How Would You Capture Or Kill A Sasquatch?

[Guest tracker]

That could be what I am remembering, LAL, perhaps a review of his son's story. I remember something about one of the witness' stories going way out into left field years later as far as paranormal stuff, interdimensional beings, etc., but I can't recall the details of it.

Yeah, I wish I could remember the source of what I read, Tracker. It is entirely possible that what I read was written by somebody who just wanted to discredit the event, I can't be sure at this point. I do remember reading the original story back in the early 1980's though, and being enthralled with it, along with the Baughman story and the other classics. Real or not, they will all be part of BF history forever, and I like to read through them again every now & then. You comments inspired me to want to reread the Ape Canyon once again.

Btw, I am not sure if you guys realize it or not, but the Baughman story is not the only potential BF reference in Roosevelt's Wilderness Hunter

Edited for a type-o

I recall reading Dalhinden's and Patterson's book before everything got watered down. There's so much more that happened at both Ape Canyon and Bluff Creek then people realize or remember. So i add the odd tid bit in so we don't forget the other incidents surrounding those two classics.

[Drew]

Peter Hathaway Capstick always said the higher the foot-pounds, the better.

He used jacketed bullets for elephants, cape buff, and rhino, he used soft bullets for leopards, lions and antelope.

His weapon of choice was a 470 Nitro Express which could generate 6,394 ft·lb force (500 grain solid).

Here are some typical rifle forces

air gun .177 15 20

pistol .22LR 117 159

pistol 9 mm 383 519

pistol .45 ACP 416 564

rifle 5.56 × 45 mm 1,325 1,796

rifle 7.62 × 39 mm 1,527 2,070

rifle 7.62 × 51 mm 2,802 3,799

heavy .50 BMG 11,091 15,037

Edited July 5, 2011 by Drew

[norseman]

Peter Hathaway Capstick always said the higher the foot-pounds, the better.

He used jacketed bullets for elephants, cape buff, and rhino, he used soft bullets for leopards, lions and antelope.

His weapon of choice was a 470 Nitro Express which could generate 6,394 ft·lb force (500 grain solid).

Here are some typical rifle forces

air gun .177 15 20

pistol .22LR 117 159

pistol 9 mm 383 519

pistol .45 ACP 416 564

rifle 5.56 × 45 mm 1,325 1,796

rifle 7.62 × 39 mm 1,527 2,070

rifle 7.62 × 51 mm 2,802 3,799

heavy .50 BMG 11,091 15,037

http://www.reloadammo.com/tkofactor2.htm

You can calculate something that John Taylor created, with this page. Taylor was a big African game hunter of the mid-20th century and he had experience with what stops huge game like tigers, lions, elephants and hippos. He came up with a pretty simple formula for what he called, "Knock Out Power."

This formula is simple. You take the weight of the bullet (in grains), times the speed (in feet per second), times the diameter (in inches - like .451) and after multliplying the results, you divide by 7000 to give you a reasonable number to work with, somewhere between 1 and 100. Perhaps he used 7000 because that's how many grains makes a pound, but in any event it gives a workable number. ( TKOF = weight * speed * diameter / 7000 )

This formula is biased towards the bigger and heavier bullets, but that's what he wanted to have a scale to Knock Out big game. Plug in some light 30-06 loads and compare to some 500 S&W loads with a very heavy bullet for comparisons. Example: A 30 caliber 150 grain bullet moving at 3,000 fps = 19.3, while a 50 caliber, 630 grain bullet moving at 1300 fps = 58.5 a huge difference, but for Taylor, he felt that's what would take down big game best. If you want to save your data, print this page after you make a calculation.

[norseman]

Actually there was this little known report out near you where a miner put 5 or 6 slugs into a Bf on a ridge. That night the whole Bf family paid the minors a visit at their cabin. Now what was the name of the place again? it had kind of a ring to it ? Surely NM you haven't forgotten that act of retribution?

maybe they are more like barbarian hunters anyways? saxon shield wall good one NM.

