The Scientific Collection Debate........

[norseman]

Alright, after working for about 11 days straight, I had time today to talk with the USFWS.

 

I called this number first:

 

1-800-344-WILD

 

I explained that I was interested in collecting a type specimen and needed to know where and how to get a permit for that. The receptionist asked me what state I was in and I stated I was in Washington state. So she gave me the number of the USFWS Law Enforcement division in Region 1.

 

http://www.fws.gov/info/pocketguide/regionalcontacts.html

 

I called and again explained that I was interested in purchasing a permit to take a type specimen. The receptionist asked what I meant by a "type specimen", I explained that if I was to harvest a completely new species in the name of science, what permit did I have to have in order to do that? She had never heard of such a thing and would have a enforcement officer call me back. Within about an hour I got a call from a USFWS LE agent and again explained to him what I was doing.........he was stumped as well, but he asked me directly where I planned on doing this. (evidently they don't deal with new species much) 

 

To make a long story short? The USFWS as I thought only administers to the US wildlife refuges in giving out permits. So if your going hunting for a new species on a Federal wildlife refuge? Then yes you need a permit. I then asked him if I was to go looking for a type specimen on National Forest Service land or the National Park Service did I need a permit? He had no idea if I needed a permit or not but he did not have jurisdiction over those areas (again as I had thought).

 

 

I'm fairly sure that you will need to get a permit directly from the National Park Service for this endeavor. I'm also quite sure that you do not need a permit on the National Forest, and the reason why is that State wildlife agencies administer the National forests and State forests. I grew up outside of Colville, Wa and know many people who work for the NFS in the Colville forest HQ (my wife was one for awhile) and I also know the local game wardens. 

 

So here is the scientific collection permits for Washington, Idaho and Montana:

 

http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/scp/

 

http://fwp.mt.gov/fishAndWildlife/licenses/scientificWildlife/

 

http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/licenses/?getPage=68

 

 

If you open any of those PDF files listed on any of the three state agencies your going to notice two things right off.

 

1) You must list your scientific credentials.

2) You must list the type of species your studying.

 

Other problems crop up as well, like........WHERE are you going to be doing your research, like as in GPS coordinates.

 

Obviously these permits are curtailed to universities that are going to be studying a warbler nest in a specific tree in a specific locale.

 

So? Does any of our scientifically accredited members want to step up to the plate? I'll cough up the money to pay for the permit. I have a sneaking suspicion that when the cat gets out of the bag, and we list in the species section "Sasquatch" that there will be giggles coming from the other end of the line.

 

But I was challenged to do this by another member who is concerned about the laws of this great nation. I have ran this out to the best of my ability and my conclusion is? Ummmmm there is NO agency that is administering a scientific collection permit for the species known as Sasquatch.

 

I mean I can spend the 117 bucks for a Washington permit and it gives me a box to check for  "Firearms are being used for this collection".

 

 But I cannot give them a scientific and common name, nor do I represent an agency or institution.......

 

So this elusive permit? Is as elusive as the creature itself.

Edited June 14, 2013 by norseman

[Guest wudewasa]

Norseman,

 

Way to step up to the plate and get things rolling!

 

As far as a scientific name goes, Dr. Meldrum named the purported footprints of a sasquatch Anthropoidipes ameriborealis.

 

Here it is- http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/meldrum2007_ichnotaxonomy_of_giant_hominoid_tracks_in_north_america.pdf

 

Perhaps Meldrum could be the academic that would back your harvesting of a type specimen?

 

Here is his contact info-

 

Department of Biological Sciences
Campus Box 8007
Idaho State University
Pocatello, ID 83209-8007

(208) 282-4379
meldd@isu.edu

Edited June 14, 2013 by wudewasa

[Guest Rick1013]

Excellent investigation and follow-up Norseman!

 

In my view, if you can't officially get a permit to do it (no scientific species name, no specific collection location) then doing it (and succeeding) shouldn't be considered illegal.

[norseman]

Excellent investigation and follow-up Norseman!

 

In my view, if you can't officially get a permit to do it (no scientific species name, no specific collection location) then doing it (and succeeding) shouldn't be considered illegal.

 

Well let's put it this way.

 

If it is illegal to take a new species without a permit, and they will not issue a permit without you listing the name of the known species on it? Then we are caught in a revolving catch 22 with no way out.........and science would grind to a halt.

[Guest Cervelo]

Norse,

I think we just stick with the original plan!

We were varmint hunting....look at this big varmint we got LOL!!

[Guest UPs]

Excellent work Norseman! Many of us appreciate your attempt to solve this mystery once and for all.

[Guest zenmonkey]

awesome work bro once again I am proud to have people like you in the ranks!

