Silverback Sax Posted August 30 Posted August 30 1 hour ago, georgerm said: I have experienced the woo traits of bigfoot. Can you explain what you know? I don't "know" anything. I am open minded and have formed my opinion based on the account of thousands of others personal accounts. 1
georgerm Posted August 31 Author Posted August 31 On 8/30/2025 at 12:12 PM, Silverback Sax said: I don't "know" anything. I am open minded and have formed my opinion based on the account of thousands of others personal accounts. Welcome to the Bigfoot Forum. 1
georgerm Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 (edited) My prediction is a small group of upper management charged with managing federal lands knows about bigfoot. The Forest Service and the BLM biologist in Washington DC know about BF is my opinion. If so, they probably have pictures of dead ones and maybe bodies as proof. Did they take Smeja's bigfoot? Other lower level managers are kept out of the loop, ridiculed, and threatened with firing if they start talking about BF (probably true) In my opinion bigfoot prospers in logged land where they hunt an abundance of deer feeding on vegetation growing in the sunlight. Here in Oregon, the rare Spotted Owl has caused logging on federal land to be cut way back to retain their habitat. It's logical, bigfoot would require special protection too. Without logging, the Forest Service will shrink even more. However, my opinion as a past landscape architect for the Rogue River National Forest and a knower of bigfoots, bigfoot thrives on the extra deer that graze on brushy land being reforested after clear cutting. Bigfoot thrives in logged areas that are growing back providing the sustained yield logging method is used based on the fir trees that take 50 to a 100 years to reach maximum growth. For example clear cut a 100 acres of a 10,000 acre forest plantation every 100 years that grow under average conditions. In the case of fast growing trees in prime conditions cut 100 acres every 50 years. (check my math) "As the law states now, the federal government restricts logging within a 2,000 acre radius around known spotted owl nests and roosts, and also requires that at least 500 acres of the largest trees in that zone be left uncut." http://www.wildlifewatchers.org/esReports/report17.html This will not happen in the case of bigfoot. Edited September 5 by georgerm
Huntster Posted September 5 Posted September 5 Interesting post........ 1 hour ago, georgerm said: My prediction is a small group of upper management charged with managing federal lands knows about bigfoot. The Forest Service and the BLM biologist in Washington DC know about BF is my opinion. If so, they probably have pictures of dead ones and maybe bodies as proof. Did they take Smeja's bigfoot? Other lower level managers are kept out of the loop, ridiculed, and threatened with firing if they start talking about BF (probably true)......... I believe this is true, to wit: If sasquatches exist, the federal government knows it to some extent. Quote ......... In my opinion bigfoot prospers in logged land where they hunt an abundance of deer feeding on vegetation growing in the sunlight......... This may be true, however, I believe that the overall pressures of us Homo sapiens far outweighs the possibility le benefits of increased deer populations. For example, over the past 150 years, the salmon populations in many watersheds of the Pacific Northwest have virtually gone extinct if not crashed over the long term. This represents a huge loss of sustenance for such a creature. On the other hand, humans have eliminated brown bears from much of western sasquatch habitat, which likely has also benefitted them. There are lots of factors that go way, way, way beyond deer and old growth forest. Quote .......As the law states now, the federal government restricts logging within a 2,000 acre radius around known spotted owl nests and roosts, and also requires that at least 500 acres of the largest trees in that zone be left uncut." http://www.wildlifewatchers.org/esReports/report17.html This will not happen in the case of bigfoot. Why not?
