What do you think of the US Forest Service's view on bigfoot?

[bipedalist]

@Huntster  Geesh you could write a book on the incidents and you can't make this sheet up! 

 

Wow, just Wow!

 

To stay on topic, Rich Germeau, co-founder of the Olympic Project and LEO Bigfoot Experiencer (interviewed on A Flash of Beauty) was on active patrol during one sighting.  Had others though too.  Would highly recommend reviewing his experiences as LEO and researcher. Not sure if his sightings were on Federal or state property but I know he had one experience near the Mason County WA line on/near an island in South Sound.  

 

 

Edited yesterday at 05:27 PM by bipedalist

[georgerm]

11 hours ago, Huntster said:

No, times have changed. Photographic evidence isn't going to cut it.............

 

 

Weee...............wee............. ride the "derailment disappointment railroad to nowhere"...........oh by the way, "What do you think of the US Forest Service's view on bigfoot?" I know you are smart and must have some good ideas about this topic. 

 

The forest service must have endless detailed records on Sasquatch. Their top wildlife biologist know all about Sasquatch and most likely have been told not to discuss the issue until all the facts are known. I venture to say that a few of these wildlife biologists have observed bigfoot along with the woo factors as Tom Powel, a Portland, Oregon science teacher and others describe. Forest Service biologist are surely perplexed, so the forest service just states they are a creature of folklore. A this point they terminate the discussion probably because they are perplexed by standard bigfoot reports, and they know about the woo factor that accompanies about ten percent of credible sightings including my own experiences. This sounds ridiculous but some credible witnesses have seen bigfoot walking away and cloaking.................... yes, disappearing in a similar fashion as advanced nonhuman visitors. This is just the beginning of perplexing theories in regard to bigfoot. I will stop here since this is an approved divergence from the thread's topic which is, "what do you think is the forest service's view on bigfoot?" 

Edited yesterday at 05:10 PM by georgerm

[Backdoc]

20 hours ago, georgerm said:

 

If the federal government calls bigfoot a mythical creature how long do you think some Joe Blow is going to be showing off his real bigfoot until the feds show up, take his computer, replace the body with a fake bigfoot and fine or imprison Joe? The feds know all about bigfoot.

If the feds know all about Bigfoot why isn't there a federal law covering the shooting or hunting of a Bigfoot?  Not a deal breaker but seems pretty curious.

[Backdoc]

14 hours ago, norseman said:

Such BS! Yes you are a victim of theft. 

 

This should be filed under the idea of "which is more likely"   The thing that is more likely is probably true if the other option is really far-fetched. 

[Backdoc]

12 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

 

 

 

#1  Love  the video.

 

#2  A few years from now it is going to get really difficult to tell what is fake and what is real.  This illustrates how good these vids are getting.  Imagine a video 20 years from now; especially one made for harmful purposes vs comedy purposes.  

[norseman]

36 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

If the feds know all about Bigfoot why isn't there a federal law covering the shooting or hunting of a Bigfoot?  Not a deal breaker but seems pretty curious.

Because that would require them to admit the creature is real.
 

Just like issuing a hunting permit or putting up a warning sign on a trail or handing out safety pamphlets. 

 

All of these things require the authorities to admit that a 800 lbs primate roams our woods and they have no control over it and more terrifyingly it outsmarts them most of the time.
 

If it was as dumb as a bear? It would already be in a zoo. If it was smarter than us? We would be in the zoo. Instead it fills a niche that terrifies Homo Sapiens. An ambush predator that loves thick cover. It is the “other” us. It’s in that “uncanny valley” state that robotics people talk about. It’s almost us, but it’s not us. And that terrifies humans. It’s why women used to feint when watching King Kong drag the dress torn woman to the top of the sky scraper. I think King Kong says an awful lot about humanity and our interaction with our closest living relatives over the last couple hundred thousand years.

 

And maybe this is also the answer we seek concerning the cover up? Or at least one of them? And once you start telling lies? You cannot stop.

[georgerm]

2 hours ago, Backdoc said:

If the feds know all about Bigfoot why isn't there a federal law covering the shooting or hunting of a Bigfoot?  Not a deal breaker but seems pretty curious.

 

1. Good question and I'm going to quote what Norseman said, "Because that would require them to admit the creature is real." Remember bigfoot is what the forest service calls a mythical creature mentioned in folk tales. This means feel free to hunt them at your own risk.  In reality remember before you try, they travel in groups in the deep forest, they are lightning fast, and they can tear bears apart in seconds for a lunch snack. They are not stupid and probably know taking out humans will bring in intensive search parties that disrupts their food foraging. I venture to say they rarely take out humans. If they do then they eat most of the flesh, then to keep from being detected they deeply bury the remains and disguise the grave. This is done by old starving bigfoots.

 

2. Ridiculous answer: The grey aliens who import bigfoots for some unknown reason have a treaty with the deep state federal government and that bigfoots will remain free to roam.  It is a mythical creature and passing no hunting laws will indicate, as Norseman mentioned, that the government believes bigfoot is real.