[hiflier]

Hello Norseman,

Agreed, good work. Maybe going the route of securing a tagging permit might open some doors. Obviously the proper amount of tranquilizer for something around 800 lbs is fairly common knowledge for those involved in bear tagging so some info might be easily available. Linking in with a University interested in discovering new species of just about anything could be an avenue if you offered your services as a tracker knowledgeable of the area. A combination of approaches might also show a serious intent at discovery and I'd look into grants for deep forest research in what everyone is pushing these days- sustainability.

There is an argument in your favor if you continue your pursuit which to me is a serious point to make to those not up on their local anthropology: No one has proved that Sasquatch DOESN'T exist so with climate changing as it is someone needs to step up to ensure that even an elusive unknown species is given a chance at survival SHOULD THEY EXIST which in reality they just might!

Edited June 15, 2013 by hiflier

[Guest]

plussed Norsemen

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

Here is where I think part of the problem lies, since it seems there is a whole lot of ambiguity in the law. This is done purposefully from my point of view, as then those who enforce and prosecute these laws have a bit of leeway. So for instance, someone who does collect a type specimen may or may not be prosecuted, due to both the ambiguity of the written statutes, and basically the mood/whim of those in a position to prosecute. I suspect that if their superiors, or they themselves, want to prosecute someone to make an example out of them or whatever, it will occur. 

 

The best bet for anyone who wishes to bag a bigfoot, in my opinion, is to come down here to Texas. I may even accompany such a person, and I can take them to where I had my sighting. This is a national forest area, outside of a nearby wildlife refuge. I am not certain about the hunting regulations there, but a lot of hunting does go on in the area. And I would be willing to bet that there is a ton of nearby private land, and since it is so close, and connected with the forests that have had many sightings, bigfoot is bound to go through there at some point throughout the year. Given that it is fairly secluded, or provides some sort of nourishment that is not found elsewhere.

 

Which reminds me. One of the best places to wait for bigfoot is an orchard with fruit trees. I have long believed that the best method of seeing one, or shooting one if that is the goal, is to draw them in. But, simply hoping to pique their interest is not enough in my opinion. Of course it does happen this way all the time, but I suspect that when one does get scoped by a sasquatch, they will never know it. A sasquatch doesn't have to get all that close to a person or their camp to see what is going on. Of course the surrounding terrain will likely play a huge factor in the animal's decisions as well.

 

So the best method involves food. And not just any food, but food that they will be able to smell from a distance. I would prefer cooking meat of some type. But as I was saying, once they know where an orchard is located, it would be a good bet that they will visit it multiple times per week, if they are in the area. And if it has a good food source, why wouldn't they be? Maybe climate, or other factors, but it is still one of the best bets in my opinion. So good luck to whoever actually embarks on a hunting expedition for sasquatch. Some other advice I would give is "don't miss." I don't mean miss the sasquatch altogether. That would not be so bad. But don't wound it and let it get away. That would be terrible to inflict such unnecessary suffering on such an animal. Especially one so close to humans in the grand scheme of things. We know today, in 2013, that chimps, for one, are much closer to humans in behavior, reasoning, etc. than anyone ever has. So just think how "human" a sasquatch is likely to be.

[norseman]

Hello Norseman,

Agreed, good work. Maybe going the route of securing a tagging permit might open some doors. Obviously the proper amount of tranquilizer for something around 800 lbs is fairly common knowledge for those involved in bear tagging so some info might be easily available. Linking in with a University interested in discovering new species of just about anything could be an avenue if you offered your services as a tracker knowledgeable of the area. A combination of approaches might also show a serious intent at discovery and I'd look into grants for deep forest research in what everyone is pushing these days- sustainability.

There is an argument in your favor if you continue your pursuit which to me is a serious point to make to those not up on their local anthropology: No one has proved that Sasquatch DOESN'T exist so with climate changing as it is someone needs to step up to ensure that even an elusive unknown species is given a chance at survival SHOULD THEY EXIST which in reality they just might!

 

You are in the same boat as I am wanting to shoot one.

 

The categories are thus:

 

Lethal Methods

Non Lethal Methods

Salvage Methods

 

So not only do you need to have a permit to shoot one? You need a permit to tranq one as well. And the way I'm reading the permit process? You need a permit to pick up a dead animal too.

 

Which makes sense I suppose..........if your driving around with a dead elk in your pickup without a hunting license and tag, out of season? Your gonna want that permit to show the game warden when he stops you......trust me.