georgerm Posted September 8 Author Posted September 8 On 9/5/2025 at 3:13 PM, Huntster said: Interesting post........ I believe this is true, to wit: If sasquatches exist, the federal government knows it to some extent. This may be true, however, I believe that the overall pressures of us Homo sapiens far outweighs the possibility le benefits of increased deer populations. For example, over the past 150 years, the salmon populations in many watersheds of the Pacific Northwest have virtually gone extinct if not crashed over the long term. This represents a huge loss of sustenance for such a creature. On the other hand, humans have eliminated brown bears from much of western sasquatch habitat, which likely has also benefitted them. There are lots of factors that go way, way, way beyond deer and old growth forest. Why not? The salmon fishing in Oregon has maintained a good level on some Rivers like the Rogue River where they have an Oregon Hatchery up by Shady Cove. I live on the Coquille River in southern Oregon, and the salmon fishing is still holding up but they closed it down early. All we can do is the best we can since we don't know how many bigfoots are out there and we don't know if they are starving due to the lack of salmon. My guess is the Bigfoot are doing okay because there are plenty of deer here in Oregon and I've heard that when they begin to get really hungry they'll take out cows. This may be a way to gauge how hungry the bigfoots are getting. I took some of the latest Bigfoot Research Organizations data showing Bigfoot action in Oregon, and there are recent reports which is a good sign. My guess is the bigfoots are remaining healthy as long as the forest service keeps up its present sustained yield logging quota. Now some of the forest service roads are being gated off so if they ever start studying Bigfoot, they can use this method to keep up Bigfoot numbers and to keep people out of their habitats. With sustained yield logging which means as Forest are cut down the clear-cut areas are replanted so there are always trees that are growing and the mature ones get cut down. In the clear cut areas there's a number of various foods that Bigfoot easily survives on such as huckleberry, deer and Elk. I also believe and sometime it will be proven that if an area becomes void of food such as rivers that have reduced salmon populations then the Bigfoots are mobile enough and they move into different areas where food is more plentiful. Now an example of this is the Rogue River that has a lot of boat traffic during all seasons of the year, and I believe the Bigfoot avoid this area. They can move over a mountain ranges, and there will be less people and some of the rivers there have fish hatcheries. The salmon population can remain stable providing the state of Oregon secures its funds to keep the fish hatcheries viable. February 2025, Jackson County (Class B) - LAST FRIDAY: BIgfoot knocks heard in mountains 28 miles NE of Medford August 2023, Clackamas County (Class B) - Backpackers on east flank of Mt Hood hear volleys of loud knocks between 12am and 3am August 2023, Clackamas County (Class B) - Solo female backpacker reports sasquatch vocals and knocks at 3am at Timothy Lake, 18mi S of Mt. Hood 1
Backdoc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 I’ll be Mr Boring: the “Federal Government “ has an opinion equal to the opinion of the science community in general. That opinion is ——->. Bigfoot is not yet a proven creature. if the science community in general -by a large consensus- felt differently the government would go where the science is. It’s no coincidence the government essentially says Bigfoot has not been proven to exist mirroring the science consensus its not more complicated than that.
Huntster Posted September 8 Posted September 8 10 hours ago, Backdoc said: .........the “Federal Government “ has an opinion equal to the opinion of the science community in general. That opinion is ——->. Bigfoot is not yet a proven creature........... I think it's more a "position" than "opinion". Quote .........if the science community in general -by a large consensus- felt differently the government would go where the science is........... I opine that it's the other way around: Science will go where the government is. That's because government has the money, and Science (like everybody else) wants some. Government likes whiz-bang weapons, so Science produces them, and they get paid for it........handsomely.
MIB Posted September 8 Moderator Posted September 8 10 hours ago, Backdoc said: the “Federal Government “ has an opinion equal to the opinion of the science community in general. That opinion is ——->. Bigfoot is not yet a proven creature. Not truly disagreeing but I'd say it slightly differently. By way of analogy, do you recall when someone characterized the Ketchum study as "not even wrong"? I see the fed gov't "official" response as similar to that. In other words, not only do they not treat bigfoot as real, I don't think they take the question of bigfoot as a serious topic .. at least not officially. Certainly we have heard some INDIVIDUALS from fed gov't deny existence; likewise, we've heard a very very few say bigfoot is real, but none speak with agency authority, rather, they speak as individual people who happen to draw a gov't paycheck.
