How Would You Capture Or Kill A Sasquatch?

[Guest]

I mentioned this on another thread.

I think one possible strategy would be to be out hunting something else, perhaps hogs with dogs, not necessarily trying to hunt the big fella, but prepared to if you encounter one.

The most important (read hardest) part about shooting one is to be ready and able to do so if the opportunity presents. Consider the numerous accounts of hunters in the woods who have seen one and just sat there with their jaw gaping open and a rifle in their hand. Then there are reports of folks shooting at a prowler or something like that then on later reflecting realizing that it could have been a squatch?

This thing (harvest a specimen) will go any which way when it does. Anyone could get lucky(?) or a pro could do it.

[Guest]

Everyone needs to get off that manlike creature resulting in criminal charges being filed boat!!!

To every authority and agency these things don't exist!!!!

Try this, write to any entity for yourself and see what they say. The Texas Parks and Wildlife says that only species on the list already are protected. They said that even after I said the word bigfoot.

If bubba in a suit gets capped then let the forest floor have him just like all the big fellas that fall naturally.

How simple is that?

[Guest ajciani]

To every authority and agency these things don't exist!!!!

Unless they actually are just hairy people, in which case they do exist, and there are laws. Ideally, the prosecutor might just let it slide, but he could always figure that you murdered a piney, and charge you.

[Guest]

In modern field biology a type specimen is not necessary. A photo in combination with other evidence and the ability to deliberately and consistently locate the living animal would be fine. If a hunter is sure they can shoot one, would they not also be relatively sure they could get close enough to capture its image using film in a predictable and dependable way? So, a hunter goes out with a camera mounted on a rifle stock as is done on occasion when photographing with a long lens and takes the shot, but with film or video. On presenting the evidence a scientist would have to say, regardless of whether it's as sharp as Peter Jackson's King Kong or Patterson's Patty, that by itself it is unconvincing and inadequate, but the hunter now says he can get another one using the same technique and can even guide another capable field biologist into the field and show them how to do it. Why would a hunter think that he could shoot a BF with bullets only once? Wouldn't a hunter think that if he could find one BF he could others using the same hunting skill, and if they could shoot others with bullets couldn't they find and hunt others with film. That might persuade a field biologist to willingly accompany the hunter so see what it is and how they do it with such certainty.

By the way, I'm not necessarily against taking a specimen, but I just have a hard time understanding how an hunter can think that they could, if only allowed, take a specimen but don't think they could locate that same specimen repeatedly and in a predictable/dependable way multiple times. Does a BF being tracked by a hunter but not taken then become untrackable?

[Guest SurfingCowboy]

First off this is not the thread for pro kill or anti kill. This is for discussion on how any of us would go about trying to capture or if needed to kill a very fast, powerfull and intelligent creature. A creature that has superior senses and physical abilities than ours? For scientific identification of course, then the debate is over.

Capture.

1. Okay so maybe you would just hold it long enough to obtain the required proof (48 hours?) then set it free. How would this be achieved? They could bend steel bars I bet, so besides risking killing one in a box car, How from start to finish?

Kill.

2. Okay now here the other side, how would a hunter kill one and get it back in one piece for identification. One shot won't bring one down. You would need to track it and finish the job miles deep into the mountains. Maybe even at night with it or others screaming at you or worse? How?

Tree stand and baiting only works for less intelligent creatures. Tree knocking, call blasting and trail cams are almost successful. Anyways we got enough blobsquatches already with trying to film them.

We need to go for the gold or go big or go home etc,etc. Whats your plan?

Well I'm glad that someone has actually asked the real questions.

1. Now this is from a everyday average joe hunter point of you, I can't afford the big money tranques, and fancy things but if you put over the counter sleepy meds in bait you could knock it out because BF's body isn't used to it. Their are alot of other methods and distribution methods but bait would be easiest if you could get them to take it.

2. This shouldn't be that hard really; If you could get a clear shot; I for example won A H&k 1871 Buffalo Classic 45/70 Govt. round now if you bought the highest grain made they can be used for cape buffalo, regular buffalo and large bear. Their are plenty of other better big game guns and calibers that should be able to stop a BF.