Your talking about Ape Caynon and the Fred Beck story!

For one.....they are miners protecting a mining claim, take that for what you will. For two, this story seems out of place with known bigfoot behavior. Did the German/Canadian moose hunter get attacked after killing one (story told by Bindernagel)? What about Ostman......he shot at one, why wasn't he tracked down and skinned alive by bigfoot army?

The bottom line for me is that if they were competing with humans for resources and had concepts like retribution? Then they are not apes. Our closest living relatives:

Silk and her colleagues presented captive chimps with an apparatus that allowed them to get food by pulling on one of two ropes. Choosing one of the ropes meant that the chimp could haul in a tasty titbit. Selecting the other yielded exactly the same reward, but another chimp in an adjacent cage also received a morsel to eat.

Given that the chimp in charge got the same food reward regardless of which rope was selected, one might expect them to have shown some compassion and chosen the one that gave food to their companion too. "All they had to do was be nice," Silk says.

But the 29 chimps tested were no more likely to choose the generous option than the selfish one, Silk and her colleagues report in this week's Nature. This shows that the apes are not motivated to help others as a matter of course, they conclude.

http://www.bioedonline.org/news/news.cfm?art=2126

So tracker, if the two of us were chimps? And humans were hurting you? Why would I come to your aid? That's your problem and not mine.....

[Drew]

Yes, I remember PCH had a simple formula like that, but I can't quote it off the top of my head

[Guest tracker]

Your talking about Ape Caynon and the Fred Beck story!

For one.....they are miners protecting a mining claim, take that for what you will. For two, this story seems out of place with known bigfoot behavior. Did the German/Canadian moose hunter get attacked after killing one (story told by Bindernagel)? What about Ostman......he shot at one, why wasn't he tracked down and skinned alive by bigfoot army?

The bottom line for me is that if they were competing with humans for resources and had concepts like retribution? Then they are not apes. Our closest living relatives:

http://www.bioedonli...ws.cfm?art=2126

So tracker, if the two of us were chimps? And humans were hurting you? Why would I come to your aid? That's your problem and not mine.....

Maybe they can be indifferent too? " I never liked that guy anyways " He's always trying to steal my woman and food.

[Guest ajciani]

Well, in that case I would hesitate to use the title "sniper". I suppose the fellow must have gotten rattled at the sight of the creature, or was inexperienced and jerked the trigger, which pulls the barrel downward, thus lowering the trajectory of the bullet significantly. You've got my curiosity piqued, though. Do you have a link to the story?

The Louisiana Hunt was a GCBRO activity, and is reasonably well reported and easily searched. I happen to know one of the principles, who was the second person to take a shot at the wounded bigfoot. He is solidly no-kill today.

The "sniper" was not startled or inexperienced. He was simply using equipment that was not well suited to an after dusk shot. I think he was aiming the rifle through NV goggles, or something like that; so amazing that he hit anything at all. He may not have even realized that it was only gut shot, until it was running away. I think the others wanted him to shoot again, just to make sure.

The bigfoot he shot was 1 of 2 that were in his view. One crawled up to grab the carcass, and another was standing a little further back and in cover. The BF was probably gut shot, as the GCBRO found vomitous, which appeared to contain blood.

As NM indicated, animals usually run at the sound of gunfire, and these two bigfoots were no exceptions. They tracked the wounded BF to a fallen tree, at which point the BF leaped from cover, and one man tracked its head with his shotgun, and took a shot to drop it as it emerged from behind a tree, but the bigfoot vanished instead. In the morning, they saw that behind the tree was a drop off into a creek, so the shot probably went well above its head.

They stopped pursuing the wounded BF, because of the approaching bigfoot army. They could clearly hear that they were being approached by multiple BFs, and so they buggered back to camp. The other BFs did not come into their lantern light. I do not know how their night at camp went. In the morning, they were able to do a little more tracking, and found where the BF had apparently lain and probably died, but the body was nowhere to be seen.

