works very well

8: trash bags

9: hand towel

10: cardboard box

11: newspaper or bubble wrap

12: tape measure

13: camera

 

Casting footprints is time consuming and messy, and before you start casting, you'll want to thoroughly photo document all the footprints.

After photo documenting tracks, choose the one's you wish to cast. It will take normally one 5 pound box of plaster "per footprint" (Sasquatch). Plaster can be obtained from most hardware stores (Lowes, Home Depot, etc.).

Before starting with Sasquatch footprints, practice on animal and human footprints; begin with your dog or cat's footprints.

Practicing will enable you to perfect your skills at casting before casting the important ones and help prevent mistakes that could cost you that important print.

When you are ready, take your plastic bucket, and pour in the contents of one 5 pound box of plaster. Wear latex gloves as it works best to mix the plaster with your hands, removing all dry lumps as possible.

The plaster dries your hands, the gloves help prevent this. Clean up is much easier also.

You will want the plaster the consistency of pancake mix after adding water. Add water slowly as not to make the plaster too runny. Thick is good, but liquid enough to be able to pour it. After practicing this awhile you will get the hang of what thickness works best.

When you get the thickness you want your ready to pour. Be careful not to wait too long while mixing as the plaster begins to set up (harden) as soon as water is added to it.

Pour slowly and lightly use your hand to push the plaster to fill in all parts of the footprint.

Repeat this with all footprints you want to cast. You may have to clean your bucket depending on how many tracks you are casting, you will be able to tell as you go along.

After the plaster is poured, you may have up to two hours to wait for it to be dry enough to remove from the ground. Once in a while after the surface of the plaster feels dry and hard, tap it gently. It will feel hard enough eventually, this is where the knife comes in.

You will have to dig around the cast; do not try to just pull it from the ground because it will break apart.

Dig around it entirely and as far under it as you can, then lift it gently out when it’s loose enough. The plaster will still take up to a week to dry enough to handle it and clean it.

You can brush some of the larger pieces of soil off the cast, but its best to give it time to dry; you have plenty of time later to clean it properly.

Wrap it in newspaper and gently place it in a cardboard box for transport. When cleaning casts, a dental pick with a rubber tip helps the small cracks and a toothbrush with soft bristles. Don’t try to clean it fast or all at once take your time and you will end up with very nice footprint castings.

 

Australopithecus.....Food for thought

I recently came across a video lecture by researcher and author Lloyd Pye. His discussion centered on what he calls "Intervention Theory". This is in regard to how life in general and our ancestors arrived on Earth. This aside, I was intrigued by what he discussed concerning fossil hominids. What ever anyone's background education or knowledge of hominids may be, his discussion is worth considering. Particularly interesting was his discussion of the Australopithecines. His contention, and he is not the first to arrive at this idea, is that the Australopithecines were not actually in the human lineage but rather the ancestor to the creatures inhabiting the fringes of societies today to put it generally. He suggests that the Sasquatch, Yeti, Almas and creatures that are said to inhabit the south American jungle regions are the decendents of these creatures. There were 6 Australopithecus species discovered so far, two "Gracile" meaning essentially smaller, and four "Robust". John Napier in the early 1970's suggested this,  and he was an anthropologist assigned to the Smithsonian, so the idea has merrit. Below I have provided some information about the Australopithecines, and photographs of skulls, and artist conceptions of what they looked like from the fossils discovered of them. Compare them to the Sasquatch from Roger Patterson's film, notice the similarities? I am a simple Sasquatch Hunter (non-lethal)and don't pretend to be an expert on such things, however this provides us with a different vantage point on the issue.  Lloyd Pye suggests that creatures such as the Sasquatch, Yeti, etc are already represented in the fossil record, and that these are them. Food for thought. 

  

Anatomy and biology of the australopithecines:

·         Bipedal apes with modified dentition.

·         Lived in more open environmental setting, not the open plains of bushland and wooden Savannah.

·         Hominid structure of teeth and jaws appear to have required more grinding that an ape’s diet.

·         Male australopithecines were larger in body size. 20-40% taller, 30-40% heavier than females.

·         Australopithecines were social animals.

·         Foraging strategies of hominids were not dramatically different: australopithecines have been carnivores.

·         Australopithecines were principally vegetarian.

·         Australopithecines of 2 million years ago occurred in 2 forms:

Gracile (means slender)

Robust.

