Why is the Forest Service and BLM so quiet about Bigfoot?

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

...........If the Federal government employs an army of biologists out on public lands? Why is it some private group’s responsibility to prove a cryptid exists to them on their off time? This is the mantra that Huntster has been repeating for quite sometime.........

Because, as my theories have evolved and here arrived: the government is reluctant and avoiding discovery.

 

Of course, my position has also evolved to accept and agree with government's position on discovery both for the good of mankind and sasquatchery. But if one is determined to prove existence, here is how you would have your best chance:

 

1) Cut an agreement with Matt Moneymaker. His BFRO witness reporting system appears to be the best to respond to a FRESH, high quality report, and thereby improve the odds of catching another encounter. 

 

2) Form a team that can respond IMMEDIATELY to a fresh report. This team should be equipped with top notch big game hunters experienced in harvesting dangerous game and shooting magnum calibers with 5-10 round magazines, a houndsman with trained Karelian bear dogs, and an experienced drone operator with a pair of top quality drones with heat seeking capabilities. Finally, if possible, the resources to hire a helicopter operator who would allow hunting from the bird (like people do with hogs) would pretty much seal the harvest.

 

It appears the BFRO produces fresh, top quality sighting reports one to two times per year. If such a team deployed three times every two years, I estimate that a dead sasquatch would be laying on the ground within four years. 
 

Then you need the top quality lawyer.........

[norseman]

49 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Because, as my theories have evolved and here arrived: the government is reluctant and avoiding discovery.

 

Of course, my position has also evolved to accept and agree with government's position on discovery both for the good of mankind and sasquatchery. But if one is determined to prove existence, here is how you would have your best chance:

 

1) Cut an agreement with Matt Moneymaker. His BFRO witness reporting system appears to be the best to respond to a FRESH, high quality report, and thereby improve the odds of catching another encounter. 

 

2) Form a team that can respond IMMEDIATELY to a fresh report. This team should be equipped with top notch big game hunters experienced in harvesting dangerous game and shooting magnum calibers with 5-10 round magazines, a houndsman with trained Karelian bear dogs, and an experienced drone operator with a pair of top quality drones with heat seeking capabilities. Finally, if possible, the resources to hire a helicopter operator who would allow hunting from the bird (like people do with hogs) would pretty much seal the harvest.

 

It appears the BFRO produces fresh, top quality sighting reports one to two times per year. If such a team deployed three times every two years, I estimate that a dead sasquatch would be laying on the ground within four years. 
 

Then you need the top quality lawyer.........

To defend yourself from the government simply because you did THEIR job…..

[norseman]

2 hours ago, georgerm said:

 

My intent of my statements is offer a backup group to gather evidence on Bigfoot in case congress fails to order the Forest Service or Fish & Wildlife to gather evidence to prove Sasquatch's existence. If congress fails to order some government agency to prove Bigfoot's existence, then we need back up alternative. I agree it would be better if Congress could order the Forest Service or Fish and Wildlife to gather evidence on Bigfoot and to carry the ball all the way forward to absolute proof. However, if congress fails to order the Forest Service or the Fish & Wildlife Service to conduct Bigfoot research then we need and alternative.

 

The backup plan would be for individuals across the United States who have the money to contribute to funding a private group of citizens such as the Olympic Project or Bigfoot Forums who will manage the organization fulltime and will hire credentialed/wilderness hardened biologist to gather evidence on Bigfoot until it becomes a proven species with a genus and species name. Now this private group who is funded by private donors and public money would could hire some established existing group like the Olympic project or Bigfoot Forums to organize and direct professional wildlife biologists fulltime to gather evidence on Bigfoot. This effort will lead to absolute proof and the Forest Service or the Fish and Wildlife Service would manage Bigfoot's ecosystem and the health, safety and welfare of bigfoot.  

I don't think Congress will get involved.

 

Knowers that I have talked to just have no interest in proof.

 

And the government agencies in question make a big joke about the subject.

 

So here we are. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[georgerm]

32 minutes ago, norseman said:

I don't think Congress will get involved.

 

Knowers that I have talked to just have no interest in proof.

 

And the government agencies in question make a big joke about the subject.