georgerm Posted September 8 Author Posted September 8 11 hours ago, Backdoc said: BACKDOC SAID: the “Federal Government “ has an opinion equal to the opinion of the science community in general. WELL BEFORE I CAN ANSWER THIS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME FACTS IN REGARDS TO WHAT THE GOVERNMENT AND THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY THINK ABOUT BIGFOOT. WE KNOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THINKS BIGFOOT IS A MYTH. THOSE IN THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE A MASTER'S DEGREE OR PHD IN LARGE PRIMATE BIOLOGY HAVE AN OPINION ON BIGFOOT BUT SOMEONE ELSE ON THE FORMUM IS GOING TO HAVE TO ANSWER WHAT IS THEIR OPINION. That opinion is ——->. Bigfoot is not yet a proven creature. YES, YOU ARE CORRECT MOST LIKELY. HOWEVER IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT SCIENCE WILL NOT RECOGNIZE BIGFOOT LESS A LIVE OR DEAD SPECIMEN CAN BE BROUGHT IN FOR STUDY. IT UNFORTUNATE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT PURSUING BIGFOOT WITH TRANQUILIZER DARTS TO HELP PROVE ITS EXISTENCE. 11 hours ago, Backdoc said: ........if the science community in general -by a large consensus- felt differently the government would go where the science is........... THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY HAS ALREADY STUDIED BIGFOOT AND IN MY OPINION THEY HAVE PROVEN ITS EXISTENCE WITH FOOTPRINTS, EYEWITNESSES, HAIR, AND VIDEO EVIDENCE. I UNDERSTAND THAT SCIENCE REQUIRES LIVING SPECIMEN OR A DECEASED BIGFOOT BEFORE IT WILL GIVE THE STAMP OF APPROVAL DESIGNATING IT AS A PROVEN ANIMAL. I BELIEVE THAT ENOUGH EVIDENCE HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND THE FOREST SERVICE SHOULD BE ASSISTING SCIENCE TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF BIGFOOT. NOW THE FOREST SERVICE IS MOST LIKELY DRAGGING ITS FEET BECAUSE IT FEARS THAT BIGFOOT WILL BE LABELED AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES WHICH COULD DEVASTATE THE LUMBER INDUSTRY. AGAIN I DON'T BELIEVE THAT BIGFOOT IS IN DANGERED BY THE LOGGING INDUSTRY SINCE DEAR OR BROUGHT IN AFTER FORCE CLEAR CUTTING AND BIGFOOT FEEDS ON THE DEER. 11 hours ago, Backdoc said: HUNSTER SAID: I opine that it's the other way around: Science will go where the government is. HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT WE AS A COUNTRY WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LIKE THE FOREST SERVICE SHOULD AGREE TO FOLLOW THE SCIENCE THAT MIGHT BE DISCOVERED BY FOREST SERVICE BIOLOGIST OR THE SCIENCE MIGHT BE DISCOVERED BY INDIVIDUAL RESEARCHERS. AND AT THIS TIME THE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION FOR THE MAMMAL SHOULD BE APPLIED. THE OFFICIAL DESIGNATIONS ARE IT'S A LIVING BREATHING ANIMAL, IT'S CALLED TO BEAN AND ENDANGERED SPECIES, IT IS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES, OR IT'S NOT AN ENDANGERED SPECIES. IN A PERFECT WORLD THE FOREST SERVICE WILDLIFE FILE BIOLOGIST AND PRIVATE WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST SHOULD WORK TOGETHER TO DESIGNATE WHAT KIND OF ANIMAL BIGFOOT IS. That's because government has the money, and Science (like everybody else) wants some. Government likes whiz-bang weapons, so Science produces them, and they get paid for it........handsomely. IT I'M NOT FOLLOWING WHAT YOU JUST SAID BUT I BELIEVE THERE IS MONEY IN UNIVERSITIES FOR WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST AND THE GOVERNMENT PAYS WILDLIFE BIOLOGISTS TO STUDY ALL KINDS OF ANIMALS TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE AN ENDANGERED SPECIES OR NOT. MIB SAID: Not truly disagreeing but I'd say it slightly differently. By way of analogy, do you recall when someone characterized the Ketchum study as "not even wrong"? I see the fed gov't "official" response as similar to that. In other words, not only do they not treat bigfoot as real, I don't think they take the question of bigfoot as a serious topic .. at least not officially. Certainly we have heard some INDIVIDUALS from fed gov't deny existence; likewise, we've heard a very very few say bigfoot is real, but none speak with agency authority, rather, they speak as individual people who happen to draw a gov't paycheck. I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN REGARDS TO THE KETCHUM STUDY. YES I AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT NOT STATING THAT BIGFOOT IS REAL, BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF FOREST SERVICE WILDLIFE BIOLOGISTS WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT ARE SECRETLY STUDYING BIGFOOT AND COLLECTING EVIDENCE IN CASE IT BECOMES A PUBLIC ISSUE AND WHETHER OR NOT BIGFOOT SHOULD EVEN BE RECOGNIZED. I CAN'T BELIEVE THE FOREST SERVICE AT THE TOP LEVELS HAS NOT BEEN RESEARCHING BIGFOOT AND COLLECTING EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE EVENTUALLY BROUGHT TO THE FOREFRONT AND THE FOREST SERVICE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. 11 hours ago, Backdoc said: BACKDOC THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPLY AND I ENJOY READING YOUR COMMENTS