[Guest]

Thank you, ajciani! I appreciate you posting the rest of the story, and it was great reading. Would Monster Hunter over at GCBRO be privy to that incident? I have been a lurker on that site for years (I have a report on there from 2002), but I only registered a few weeks ago, so I am not sure that I have built up enough re pore to gain the confidence of anyone yet. I have the same screen name on all the BF sites that I post on.

Edited July 7, 2011 by Surveyor

[Guest tracker]

The Louisiana Hunt was a GCBRO activity, and is reasonably well reported and easily searched. I happen to know one of the principles, who was the second person to take a shot at the wounded bigfoot. He is solidly no-kill today.

The "sniper" was not startled or inexperienced. He was simply using equipment that was not well suited to an after dusk shot. I think he was aiming the rifle through NV goggles, or something like that; so amazing that he hit anything at all. He may not have even realized that it was only gut shot, until it was running away. I think the others wanted him to shoot again, just to make sure.

The bigfoot he shot was 1 of 2 that were in his view. One crawled up to grab the carcass, and another was standing a little further back and in cover. The BF was probably gut shot, as the GCBRO found vomitous, which appeared to contain blood.

As NM indicated, animals usually run at the sound of gunfire, and these two bigfoots were no exceptions. They tracked the wounded BF to a fallen tree, at which point the BF leaped from cover, and one man tracked its head with his shotgun, and took a shot to drop it as it emerged from behind a tree, but the bigfoot vanished instead. In the morning, they saw that behind the tree was a drop off into a creek, so the shot probably went well above its head.

They stopped pursuing the wounded BF, because of the approaching bigfoot army. They could clearly hear that they were being approached by multiple BFs, and so they buggered back to camp. The other BFs did not come into their lantern light. I do not know how their night at camp went. In the morning, they were able to do a little more tracking, and found where the BF had apparently lain and probably died, but the body was nowhere to be seen.

See i told you NM, there are Bigfoot armies that may exact retribution ! Sorry no Saxon defense wall just big angry Bf's that could pound hunters into pulp. So watch out !

[Guest]