 

So here we are. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

I hear what you are saying Norseman, but we always have hope. It takes a spark to burn down a field of dry grass. If someone can put all the evidence, we have so far into a paper that is intended to get other scientist on board, there is always a spark or chance to make a breakthrough. There are groups of bigfooters around the country, and if someone with drive and power can organize them so they can communicate with each other, a spark in dry grass could get the ball rolling. If someone with drive and know how can put a scientific paper together so university and private biologist could sign onto the bigfoot train, then maybe the dial can be pushed forward. Oh yes, some with poo poo the subject and laugh at us. There is enough evidence presently to make bigfoot's genus and species name stick. A good hot spark would be a captured juvenile bigfoot, one wounded during hunting season, or a fresh dead one found in the woods. 

[MIB]

8 hours ago, norseman said:

So again this comes down to two things. Either the government is grossly incompetent. Or they have an ulterior motive. Which is it?

 

Third option: at the level that controls the purse strings, the gov't does not believe bigfoot exists so looking for them never gets taken seriously enough to be assigned.    That doesn't require field people not to know about bigfoot.    How do you truly rock the boat, not merely look stupid, unless you have proof in hand, and if you have proof in hand, can you prove you were not gathering that on work hours while neglecting your specifically assigned duties?   

[Huntster]

14 hours ago, norseman said:

To defend yourself from the government simply because you did THEIR job…..

 

Depends on how you determine what their job is.

[norseman]

12 hours ago, MIB said:

 

Third option: at the level that controls the purse strings, the gov't does not believe bigfoot exists so looking for them never gets taken seriously enough to be assigned.    That doesn't require field people not to know about bigfoot.    How do you truly rock the boat, not merely look stupid, unless you have proof in hand, and if you have proof in hand, can you prove you were not gathering that on work hours while neglecting your specifically assigned duties?   

I would argue that would fall under the gross negligence category. And it still may fall into the conspiracy side as well.

 

You hire an army of biologists that tell you you have an a 800 lbs primate in your forest. And you berate them into silence and don’t believe them?

 

So any data that is mistakenly brought in by the agency it will simply be destroyed to fit your narrative?

 

Biologists are out there collecting stool samples, water samples, hair samples, trail camera, thermal camera, etc, etc. They have eyes and have also probably seen tracks as well. We KNOW the data will be there!

 

So maybe as you say MIB this is a institutional problem within our agencies. But even if the biologists and the data are not being believed by the top brass? Thats still gross negligence AND a conspiracy IMHO.

 

I would argue its not important why they suppress the data. Whether they simply don't believe its real or they are afraid of the truth. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Depends on how you determine what their job is.

I determined it based on their own mission statement.

[norseman]

15 hours ago, georgerm said:

 

I hear what you are saying Norseman, but we always have hope. It takes a spark to burn down a field of dry grass. If someone can put all the evidence, we have so far into a paper that is intended to get other scientist on board, there is always a spark or chance to make a breakthrough. There are groups of bigfooters around the country, and if someone with drive and power can organize them so they can communicate with each other, a spark in dry grass could get the ball rolling. If someone with drive and know how can put a scientific paper together so university and private biologist could sign onto the bigfoot train, then maybe the dial can be pushed forward. Oh yes, some with poo poo the subject and laugh at us. There is enough evidence presently to make bigfoot's genus and species name stick. A good hot spark would be a captured juvenile bigfoot, one wounded during hunting season, or a fresh dead one found in the woods. 

Maybe I am a stubborn pot stirrer.

 

But if I see one? I am putting it down. The chips can fall where they may. But truth is truth.

[georgerm]

16 hours ago, Huntster said:

Because, as my theories have evolved and here arrived: the government is reluctant and avoiding discovery.

 

Of course, my position has also evolved to accept and agree with government's position on discovery both for the good of mankind and sasquatchery. But if one is determined to prove existence, here is how you would have your best chance:

 

1) Cut an agreement with Matt Moneymaker. His BFRO witness reporting system appears to be the best to respond to a FRESH, high quality report, and thereby improve the odds of catching another encounter. 

 

2) Form a team that can respond IMMEDIATELY to a fresh report. This team should be equipped with top notch big game hunters experienced in harvesting dangerous game and shooting magnum calibers with 5-10 round magazines, a houndsman with trained Karelian bear dogs, and an experienced drone operator with a pair of top quality drones with heat seeking capabilities. Finally, if possible, the resources to hire a helicopter operator who would allow hunting from the bird (like people do with hogs) would pretty much seal the harvest.

 

It appears the BFRO produces fresh, top quality sighting reports one to two times per year. If such a team deployed three times every two years, I estimate that a dead sasquatch would be laying on the ground within four years. 
 

Then you need the top quality lawyer.........

