Leaderboard

When I worked for the Forest Service back in 1974 and 1975, I had no concept of what the agency's stance was on bigfoot. While on the job, if I had a sighting, I would have reported it to my boss who was higher up in the district office of the Rogue River National Forest of Medford, Oregon. He probably would have told me to not report it to the wildlife officer since this would put my job in jeopardy. My annual job performance review was coming so I would not have reported it to those higher up in the chain of command. Since my annual review was coming up, and if I reported the sighting to the wildlife officer, I probably would have been fired for disobeying my immediate boss. I would guess the Forest Service has not changed their stance presently, and they call bigfoot a mythical creature for a reason. This means they are not real, so they have no effect on Forest Service policy. Work someplace else if you don't understand the policy.

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.

A struggle for me is the close human association in terms of alleged DNA results. And yet the morphology and behavior are not so similar. Almost not inside the parameters of the Homo genus at all. I say almost because while Homo Erectus used fire and stone tools? We don't know often they were used. Or if groups lost the ability because of topography and resources as they moved. All great ideas to ponder.👍🏼

The pieces do not fit neatly. There's always something we have to willfully ignore, something that it doesn't look right to ignore. I've often wondered if bigfoot wasn't a Homo erectus descendant, tiny population cut off in North America and forced by extreme climate to drift genetically quite rapidly. That much has been shown to happen in other species. That could account for the Cerutti mastadon site, for example. It could account for the lack of ancestral fossils in North America as well. It could potentially account for the DNA samples coming back as so near us they appear to be contamination or environmentally degraded rather than as a separate species. However, like every other answer, there seems to be a problem. In this instance the problem comes up if we try to equate bigfoot here with Almasty, yeren, maybe yowie .. because those from Europe and Asia, maybe Australia, are not separated from the larger H. erectus population in the same way any in North America would have been and continued connection with a larger population would have buffered out that sort of truly rapid genetic drift. There just is not a good, clean answer so far.

Denisovan

I tried to find a thread about early Homo sapiens, and this was the most appropriate find. I thought this YouTube video on Bear Cults was great! It fit so much of everything I've been taught or discovered about religion, anthropology, and bears, and was just a great video in general. Enjoy!

I'm pretty confident that it would be absorbed, and I wouldn't hear squat about it again. Almost universally, sensitive information that I was involved in was absorbed by management, dealt with confidentially, and it remained quiet. And I remained quiet about it as well, and that confidentiality served me well with management.

And here is a chew.....gotta have lots of DNA.

The threats against whistleblowers and even the outbreak of missing and assumed deceased scientists is grist for the mill about how national security will continue to be used to cover up black box programs and funds, we can only hope the gold bars at Ft Knox haven't flown the coop already. Family of potential whistle blowers are now threatened and false charges used to wreck careers so the stories about BF researchers having home invasions and computers snatched in the past is totally believable. Mr. Gold's comments on the paranormal are as normal as remote viewing now.