[Guest]

I read the first couple of pages and then this last one. I have to agree with Norseman and some of the other obviously experienced hunters. For those who have said you can't kill a BF with one shot, I very much disagree. It is the shooter, not the rifle, that determines that, with certain limitations (caliber-wise). I guarantee there is no terrestrial animal on the planet that cannot be put down with one shot. I have seen hippos, elephants, and rhinos killed with one shot, so I know a BF can easily be taken out with one. A deer-sized round placed in the vitals will end his day. If you shoot one in the chest with the 45/70 SurfingCowboy mentioned with about a 300 to 400 gr bullet it will knock him backward so hard he'll leave a body impression in the ground at short range. For those who said a BF would be hard to hit because they move too fast, running through the woods, the entire point in hunting one is to catch it unaware. Unless they constantly run everywhere they go, it should be an easy shot. Also, I am sure I am not the only hunter on here who has successfully made shots on running animals, though I don't like to. I cannot see a massive bipedal animal running faster than a deer. Here in the South, it used to be a tradition to hunt deer with dogs, mostly running Walkers, and if you got a shot, many times the deer was zipping by with the dogs in hot pursuit. I have not hunted that way in nearly 20 years, but I have done it.

If dogs were used to track a BF, I am betting it would turn out similar to a bear or hog hunt, in that the dogs would pursue the BF until it tired, and then they would bay it up in a thicket, tree, or cave, etc. That's when the hunter comes in for the kill, hoping it doesn't jump & run again.

[Guest tracker]

I read the first couple of pages and then this last one. I have to agree with Norseman and some of the other obviously experienced hunters. For those who have said you can't kill a BF with one shot, I very much disagree. It is the shooter, not the rifle, that determines that, with certain limitations (caliber-wise). I guarantee there is no terrestrial animal on the planet that cannot be put down with one shot. I have seen hippos, elephants, and rhinos killed with one shot, so I know a BF can easily be taken out with one. A deer-sized round placed in the vitals will end his day. If you shoot one in the chest with the 45/70 SurfingCowboy mentioned with about a 300 to 400 gr bullet it will knock him backward so hard he'll leave a body impression in the ground at short range. For those who said a BF would be hard to hit because they move too fast, running through the woods, the entire point in hunting one is to catch it unaware. Unless they constantly run everywhere they go, it should be an easy shot. Also, I am sure I am not the only hunter on here who has successfully made shots on running animals, though I don't like to. I cannot see a massive bipedal animal running faster than a deer. Here in the South, it used to be a tradition to hunt deer with dogs, mostly running Walkers, and if you got a shot, many times the deer was zipping by with the dogs in hot pursuit. I have not hunted that way in nearly 20 years, but I have done it.

If dogs were used to track a BF, I am betting it would turn out similar to a bear or hog hunt, in that the dogs would pursue the BF until it tired, and then they would bay it up in a thicket, tree, or cave, etc. That's when the hunter comes in for the kill, hoping it doesn't jump & run again.

I don't agree unless close range eye shot. Also Bf's kill dogs and their not always alone. If there's more than one they work together so bear hunting tactics won't work IMO.

tracker

[Guest]

I don't agree unless close range eye shot. Also Bf's kill dogs and their not always alone. If there's more than one they work together so bear hunting tactics won't work IMO.

tracker

You don't agree with what unless it's a close range eye shot? And what is close range? Bear, cougar, and most of all, boar kill dogs too. That's why we use the kinds of dogs that we do to hunt them. I'm not speculating, I'm talking from experience, and the theoretical portion of what I have typed is based of experience; educated guessing, not pondering.

[Guest tracker]

You don't agree with what unless it's a close range eye shot? And what is close range? Bear, cougar, and most of all, boar kill dogs too. That's why we use the kinds of dogs that we do to hunt them. I'm not speculating, I'm talking from experience, and the theoretical portion of what I have typed is based of experience; educated guessing, not pondering.

The range depends on how good a shot a hunter is at hitting a 3" eye opening under poor conditions. Most Dogs flee from the scent of Sasq and won't approach them. If they do they are torn apart or stomped on, so forget dogs. If you think you got the tactics figured out to bring one down that's fine. Do it then and lets be done with all this " if they exist "BS.

So what's your experience? Ever ground hunt Griz without dogs? It's the closest thing to hunting them but still falls short IMO. Or are you planning on using an elevated position and bait?