Huntster Posted September 8 Posted September 8 17 minutes ago, georgerm said: ......... I BELIEVE THAT ENOUGH EVIDENCE HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND THE FOREST SERVICE SHOULD BE ASSISTING SCIENCE TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF BIGFOOT. NOW THE FOREST SERVICE IS MOST LIKELY DRAGGING ITS FEET........... This. The amount of evidence accumulated over the past 70 years is "overwhelming", "convincing", "compelling", "persuasive", and "conclusive" enough to warrant the U.S. government to conduct its very first official investigation into the phenomenon. If they need help, they can first interview some of the local law enforcement authorities.........like these sheriff's deputies: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=76973
Incorrigible1 Posted September 8 Posted September 8 2 hours ago, georgerm said: THE SCIENCE COMMUNITY HAS ALREADY STUDIED BIGFOOT AND IN MY OPINION THEY HAVE PROVEN ITS EXISTENCE WITH FOOTPRINTS, EYEWITNESSES, HAIR, AND VIDEO EVIDENCE. I UNDERSTAND THAT SCIENCE REQUIRES LIVING SPECIMEN OR A DECEASED BIGFOOT BEFORE IT WILL GIVE THE STAMP OF APPROVAL DESIGNATING IT AS A PROVEN ANIMAL. I BELIEVE THAT ENOUGH EVIDENCE HAS BEEN COLLECTED AND THE FOREST SERVICE SHOULD BE ASSISTING SCIENCE TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF BIGFOOT. NOW THE FOREST SERVICE IS MOST LIKELY DRAGGING ITS FEET BECAUSE IT FEARS THAT BIGFOOT WILL BE LABELED AS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES WHICH COULD DEVASTATE THE LUMBER INDUSTRY. AGAIN I DON'T BELIEVE THAT BIGFOOT IS IN DANGERED BY THE LOGGING INDUSTRY SINCE DEAR OR BROUGHT IN AFTER FORCE CLEAR CUTTING AND BIGFOOT FEEDS ON THE DEER. MIB SAID: Not truly disagreeing but I'd say it slightly differently. By way of analogy, do you recall when someone characterized the Ketchum study as "not even wrong"? I see the fed gov't "official" response as similar to that. In other words, not only do they not treat bigfoot as real, I don't think they take the question of bigfoot as a serious topic .. at least not officially. Certainly we have heard some INDIVIDUALS from fed gov't deny existence; likewise, we've heard a very very few say bigfoot is real, but none speak with agency authority, rather, they speak as individual people who happen to draw a gov't paycheck. I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN REGARDS TO THE KETCHUM STUDY. YES I AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT NOT STATING THAT BIGFOOT IS REAL, BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF FOREST SERVICE WILDLIFE BIOLOGISTS WORKING FOR THE GOVERNMENT ARE SECRETLY STUDYING BIGFOOT AND COLLECTING EVIDENCE IN CASE IT BECOMES A PUBLIC ISSUE AND WHETHER OR NOT BIGFOOT SHOULD EVEN BE RECOGNIZED. I CAN'T BELIEVE THE FOREST SERVICE AT THE TOP LEVELS HAS NOT BEEN RESEARCHING BIGFOOT AND COLLECTING EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE EVENTUALLY BROUGHT TO THE FOREFRONT AND THE FOREST SERVICE WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. Are you angry? 1
Backdoc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 Who speaks for "the government"? When we say, "The government says you have to be 18 or over to vote" we can go to a specific area of the government and confirm this position. There is even overlap of various agencies holding this position. Other departments would not be expected to have any position. If I was to look up the issue: AGE TO VOTE I would go to the constitution, the local courthouse, ask a government employee involved in that department, and so on. They could even give me a paper with a written statement on the requirements to vote. That would be the accurate position of the government. We could ask "How old do you have to be