So far, only one gracile australopithecines has been identified whereas, as many as 4 robust species have been named. In South Africa, the gracile species is australopithecus africanus and the robust australopithecus robustus. The robust australopithecine in East Africa is australopithecus boisei. Naming gracile species in East Africa is more contentious; some apply the name australopithecus africanus to some specimens. The term gracile and robust implies substantial anatomical differences between the 2 forms. One small and delicately built. The other bigger and more massive. Scholars realize the difference between the 2 forms is mainly in the dental and facial adaptations to chewing. The robust forms have bigger grinding teeth, more robust jaws and more bulky chewing muscles and muscle attachments.

Australopithecines anatomy

·         Teeth, jaw and cranial anatomy are one functional complex.

·         Difference between the 2 forms of australopithecine is that the robust species have taken this adaptation to an extreme, having enormous, flat molars and relatively small blade-like incisors and canines.

·         In all hominid, the tooth row is tucked under the face more than the apes, giving a less projecting facial profile and increasing chewing efficiency.

·         Australopithecines tucking under are particularly marked.

·         The robusticity of the lower jaw (mandible) that is characteristic of hominids compared with apes is particularly apparent in the robust species, reflecting more powerful chewing action.

·         Extra muscle in the robust has 2 anatomical consequences:

One of the muscle that power the lower jaw-the temporal muscle-is anchored to a raised bony crest that run along the top of the cranium, front to back.

This so-called sagittal crest also in gorillas is absent in gracile australopithecines.

The great site of the temporal in robust and a second chewing muscle, the masseter, causes the cheekbones (the zygomatic arch) to be exaggerated and flared forward

This and the strengthening of the central part of the face by pillars of bone, gives the robust australopithecine face a characteristic dished appearance. The difference in dental apparatus between gracile and robust australopithecines was once interpreted as a result of substantial differences in diet. Robust was more vegetarian. Gracile more carnivorous. The past decade they were implies a vegetarian diet for the australopithecines. More recent Fredrick Grine and Richard Kay concluded robust consume tougher foods than gracile. It is consistent with evidence that robust australopithecine’s lived in drier habitats where soft fruits and leaves were more common. Sillien recently challenged this conclusion. His analysis included the robust species included a significant amount of meat.

Sound familiar to things being reported in contemporary times?

Why would anyone perpetrate the supression or cover-up of the existence of the Sasquatch?

I am researching this question in detail for one of my two new book projects, but wanted to present one of the possible reasons why anyone would wish for the Sasquatch to remain in the realm of mythical creature. This short article is published on a new blog called "bigfootbuzz" that I recomend everyone check out, and is put together by Chuck Prahl one of the hosts of the Bigfoot tonight radio show.

This is only a quick overview of the piece I am currently working on, but it gives the reader enough information as "food for thought".

If an "endangered" species of owl could cause large scale financial havoc with communities associated with our forests, how much would a species of primate previously unrecognized cause? 

This is becoming an increasingly frequently asked question. I myself never considered such a thing, and having been a close personal friend of the late Rene' Dahinden was in a position to have known of such activities had they been perpetrated, but had not heard of such things.

I was reading comments on a blog last year about just this, and the people chatting there were asking rather excellent questions. This discussion got me thinking about my own experiences, and I have them written on my own website and blog, and began seeking accounts from anyone else who may have experienced similar situations.

I began receiving responses from people all along the west coast of the United States with similar stories. So the question is not "if" such cover-ups and outright destruction of evidence is taking place, but "why"?

I am certain that there are numerous reasons for why anyone would wish the Sasquatch to remain in limbo as far as being officially recognized, but one stands out in my mind as likely the strongest reason.

Many investigators over the years attempting to uncover government actions successfully follow the same path, and that is to follow the money. In this case taking a close look at the financial impact that proving the Sasquatch to exist would have on local communities which are in the vicinity of national or state forest lands would have.

I have not completed my investigation into this probable impact, but enough so that it would be devastating on a wide scale.

How do we know this would be a problem? We already have a much smaller example with the Northern Spotted owl, remember this?

I have placed an article here that was written about the impact the owl controversy had on communities, I have yet to hear any major studies done on the impact on communities and humans as a result of the Spotted Owl decision.

In June 1990 the government set aside 15% (20 million acres) of old growth forest for the owl habitat, and all the neighboring communities never recovered from this. Below is the article from a site called "One voice working for the forests".

It was 20 years ago — June 26, 1990 — that the spotted owl was listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The Oregonian has taken an in-depth look at what that decision has meant for the timber industry and the spotted owl itself. The results, especially for the industry, are not pretty, and environmental groups might have a few things they’d rather forget too.

As this graphic shows, the owl listing ended up cutting Oregon’s total timber harvest in half. And the Northwest timber industry was decimated.

