Forums

Bumping this old thread,    just because,    I am nostalgic, hahah

Gotta laugh, sort of like USFS as a billboard proponent and sleuth fo the "beauty strip" script. I was doing some volunteer work yesterday and many different environmental agencies were involved.  I was the only nongovernmental person present.  I can tell you there are some very dedicated personnel out there doing important jobs that keep their head low now.     My personal perspective is that Sasquatch and UAP and NHI are Siamese partners who swim in the same pool. 

I would say #1 is less likely.   There isn't a ton of timber harvest of USFS land anymore, much -> most seems to come from private timber lands and BLM lands as well as state forest lands now, none of which USFS has any responsibility or authority for.   I'll mix #2 and #3 together because I think #3 presents the situation with fair accuracy, moreso than #2.      #4 is definitely true.   Moreover, many -> most of their "biologists" are on the forestry side, not the wildlife side.   Typically wildlife issues on federal lands of all sorts go to the US F&W service, not the land management agency.   My expectation is if USFS were to get involved, they would quickly pass the torch to the federal wildlife agencies, not a timber / recreation agency.    Oooh oooh .. that brings up another thing: USFS now spends more time / money managing recreation than they do managing timber harvest.    ... and if you look at the condition of our USFS-maintained trails you'll see even that is a failure.    Since you had your sighting up behind Prospect and Butte Falls, you're somewhat familiar with the area.   Did you know that 2 years ago USFS only had 2 people on the High Cascades (Prospect) ranger district tasked with trail maintenance because their budget was so tight?   #5 -- I don't think BF exactly puts jobs in danger, BUT I do think making a fuss about bigfoot might cause problems for someone trying for a career that goes beyond a local ranger district or forest.   To move up in rank above .. I think it is GS-11 but it might be GS-9 .. you almost have to transfer to another forest.   The supervisor on the "receiving" forest can accept your transfer or reject it.   If you've made trouble in your current position, forced the district ranger there to deal with issues they don't want to, then likely the transfer .. as well as the promotion going with it .. are going to be denied.   That doesn't mean you get fired,  you just get .. stuck in place with a lot fewer upward mobility options.   #6 -- I don't think the president or cabinet have a role in this.   This has gone on since 1967 or before across administrations, across parties.    If it were as simple as that, with this much time passing, some administration would have decided to spill the beans.   #7 and #8 are both possible.      So to summarize, I think USFS doesn't get to the bottom of this because it is not their job.   I think it would more clearly fall on USF&W servivce on public land in general, possibly on some of the military base command (like JBLM) where appropriate.     More likely than some deep conspiracy to keep us in the dark, I think the reason lies somewhere else.   We, as citizens, expect our government to be subject matter experts, to manage situations, to control them, and to protect us.    Facing a situation they do not have expertise, cannot manage or control, and cannot guarantee our safety, the most rational option for their employees is to pretend the situation does not exist.   Until someone officially and publicly acknowledges it, someone with the authority to speak for an agency when they do so, the situation truly does not exist so far as their responsibility to handle it goes.   Just my view of course.      

Well, I know it's true that the forest service says bigfoot is a myth.  My question is why do they hold this position when so many average Americans go on BFRO and report sightings while in the national forest lands. Why is the forest service refusing to get to the bottom of the bigfoot issue?   1. Is the administration afraid to address this issue and study bigfoot since it may result in logging being shut down. 2. Do the higher ups spend too much time in the office and will never see one, and they believe that eyewitnesses are mistaken. 3. Are the higher ups so busy, they don't have time to spend on the topic? 4. Is their budget so tight they don't have the funds to hire biologist to study the issue? 5. Does the forest service administration know bigfoot exists, and it they admit this, their jobs will be in jeopardy? 6. Has the president and cabinet ordered the Forest Service to ignore the issue? 7. Does the administration know bigfoot exists but they don't have the expertise to study the creature. 8. There is nothing to investigate since bigfoot is not real according to their biologist.   List your top three reasons starting with the most likely reason.   What are the real reasons why the Forest Service doesn't get to the bottom on this issue?.  

Explain what?      Are they truly well thought out?   We need to keep in mind carefully what we know is true, what we know is false, and what we still do not know.   Some people are deathly afraid to admit there is something they do not know so they grab onto falsehood as truth instead.    That is how I see this line of reasoning and that's why I'm calling it out.   There is no shame in admitting you do not know a thing.   There is shame in claiming falsehood is truth.   That is what is happening here .. offering falsehood for truth rather than simply embracing the unansweredness of the question out of insecurity.   Seems like that is you as well?