Hi. I'm really new here and have been reading many of these posts on the forum. I never gave it much thought on how to capture a bigfoot. But, I think it would be a difficult task to do. I don't live near any real hot spot of bigfoot activity, and haven't given it much thought. I have been scuba diving for 40 years, and have dove with humpback whales as the largest thing I've ever seen up close and personal. I wasn't afraid at all of it, or being in it's habitat. I knew the dangers of being so close to it, so I'm not sure what my reaction would be with a bigfoot, and they are much smaller than a whale. If I had to defend myself against a bigfoot and didn't have a gun handy, I would positively use a knife called a WASP. It is used underwater for sharks and has a CO2 cartridge in it which injects CO2 into the animal when you stab it. It kills what ever you stab immediatly. A lot of people carry one underwater in shark territory and on land in bear country for protection. It's a very cool knife. The second thing I'd do to capture a bigfoot on film only, because I don't think I could kill one even though I have hunted and killed animals before. I think a bigfoot looks to human and does too many human things, so I couldn't shoot one. I'd have to hunt with film. But, I would have a woman come with along with a toddler. I'd have the woman holding the toddler while she walked, or have the kid walk along. I would think if these creatures had their own families, they would be extremely interested in seeing a human child and maybe get a little closer. It would also pose as non threatening. I wonder if anyone has put a manequin out in the field and left it there along with a camera to see what would come look at it. I'd use a life like one, with no joints or something. Maybe a male and female manequin or a child one, and leave them there in the woods for a month or so. Just as an experiment anyway. I know some of you all have put trail cams out there with food bait, but I would think that a bigfoot might be interested in maybe seeing a human close up. And if it didn't move, they may think it's dead and go investigate. The diving industry did a similar thing with sharks. They dressed a maniquin up in dive gear and dragged it around in the ocean to see if a shark would bite it or attack it. Then filmed it. I know a shark is not on land and a different environment. But,anyway. I don't know if that's too crazy or not to do. I think I probably would do it. Maybe install a camera in the manequin. A real live person taking a picture isn't working too well for a good clear shot. I've also heard somewhere that the bigfoot may be autistic. I have an 18 yr old autistic son. If the person is referring to an autistic person having a photographic memory. I'd agree with the guy. My son has a photographic memory and knows exactly where everything is in his space. He had a penny nail on his dresser that I had used to mark on his wall where to put a photo. He had it in his room for a week. I took it the other day, and within an hour, he was asking me where the nail went and if I took it. If I go in his room and even move his chair an inch. Yes, an inch. He knows it. This is an every day occurance with the kid. My son knows if anything is disturbed, even if a wrinkle on his bed is different, or if someone sat on his bed. He can tell you on a movie he has seen once, exactly the position of one of the characters bodies, and the word of a song they played on the film with it, if he hears the song again without the movie. It's spooky to hear the kid tell me these things at times. So, if a bigfoot is autistic, meaning they may have a photographic memory. Then, if we are in their home of the woods, and move even a stick. The bigfoot would know it. I would have to agree with a photographic memory instead of autistic, because with autistic, there are communication problems within the human realm, and social avoidance. The bigfoot is a social group from what I hear and have read. So, that is my opinion of what to do to capture one on film. The other thought I have is this. From what some of you all are saying, the bigfoot is curious and does a thing called gifting. Well, with technology as it is, what about putting a tracker in something you think these creatures would like, and they would carry around with them. Accidently leave something somewhere with a tracker in it, and maybe this will end up in a cache of something they have somewhere. Maybe that is crazy to think of to do also... ?? They tag sharks and follow them around. A bigfoot may take the thing possibly. Put a camera in it?? Hey... I'm just thinking what I would do. But, I'm underwater oriented. !!

[Guest]

large tuna net to catch, elephant gun to kill.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

Hi

I see your going after the Aquatic and land BF ~

Tim

[Guest tracker]

Hi. I'm really new here and have been reading many of these posts on the forum. I never gave it much thought on how to capture a bigfoot. But, I think it would be a difficult task to do. I don't live near any real hot spot of bigfoot activity, and haven't given it much thought. I have been scuba diving for 40 years, and have dove with humpback whales as the largest thing I've ever seen up close and personal. I wasn't afraid at all of it, or being in it's habitat. I knew the dangers of being so close to it, so I'm not sure what my reaction would be with a bigfoot, and they are much smaller than a whale. If I had to defend myself against a bigfoot and didn't have a gun handy, I would positively use a knife called a WASP. It is used underwater for sharks and has a CO2 cartridge in it which injects CO2 into the animal when you stab it. It kills what ever you stab immediatly. A lot of people carry one underwater in shark territory and on land in bear country for protection. It's a very cool knife. The second thing I'd do to capture a bigfoot on film only, because I don't think I could kill one even though I have hunted and killed animals before. I think a bigfoot looks to human and does too many human things, so I couldn't shoot one. I'd have to hunt with film. But, I would have a woman come with along with a toddler. I'd have the woman holding the toddler while she walked, or have the kid walk along. I would think if these creatures had their own families, they would be extremely interested in seeing a human child and maybe get a little closer. It would also pose as non threatening. I wonder if anyone has put a manequin out in the field and left it there along with a camera to see what would come look at it. I'd use a life like one, with no joints or something. Maybe a male and female manequin or a child one, and leave them there in the woods for a month or so. Just as an experiment anyway. I know some of you all have put trail cams out there with food bait, but I would think that a bigfoot might be interested in maybe seeing a human close up. And if it didn't move, they may think it's dead and go investigate. The diving industry did a similar thing with sharks. They dressed a maniquin up in dive gear and dragged it around in the ocean to see if a shark would bite it or attack it. Then filmed it. I know a shark is not on land and a different environment. But,anyway. I don't know if that's too crazy or not to do. I think I probably would do it. Maybe install a camera in the manequin. A real live person taking a picture isn't working too well for a good clear shot. I've also heard somewhere that the bigfoot may be autistic. I have an 18 yr old autistic son. If the person is referring to an autistic person having a photographic memory. I'd agree with the guy. My son has a photographic memory and knows exactly where everything is in his space. He had a penny nail on his dresser that I had used to mark on his wall where to put a photo. He had it in his room for a week. I took it the other day, and within an hour, he was asking me where the nail went and if I took it. If I go in his room and even move his chair an inch. Yes, an inch. He knows it. This is an every day occurance with the kid. My son knows if anything is disturbed, even if a wrinkle on his bed is different, or if someone sat on his bed. He can tell you on a movie he has seen once, exactly the position of one of the characters bodies, and the word of a song they played on the film with it, if he hears the song again without the movie. It's spooky to hear the kid tell me these things at times. So, if a bigfoot is autistic, meaning they may have a photographic memory. Then, if we are in their home of the woods, and move even a stick. The bigfoot would know it. I would have to agree with a photographic memory instead of autistic, because with autistic, there are communication problems within the human realm, and social avoidance. The bigfoot is a social group from what I hear and have read. So, that is my opinion of what to do to capture one on film. The other thought I have is this. From what some of you all are saying, the bigfoot is curious and does a thing called gifting. Well, with technology as it is, what about putting a tracker in something you think these creatures would like, and they would carry around with them. Accidently leave something somewhere with a tracker in it, and maybe this will end up in a cache of something they have somewhere. Maybe that is crazy to think of to do also... ?? They tag sharks and follow them around. A bigfoot may take the thing possibly. Put a camera in it?? Hey... I'm just thinking what I would do. But, I'm underwater oriented. !!