to vote in the USA" or "Can a 12-year-old vote in city state or federal elections?" We can find an official position to address this. All government wouldn't care but those specific departments concerned on the matter would care. They would directly address the issue with an official position. With Bigfoot I would ask how anyone would know what the government's official position is. We would first need to know what part of the government to seek. I doubt the IRS or the local property tax assessor would be places to start. Once we defined where the proper place then we would ask what is their official position? Can anyone please provide an OFFICIAL GOVENEMRNT POSITON on Bigfoot and post it on this thread? If there is one, it should be easy. <Post the official government position on Bigfoot here>
Huntster Posted September 8 Posted September 8 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Backdoc said: <Post the official government position on Bigfoot here> ^^^^^^^^^^ < SILENCE > Post Script: Am I angry? No, but I'm pretty frustrated.......... Edited September 8 by Huntster
Incorrigible1 Posted September 8 Posted September 8 24 minutes ago, Huntster said: ^^^^^^^^^^ < SILENCE > Post Script: Am I angry? No, but I'm pretty frustrated.......... Well, until your oversize graphic, you weren't posting in all-caps.
NorCalWitness Posted September 8 Posted September 8 Sasquatch is real. The U.S. Forest Service and other branches of government know it, and the reason they don’t openly acknowledge it has little to do with logging, despite what some people believe. The real reason for silence runs much deeper—and it would be profoundly destabilizing if the truth were admitted. Why Logging Isn’t the Issue Some argue that confirming Sasquatch would force vast tracts of forest to be shut down for conservation, crippling logging operations. That explanation is convenient, but it misses the bigger picture. In reality, logging protections would be a small policy change compared to the tectonic shock society would experience if we fully grasped what Sasquatch actually represents. Beyond Human Understanding These beings are not just another undiscovered primate. Witness accounts and field evidence suggest that Sasquatch possess abilities that challenge our most basic assumptions about physics, biology, and even consciousness. They seem able to evade detection far too effectively for their size, moving with speed and silence no known mammal can match. Some encounters describe shifts in perception, time distortions, and sudden feelings of disorientation—all phenomena that defy current science. If verified, this would mean that Sasquatch has access to dimensions of reality we don’t yet understand. Imagine what it would do to: Physics: Our current models of matter, energy, and perception would have to be rewritten. The ripple effects on technology and weaponry would be enormous. Biology: Human beings would no longer sit comfortably atop the evolutionary narrative. Sasquatch would represent a parallel lineage with capabilities we can’t reproduce. Religion & Philosophy: Entire belief systems would be shaken. Proof of a being that interacts with the physical world in ways beyond comprehension would challenge everything from creation stories to our sense of what it means to be human. The Detriment of Disclosure Society depends on consensus reality—shared rules about how the world works. Admitting that a living species can bend or bypass those rules would destabilize public trust in science, government, and religion simultaneously. Scientific institutions would lose credibility overnight as the limits of their models were exposed. Religious communities would fracture between those who embrace Sasquatch as divine evidence and those who reject it as heresy. Governments would be inundated with panic, conspiracy, and demands for control of a phenomenon they themselves don’t fully understand. Markets would reel as people scrambled to exploit or weaponize knowledge of Sasquatch’s abilities. The secrecy, then, isn’t about protecting loggers. It’s about protecting society from truths we may not be ready to process. Until our scientific and cultural frameworks evolve to handle the existence of such beings, silence is the safer path. There is no other logical explanation. Anyone claiming its about logging is quite simply not ready to go as deep as this subject requires.
Recommended Posts