JMO

Edited June 30, 2011 by tracker

[Guest SurfingCowboy]

I want to point out that alot of times when people think and talk about hunting; all the general animals of each season come into mind and all the hunters each year that go after them. I see people keep saying about noone getting a BF and that it would be so hard to track or take a shot at, and you would have trouble keeping up with it. I wonder why? Deer are faster than humans, when I was in Alaska they tell you; You don't hunt bear because actually they make a wide circle and come up behind you. Hunters take animals that are fast, smart, strong and by all rights should be the top of the food chain. However are brains and thought processing skills are what have given us the edge. I know it can be done just like any other animal. Also how many hunters are out after BF in this country, a handful. In Pennsylvania we have a million hunters in the woods the first day of deer season and that actaully was a number quoted by the DCNR. So deer get killed, same thing with bear. Lets say we created a BF season, I bet someone would bag one.

[Guest]

I want to point out that alot of times when people think and talk about hunting; all the general animals of each season come into mind and all the hunters each year that go after them. I see people keep saying about noone getting a BF and that it would be so hard to track or take a shot at, and you would have trouble keeping up with it. I wonder why? Deer are faster than humans, when I was in Alaska they tell you; You don't hunt bear because actually they make a wide circle and come up behind you. Hunters take animals that are fast, smart, strong and by all rights should be the top of the food chain. However are brains and thought processing skills are what have given us the edge. I know it can be done just like any other animal. Also how many hunters are out after BF in this country, a handful. In Pennsylvania we have a million hunters in the woods the first day of deer season and that actaully was a number quoted by the DCNR. So deer get killed, same thing with bear. Lets say we created a BF season, I bet someone would bag one.

I very much agree. Even with a million hunters in the field after deer, not that big of a % of hunters are successful the first few days, due to the superior senses of the animal. But in the end, our intelligence wins out.

The range depends on how good a shot a hunter is at hitting a 3" eye opening under poor conditions. Most Dogs flee from the scent of Sasq and won't approach them. If they do they are torn apart or stomped on, so forget dogs. If you think you got the tactics figured out to bring one down that's fine. Do it then and lets be done with all this " if they exist "BS.

So what's your experience? Ever ground hunt Griz without dogs? It's the closest thing to hunting them but still falls short IMO. Or are you planning on using an elevated position and bait?

JMO

You still did not answer my question. In relation to my initial post you said, "I don't agree unless it's a close range eye shot." What are you not agreeing with? Btw, saying most dogs flee from the scent of BF is pure speculation. You are going by reports where SOME dogs were cowering or afraid of SOMETHING at the scene of what was purported to be BF sightings on a few cases. Those were a few incidents, and they do not represent a large % of sightings or a large % of the population of tracking dogs or hunting dogs. If dogs are used to chasing bear & cougar, I doubt they would flee anything else in North America, save a skunk perhaps. I've witnessed 1st hands dogs getting cut up by wild boars and continue to fight to protect me and other dogs & hunters. There are also some reports of dogs tracking supposed BFs with no fear response (one of those reports was featured on Monsterquest, and took place in Louisiana). Are the reports of tracking dogs doing what they are trained to do instead of cowering in fear or running away supposed to be in the minority instead of the majority?

[Guest BuzzardEater]

If I was hunting BF in earnest (suppose the Cowman of Copalis Beach had ate that kid!) I think I'd want air support. Seriously. At least one helicopter and some spotter planes. This isn't out of reach for large police departments or government agencies.

I'd try using the mounted posse approach directed from the air. You'd need more than one team, so you could leapfrog in front of the subject.

I do not believe dogs would be an asset.

I would want a mixture of armament ranging from great big handguns with hot, hot loads to shotguns and big rifles. Tear gas cannisters would be a good idea, too. Tasers? I asked a smith about an over under with a ten gauge and a .50 and he thought I was nuts! I was only half kidding, I think you'd actually need that. Probably need a big magazine, too.

A hunt would have to be a well funded affair, with no boundaries. BFs are smart and this won't be easy. A BF could jump into a river and swim like crazy underwater, changing positions by a couple of miles in a couple of minutes. They can top ridges that horses cannot climb and do it quickly. I am certain they have big speed, thirty miles an hour is a light jog for them. They can do this at night.

Without a determined team and logistical support, I doubt it gets done.

[Guest tracker]

I very much agree. Even with a million hunters in the field after deer, not that big of a % of hunters are successful the first few days, due to the superior senses of the animal. But in the end, our intelligence wins out.

