Leaderboard

Not "most." About 50/50. The other half allow you to shoot, at any time, anything not specifically regulated. My state is one of these.

^^^ If a Hunter shot Bigfoot maybe they should just claim self-defense. If Bigfoot is determined to be essentially human, one can actually claim self-defense vs an attacking human. After all what kind of doctor does one take a sick Werewolf to anyway?

^^ My understanding is that in most states, hunters are only allowed to take "permitted" animals - that is, animals that the state permits you to shoot, trap, or catch. Like what happened in Canada (discussed elsewhere in another thread) - hunters were permitted to take polar bears, and permitted to take brown bears (grizzlies?), but not permitted to take hybrid brown/polar bears. So, if I recall correctly, an American hunter got a huge fine for shooting a bear that was virtually indistinguishable (to the naked eye) from a bear he was permitted to take. Presuming one lives in a reasonable state - and that the shooting has been highly publicized so that it can't be swept under the rug - whomever first shoots and kills AND makes it out with the body could be reasonably safe.

I've already stated it, you quoted me, and it aligns perfectly with the statement you posted from the USFS, and I explained why I believe they have taken that position. I'm pretty confident that they don't. I don't think anybody in the agency wants to document anything about them. I didn't see a stamp or fine print footnote of official approval.