Here is a description from Jonathan Raban’s op-ed this week in the New York Times:

(In 1994) the Northwest Forest Plan came into effect, protecting around 20 million acres of federal land from logging, and offering financial compensation and job retraining to the timber towns. As mill after mill closed, the stench of steam and pulp vanished from the Northwestern air; trucks carrying massive tree trunks, which used to cause mile-long tailbacks on the Olympic Peninsula, became rarities; and the ubiquitous slow-moving tugboats, dragging rafts of freshly felled firs, gradually faded from view on Puget Sound.

Raban, whose op-ed is generally supportive of the owl’s listing, said the sting still lingers in timber communities:

The battle over the owl has been just one engagement in the war over nature in the Northwest…The struggle has set class against class and countryside against city, and turned lifelong rural Democrats into staunch Republicans.

In the old timber towns, many people still echo the August 1994 speech by Slade Gorton, Republican of Washington, to the Senate on the human cost of the spotted owl listing: “The U.S. government, driven by sophisticated, well-financed national environmental organizations and supported by the media and urban opinion leaders, has betrayed rural communities and destroyed — yes, destroyed — the lives and careers of tens of thousands of honest working families in the Pacific Northwest.” Or, as the city attorney for Forks, Wash., (once a roaring town that declared itself the Logging Capital of the World) said when I called to remind him of last week’s anniversary: “That’s not a day we celebrate. At any time.”

And yet — this is the real kicker — all sides of the debate agree that the listing has done nothing to improve the spotted owl’s numbers from 20 years ago. In fact, after two decades of the owl being federally listed as “threatened,” there are actually fewer spotted owls than there were in 1990.

How can this possibly be? The absurdity of the situation is almost comical if it wasn’t so painful. The reason — and apparently no one anticipated this 20 years ago — is a larger, more efficient species called the barred owl has migrated to the Pacific Northwest from the East and is squeezing out the spotted owl population. In the Olympic National Forest, for example, researchers counted just 13 spotted owls last year, whereas in 1990 they counted 150.

Now it doesn't take much imagination to multiply the effects of the Sasquatch being proven to exist to see what would happen. There would be no 15% of forest old growth closed, "ALL" forests would be closed, and until scientists could determine all the aspects of Sasquatch life, range, feeding habits, family structure and how they relate to range areas, etc. The endangered species act clearly defines this, and all state DNR, state forest, national forest lands would be frozen. This could potentially include national parks as Sasquatch encounters happen in them also.

While logging has been cut off a great deal from before the spotted owl decision, which makes one wonder "did they do this to soften the economic impact in case the Sasquatch inadvertently were proven to exist"?

Of course this is speculation, but I am certain if the economic impact were thoroughly studied, the picture would become clear as to this motive.

This issue would not be the first one in which we know for fact the government has kept from the public.

Gigantopithecus

Photographs like this one showing a reconstructed Gigantopithecus really put into perspective what those of us who are eye witnesses to Sasquatch's have encountered. This isn't too far off the mark, some details of facial construct are different, but the size is right on the mark of what I have personally seen.

I always like this reconstruction Bill Munns made, is it really very difficult to believe that the Sasquatch exists when these creatures did?

Thanking my readers

I wanted to say a public thank you to people who have read my first book and the very kind words they have sent me regarding it. Here is one example of many I have been receiving, and I very much appreciate the nice words, and hope that my other books will be enjoyed as much. Here is one of the reviews my readers sent me:

I bought this book based on the good reviews and reviews from people in the bigfoot research community. It came highly recommended by other researchers.

It is easy to read, which is nice. It keeps your attention and makes you want to continue to read instead of setting it down. (So many books I tend to only get through the first few chapters before they lose my interest or get put into the "for a rainy day" pile.)

What I liked most about this book was the fact that the author has actually had his own face to face encounters with squatches. Many times authors of bigfoot books are just rehashing stories they have heard or read about. Jevnings has a personal history with the creatures, as well he has spent many years of his life researching and working with the big names in the bigfoot research field.

I also appreciated the Native American histories of the creatures. Too many times we dismiss the legends of old as silly folk tales instead of looking for the truths they contain. Gorillas once were considered to be silly folk tales and legends. I think there is wisdom in taking in the historical accounts from Native Americans. They have a history and understanding of the wilds of the Americas that we do not.

Other sections include Jevning sharing his personal encounters with the creature, a Q&A section that seemed to know the questions I was going to ask, and sections on evidence which included some "new" things that I haven't read in other books or websites.

This book is not a "technical" book. Frankly, there won't be one until live creatures are captured or studied. However, based on the evidence that is available this book is a fantastic read. I enjoyed it very much and highly recommend it as a "must have" book for anyone interested in the bigfoot subject.