 

Quote

2) Form a team that can respond IMMEDIATELY to a fresh report. This team should be equipped with top notch big game hunters experienced in harvesting dangerous game and shooting magnum calibers with 5-10 round magazines, a houndsman with trained Karelian bear dogs, and an experienced drone operator with a pair of top quality drones with heat seeking capabilities. Finally, if possible, the resources to hire a helicopter operator who would allow hunting from the bird (like people do with hogs) would pretty much seal the harvest.

 

Your plan is very imaginative, and it would be a great start to put into action. The end results would be a deceased or a live sasquatch depending on the encounter situation. Using BFRO is a great idea for focusing this Squatch One Team or SOT on active bigfoot sites. SOT would need to employ a travel supervisor who would arrange private jet flights to the designated American state and secure established camping parks that would accommodate 10 dogs and a 20 person crew including a film team of 2 . One major issue would be the funding. Funding would be partially through private money and TV documentaries. Movie/TV rights would fund the project after the team supervisor contracts with a film company who would broadcast a weekly TV series.

[Huntster]

6 hours ago, norseman said:

.........I determined it based on their own mission statement.

Is a hominin "wildlife", or should a hominin  be "managed" like wildlife?

[Huntster]

6 hours ago, georgerm said:

.........One major issue would be the funding. ........

True, but there are lots and lots of sasquatch hunters out there doing their own things and self funded. Organizing a quick reaction cooperative shouldn't be real tough or expensive.

 

Another bug issue would be an organized effort on classified public lands like a national forest. Just one curious fed asking, "What's going on out here?" can start the trouble. You can't even film commercially without a permit. 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

Is a hominin "wildlife", or should a hominin  be "managed" like wildlife?

Is it part of their “ecosystem”?

 

Does it drink their water, poop on their land, eat their plants and other wildlife?

[Huntster]

46 minutes ago, norseman said:

Is it part of their “ecosystem”?

 

Does it drink their water, poop on their land, eat their plants and other wildlife?

 

We (mankind) does, but we're not considered to be or managed like wildlife.

[norseman]

Just now, Huntster said:

 

We (mankind) does, but we're not considered to be or managed like wildlife.

I think feral people absolutely are.
 

Ask the Brazilian government.

 

 

 

 

 

[Huntster]

Thed international community has already addressed the existence of uncontacted Homo sapiens:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples

 

Quote

..........Uncontacted peoples are groups of indigenous peoples living without sustained direct relations with the world community. Generally such peoples are aware of the outside world, and have or had interactions with neighboring peoples, or may have had sustained contact with the wider world in the past.[1] Indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation are groups who decide to remain uncontacted.[2] Legal protections make estimating the total number of uncontacted peoples challenging, but estimates from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the UN and the nonprofit group Survival International point to between 100 and 200 uncontacted tribes numbering up to 10,000 individuals total........

 

A key phrase with this commission is "human rights", which non-humans don't have. Granted, sasquatches aren't likely to be homo sapiens (even though the Zana story proves that such hominins might be), if they are of the genus "Homo", they're "human".

 

From the above reference:

 

Quote

.........The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights refers to uncontacted peoples as "Indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation". The Commission defines these groups by their general rejection of contact with anyone outside of their own people. This definition also includes groups who have previously had sustained contact with the majority non-Indigenous society but have chosen to return to isolation and no longer maintain contact.[9] As such, uncontacted peoples are contemporaries of modernity, not living in an anachronistic state of nature.[10]............

 

"State of nature" is. yet another consideration:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature

 

Quote

............In ethics, political philosophy, social contract theory, religion, and international law, the term state of naturedescribes the way of life that existed before humans organised themselves into societies or civilisations.[1]Philosophers of the state-of-nature theory propose that there was a historical period before societies existed, and seek answers to the questions: "What was life like before civil society?", "How did government emerge from such a primitive start?", and "What are the reasons for entering a state of society by establishing a nation-state?".

In some versions of social contract theory, there are freedoms, but no rights in the state of nature; and, by way of the social contract, people create societal rights and obligations. In other versions of social contract theory, society imposes restrictions (law, custom, tradition, etc.) that limit the natural rights of a person. Societies existing before the political state are investigated and studied as Mesolithic history, as archaeology, and as cultural anthropology, as social anthropology, and as ethnology to determine the particulars of the indigenous society's social structures and power structures...........

 

I submit that governments (American, Russian, Canadian, Chinese, Indian, etc) really don't want to go here, especially if forced to by a tiny population of nearly extinct hominins who want nothing to do with us.