I've considered a small GPS bug but there's draw backs to doing this. I am still on the naughty list .So i only respond briefly to posts in my threads. Thanks for posting here everyone!

[Guest]

"Why has no one shot a sasquatch and actually brought in back to civilization? Would you shoot a man shaped form while hunting in New Mexico for elk? I hope not, it might be me. Only murderers shoot at other people, no matter how hairy or how big, not hunters."___Keith Foster

On the other hand as a professional soldier with 23 years in service to date I would have to say that sure it's possible to kill one with the an approproiate round, and no you don't need a .50 to it, they kill Polar bears all the time with AR-15's. But that can only happen if you get a good sight picture on the target, and for that you have to locate a prime habitat, and for that you have to locate an individual, then establish a good sight picture, and considering people can't even get passable photographs by and large good luck with that. And if you did manage to establish a good shooting profile why not video instead? Even Jane Goodall stated that clear/undeniable video should be enough to establish the species.

If by chance the stars aligned and you had the golden moment at hand you would need to consider some things.

1. The species specimens may decide to kill you instead and hide your remains. It's suspected they're responsible for some of the missing persons reports in rural and primitive areas and there are too many stories in Native American culture and annecdotal reports to discount this completely "Forest Friends" or not there are bad apples in every bunch in both animals and people depending on whatever you think Sasquatch is.

2. The species are known to sometimes travel in groups of varying size. Attacking one is highly likely to invite attack by others, in that case my advice would be "reload" and good luck.

3. IF you do manage to bring one down and can extricate it from the area who are you going to trust? IF by some miracle the Erickson Project establishes a confirmed DNA link to humans a zealous DA could charge you with murder. Or possibly to quote Grover Krantz___"They will give a medal to the first person to bring one in, and put the second in prison"

[Guest vilnoori]

Gee Gail, what a cool knife! Is it legal in Canada? I've been looking into something to take hiking to use against a bear or cougar if I had to.

http://www.waspknife.com/about.php

Oh, and I have a possibly autistic son too. Strange world. He is just as you described, but only 5 years old.

Edited September 20, 2011 by vilnoori