 

3. If the forest service admits that bigfoots roams all 193 million acres of forest service lands, some bright group of biologist will try to classify bigfoot as an "endangered species" once it's captured or shot. This could restrict logging on bigfoot's habitat so much that we may need to buy most of our lumber from Canada. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the primary federal law in the United States that protects endangered and threatened species, along with their habitats. 

 

Edited yesterday at 07:34 PM by georgerm

[Huntster]

4 hours ago, georgerm said:

...........oh by the way, "What do you think of the US Forest Service's view on bigfoot?"...........

 

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.

 

Quote

.........The forest service must have endless detailed records on Sasquatch...........

 

I'm pretty confident that they don't. I don't think anybody in the agency wants to document anything about them.

 

Quote

.........I will stop here since this is an approved divergence from the thread's topic which is, "what do you think is the forest service's view on bigfoot?" 

 

I didn't see a stamp or fine print footnote of official approval.

 

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, norseman said:

........If it was as dumb as a bear? It would already be in a zoo.........

 

Bears are a lot smarter than folks think. But their bully attitudes and unsatiable appetite overwhelms their intelligence.

[georgerm]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

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.

 

I sent you message

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Bears are a lot smarter than folks think. But their bully attitudes and unsatiable appetite overwhelms their intelligence.

I sent you a message

[Backdoc]

21 hours ago, norseman said:

Because that would require them to admit the creature is real.
 

 

 

 

This makes me wonder. If the government went after someone for shooting a bigfoot would a reasonable defense be:

 

"You guys deny it existed so how could I be responsible?

You guys didn't make a law saying I couldn't shoot one as you considered it a fairytale?

 

 

 

 

 

[Trogluddite]

^^

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.  

[Backdoc]

^^^

 

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?

 

 

 

 

 

[georgerm]

11 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

 

 

This makes me wonder. If the government went after someone for shooting a bigfoot would a reasonable defense be:

 

"You guys deny it existed so how could I be responsible?

You guys didn't make a law saying I couldn't shoot one as you considered it a fairytale?

 

 

 

 

 

You make sense for a reasonable defense for shooting a bigfoot and killing it. There is probably some law prohibiting shooting bigfoot such as the law in Minnesota that allows the killing of a listed nuisance animal and bigfoot is not on the list. "You can take some animals which are normally protected by Minnesota Statute without a license or permit if they are doing damage. If you are the landowner, manager or occupant of the property where the animal is causing damage, you can take the following animals." 

 

Here is another confusing statement from the forest service: 

"While most people believe the Sasquatch to be a thing of folklore and urban legend, researcher Thaddeus Guttenberg, with the U.S. Forest Service Mythical Wildlife Division, recently confirmed that Bigfoot is every bit as real as he is." 

“We’ve been keeping his existence under wraps for years to protect his privacy,” said Guttenberg. “But because the country is losing more and more open space each day, we wanted to make it known that the habitat to one of America’s greatest legends may be at risk.” Loss of Space Threatening North American Sasquatch | Home 

[georgerm]

On 8/19/2025 at 9:11 AM, bipedalist said:

@Huntster  Geesh you could write a book on the incidents and you can't make this sheet up! 

 

Wow, just Wow!

 

To stay on topic, Rich Germeau, co-founder of the Olympic Project and LEO Bigfoot Experiencer (interviewed on A Flash of Beauty) was on active patrol during one sighting.  Had others though too.  Would highly recommend reviewing his experiences as LEO and researcher. Not sure if his sightings were on Federal or state property but I know he had one experience near the Mason County WA line on/near an island in South Sound.  

 

 

Good find Bipedalist: Rich Germeau, co-founder of the Olympic Project and LEO Bigfoot Experiencer (interviewed on A Flash of Beauty) I watched parts one and two of riches Bigfoot experiences, and he is a very down to earth credible eyewitness.   Rich was a sheriff, and he has investigated many big foot occurrences, and he is very credible. If you listen to part one all the way through there is a point to where he notices the woo factor of Bigfoot, and he is unable to explain this. This is what happened to me during some of my field experiences involving Bigfoot. This has confused him because he is a very down-to-earth sheriff, and he is trained to deal in hard facts. When people observe Bigfoot most of the time it's a flesh and blood occurrence, but some people such as Rich and Tom Powell of the Portland Bigfoot community have mentioned in detail that some reliable eyewitnesses have observed Bigfoot in supernatural occurrences.

 

I'm reasonably sure that Forest Service's top ranked Wildlife biologist have also noticed this Woo factor that's also part of a Bigfoot observations. This might be why the top echelon of the PHD Forest Service biologist have come to stalemate due to this woo factor so they simply call Bigfoot a legend or part of folklore. What do you think of the woo factor and what will happen if these top Forest Service wildlife biologist are given permission to publish what they have observed in the field in regards to Bigfoot's. They are very detail oriented and many of them get to spend many hours in the forest observing wildlife. If the top echelons of the Forest Service divulge all of their information on Sasquatch how will this effect logging on over 190 million acres? if the Endangered Species proponents suggest that logging be hampered throughout the entire National Forest what can the Forest Service do to prevent this? 

Edited 1 hour ago by georgerm