Here is where I think part of the problem lies, since it seems there is a whole lot of ambiguity in the law. This is done purposefully from my point of view, as then those who enforce and prosecute these laws have a bit of leeway. So for instance, someone who does collect a type specimen may or may not be prosecuted, due to both the ambiguity of the written statutes, and basically the mood/whim of those in a position to prosecute. I suspect that if their superiors, or they themselves, want to prosecute someone to make an example out of them or whatever, it will occur. 

 

The best bet for anyone who wishes to bag a bigfoot, in my opinion, is to come down here to Texas. I may even accompany such a person, and I can take them to where I had my sighting. This is a national forest area, outside of a nearby wildlife refuge. I am not certain about the hunting regulations there, but a lot of hunting does go on in the area. And I would be willing to bet that there is a ton of nearby private land, and since it is so close, and connected with the forests that have had many sightings, bigfoot is bound to go through there at some point throughout the year. Given that it is fairly secluded, or provides some sort of nourishment that is not found elsewhere.

 

Which reminds me. One of the best places to wait for bigfoot is an orchard with fruit trees. I have long believed that the best method of seeing one, or shooting one if that is the goal, is to draw them in. But, simply hoping to pique their interest is not enough in my opinion. Of course it does happen this way all the time, but I suspect that when one does get scoped by a sasquatch, they will never know it. A sasquatch doesn't have to get all that close to a person or their camp to see what is going on. Of course the surrounding terrain will likely play a huge factor in the animal's decisions as well.

 

So the best method involves food. And not just any food, but food that they will be able to smell from a distance. I would prefer cooking meat of some type. But as I was saying, once they know where an orchard is located, it would be a good bet that they will visit it multiple times per week, if they are in the area. And if it has a good food source, why wouldn't they be? Maybe climate, or other factors, but it is still one of the best bets in my opinion. So good luck to whoever actually embarks on a hunting expedition for sasquatch. Some other advice I would give is "don't miss." I don't mean miss the sasquatch altogether. That would not be so bad. But don't wound it and let it get away. That would be terrible to inflict such unnecessary suffering on such an animal. Especially one so close to humans in the grand scheme of things. We know today, in 2013, that chimps, for one, are much closer to humans in behavior, reasoning, etc. than anyone ever has. So just think how "human" a sasquatch is likely to be.

 

 

Nope, Texas is the same program as Washington:

 

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/business/permits/land/wildlife/research/

[hiflier]

Hello Norseman,

Shoot one??!!? By no means. Tag for tracking is probably out because of opposable thumbs and all. You need to know that I'm not being facetious at all here but I am trying to brainstorm some approaches that could get folks in those agencies to take you seriously enough to go to bat for you to supervisors and other higher ups. You're opening up a subject that evidently has no official dialogue or guideline for Sasquatch but your efforts may in fact be of some benefit to a creature who may be feeling the pressures of environment as well as encroachment by us.

Please stay with this and if there is anything you wish help with simply let me know. I can't help but think that most would be satisfied to leave BF be if they knew it's existence was certain. Laws for it's protection could then be put into place? I think getting it on an endangered list would make some think it worth the effort to prove Sasquatch to be real. After all don't forget, the Panda eluded searchers for over 70 years.

Edited June 15, 2013 by hiflier

[norseman]

Hello Norseman,

Shoot one??!!? By no means. Tag for tracking is probably out because of opposable thumbs and all. You need to know that I'm not being facetious at all here but I am trying to brainstorm some approaches that could get folks in those agencies to take you seriously enough to go to bat for you to supervisors and other higher ups. You're opening up a subject that evidently has no official dialogue or guideline for Sasquatch but your efforts may in fact be of some benefit to a creature who may be feeling the pressures of environment as well as encroachment by us.

Please stay with this and if there is anything you wish help with simply let me know. I can't help but think that most would be satisfied to leave BF be if they knew it's existence was certain. Laws for it's protection could then be put into place? I think getting it on an endangered list would make some think it worth the effort to prove Sasquatch to be real. After all don't forget, the Panda eluded searchers for over 70 years.

 

You do realize that the purpose of Project Grendel is to harvest a type specimen correct?

 

The shooting part is not the problem, as the permit allows for that if the proper box is checked.

[hiflier]

Hello Norseman,

No, I didn't realize that. My approach was to trick an agency into a large scale search effort for finding the creature in order to protect it. Guess I was being a bit naive about things.

[norseman]

Hello Norseman,

No, I didn't realize that. My approach was to trick an agency into a large scale search effort for finding the creature in order to protect it. Guess I was being a bit naive about things.

 

It's a noble gesture on your part, and I want to protect the creature as well.

 

But the quickest way to protecting it is to kill one and shove it under the noses of science...........ending the debate with a gigantic exclamation point. No tomfoolery.......no petitions........no skewed DNA studies without substance, none of that.