You still did not answer my question. In relation to my initial post you said, "I don't agree unless it's a close range eye shot." What are you not agreeing with? Btw, saying most dogs flee from the scent of BF is pure speculation. You are going by reports where SOME dogs were cowering or afraid of SOMETHING at the scene of what was purported to be BF sightings on a few cases. Those were a few incidents, and they do not represent a large % of sightings or a large % of the population of tracking dogs or hunting dogs. If dogs are used to chasing bear & cougar, I doubt they would flee anything else in North America, save a skunk perhaps. I've witnessed 1st hands dogs getting cut up by wild boars and continue to fight to protect me and other dogs & hunters. There are also some reports of dogs tracking supposed BFs with no fear response (one of those reports was featured on Monsterquest, and took place in Louisiana). Are the reports of tracking dogs doing what they are trained to do instead of cowering in fear or running away supposed to be in the minority instead of the majority?

Everything else beside an eye shot.

Do you think your the first member to post in my thread about how easy it would be to hunt and kill Bf's or the last?. If a hunter thinks it would be just like hunting deer, bears or hogs. Then it's obvious they don't know what they are talking about in this field.

You said reports of fleeing or cowering dogs " do not represent a large % of sightings or a large % of the population of tracking dogs or hunting dogs. If dogs are used to chasing bear & cougar. "

Time to back up your claims surveyor! Post some these reports of hunters with tracking dogs attacking Bf's and surviving. And share your hunting Grizzly or Bf's adventures. Or is it all just supposing, guessing and speculation from your experiences with hunting pigs?

time to pay for talking large, were waiting. JMO tracker

[Guest]

If I was hunting BF in earnest (suppose the Cowman of Copalis Beach had ate that kid!) I think I'd want air support. Seriously. At least one helicopter and some spotter planes. This isn't out of reach for large police departments or government agencies.

I'd try using the mounted posse approach directed from the air. You'd need more than one team, so you could leapfrog in front of the subject.

I do not believe dogs would be an asset.

I would want a mixture of armament ranging from great big handguns with hot, hot loads to shotguns and big rifles. Tear gas cannisters would be a good idea, too. Tasers? I asked a smith about an over under with a ten gauge and a .50 and he thought I was nuts! I was only half kidding, I think you'd actually need that. Probably need a big magazine, too.

A hunt would have to be a well funded affair, with no boundaries. BFs are smart and this won't be easy. A BF could jump into a river and swim like crazy underwater, changing positions by a couple of miles in a couple of minutes. They can top ridges that horses cannot climb and do it quickly. I am certain they have big speed, thirty miles an hour is a light jog for them. They can do this at night.

Without a determined team and logistical support, I doubt it gets done.

The gunsmith looked at you like you were nuts with good reason. There is no such gun and there is no need for one. The 10 ga is primarily used for bird hunting. The gauge does not measure power, but the amount of shot it takes to weight a pound at that size. Also, an over/under does not use a magazine. It is a double barrel, and you only get 2 shots. Are you guys checking this stuff out before you post?

Who has seen any large terrestrial mammal "swim like crazy underwater"?....not to mention going a couple of miles in a couple of minutes? 30 mph is a light jog for them? How do you know this? Can they leap tall buildings in a single bound too? We are talking about flesh and blood animals with mortal limitations. A lot of the posts on here are starting to sound like kids posting about about some monster they encounter on the 5th level on some video game.

You don't have to hit it in the eye to kill it, the bullets you use don't have to be able to penetrate steel, sasquatches are not armor plated (as far as we know, lol). If they bleed, have a heart, lungs, liver, arteries, brain, etc., they can be shot and killed by getting hit in the vitals just like everything else on this planet. Just like I said in an earlier post on this thread, I have seen hippos, rhinos, and even elephants taken out with one shot. Sasquatches, by all reports, are no where near as large or tough and cannot possibly have bones as thick or dense as those animals. Think about it folks....

[Guest SurfingCowboy]

I have been reading alot about the idea of capturing a young BF or going for a female, from what rI know of bears, which I think we all can agree. Nothing is more dangerous than a sow with cubs. She will straight up attack even if you are unarmed and mean her now harm because of how males and other predators kill young. Now we can also agree that BF are smarter and do use a family unit (possibly. That being said taking a little one or a female that has young would be way more dangerous than trying to kill a male. If you kill the male the female and young one could still go on or join up with another family group if need be. I know that killing is a very debatable topic and I'm sorry it has to be like that but for safety resons I strongly advise against taking it alive unless you have money or extremely well funded. I do agree after the first specimen is acquired we could then protect them from further hunting and from having all the land they inhabit developed.