Guest Cervelo Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 (edited) Frankly you guys and gals with your I hate govt. mantra might want to consider in my experience with anyone associated with a NP, state park ect have been nothing but the most helpful, gracious, group of people I've every dealt with in any branch of the govt.! The backcountry ranger in Yellowstone was like having a personal travel agent! They want you to have a good time and come back, it's thier job and most of them seem to love it! I personally hope all such endeavors as Derek describes get rejected flat out, you let one group in doing this and you got to let them all in regardless of experience or intent. These lands are set aside for the citizens to enjoy free of blatant commercialization, unless of course your a paper company, oil company or mining company. The last thing I want to run into when I'm enjoying the geat outdoors is some semi-organized group of anybody's looking for anything. FYI open carry is legal in all NPs now so I would be very careful wandering around at nite, some people have some bad cases of Bearanoia, great way to get shot! Edited April 6, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter O. Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) What he was saying was I could not be anywhere around them if I was charging them a guide fee. Exactly. Why say what you are doing? It's pretty arbitrary whether you are looking for general wildlife, or looking for BF. It probably worries them that a group of people are going to be researching BF.... Dude, nobody is going to issue a permit for "Searching for Bigfoot", it's a permit for a commercial (i.e. paid) guided hike. So, yes, I agree with you about not mentioning this curious fact. I also think the title of this thread is a bit askew since there is no fee for searching for BF, only for leading commercial guided hikes. The statutes for what requires a permit are available online for all to read; I've read them. Searching for BF is still free! Yahoo! edit: +1 Cervelo, up to the part about being rejected outright... I think there is an acceptable way for people to conduct this kind of "wildlife survery" in a respectful manner. But banging on trees is probably not one of them ;-) P.S. If hiring practices at Interior or USDA are so rotten, I'm going to apply and see if I can get in. I'd love to be a park ranger but don't have any resume-worthy skills to do so... Edited April 7, 2012 by Peter O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 This stuff isn't exclusive to the government...not by a long shot. I agree. The difference -- a private enterprise that tolerates and promotes incompetence eventually goes out of businesss; as consumers we can choose not to patronize such an enterprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Pter, I think RayG was responding to Hutch, not ajciani. I agree that Hutch's post is a fairly broad "brush stroke" categorizing all public employees as incompetent, and RayG's reply (as a stated government employee) is reasonable. Given that all Hutch did was copy ajciani's post and add the single word, "BINGO!!!!," my post is accurate. Hutch did nothing to broaden ajciani's statement; he emphatically ageed with it. Count me as agreeing with it, too. Why does RayG's status as a government employee make his erroneous statement reasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 I have heard all sorts of stories about people buying the permits the sales clerks told them they needed, and then being fined for not having the required permit. Not wanting to continue any "bashing", but this is common w/government agencies. The IRS for example, will hold you liable for any mistakes you make on your taxes even if they told you to do it that way. Stupid, but there it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Regarding Derekfoot's statement about "shenanigans" I think he wasn't referring to BFRO trying to duck out of paying permits, etc.... he was referring to the park employee's perception of BF research as that which we see on Animal Planet. From what I've read, the NPS at Buffalo National River initiated their investigation because they thought an unpermitted commercial activity -- filming for "Finding Bigfoot" -- was occurring. Instead, they found that an unpermitted commercial activity -- conducting a guided bigfoot expedition -- was occurring. I read nothing about NPS expressing concern over TV show shenanigans. If I missed something in the NPS's press release, perhaps you would be eager to enlighten me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 I agree. The difference -- a private enterprise that tolerates and promotes incompetence eventually goes out of businesss; as consumers we can choose not to patronize such an enterprise. That's why we vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 I read nothing about NPS expressing concern over TV show shenanigans. If I missed something in the NPS's press release, perhaps you would be eager to enlighten me. This was covered in the blog by the gentleman from BFRO about the incident. The initial concern was that they were conducting filming for the show, they indicated it was one of the expeditions, gave the web site, etc. When the park employee checked out the web site and found they were charging a fee for the expedition that is when the issue came to a head. Again, the "shenanigans" as noted by Derekfoot was a descriptive term for how BFRO does their field research from the point of view of park employees only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Like it has been touched on a few times already....Most, if not all, BF research will now be painted with the BFRO 'Finding Bigfoot' brush, in regards to the general public's perception of our activities in the forest. What they are doing a lot of the times on the show is flat-out wildlife harassment, and is against the law. They have no concept of 'tread lightly', and this is part of the problem for all of us now. When the general public sees people lighting off fireworks in the middle of the woods(one of the most idiotic things I have ever seen), blasting calls at night, storming through the woods with torches, bating bears(you can say all you want that you are putting out food for a Squatch, but it's bear bating no matter how you slice it, and is illegal in a lot of states) running over trees with atv's, running around the woods banging on trees and disturbing all of the wildlife in the forest, what do you think they are going to think about BF researchers? I can completely understand if park rangers, and game wardens don't want these kind of people in the woods, and will do whatever they can to keep them out. I don't necessarily have a problem with most of those things, but can assure you that some people do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted April 7, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted April 7, 2012 Yes, I can see alot in that perspective PNWSq., just remember though, that in the video debrief of Cliff running over trees in Minn. with the atv, that he stated emphatically that no trees were harmed and that they sprang right back up, as they noted on other days in the same area....... you can check that one out on his website..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 That's why we vote. Which is why we have no one to blame but ourselves for allowing and encouraging such mismanagement. Zerohedge.com had an interesting article about a week ago, which nicely summarizes the problem in economic terms. In 1984 adults 35 and younger in the US had a median net worth of $25K (in 2012 US dollars). Adults 65 and older had a median net worth of $264K, about 10-times as much as the youngsters. In 2009 the elderly demographic's median net worth (again, adjusted for inflation) had dropped 31%, to $181K; the young demographic's median net worth, shockingly, had plummeted 85%, to $4K. Our children are inheriting a broken economy, which, in turn, is breaking them. Under the circumstances one can understand why the goverment, at all levels, scrounges for any fee they csn charge. It is one of the prices of mismanagement -- at all levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 (edited) This was covered in the blog by the gentleman from BFRO about the incident. The initial concern was that they were conducting filming for the show, they indicated it was one of the expeditions, gave the web site, etc. When the park employee checked out the web site and found they were charging a fee for the expedition that is when the issue came to a head. Again, the "shenanigans" as noted by Derekfoot was a descriptive term for how BFRO does their field research from the point of view of park employees only. I read the Park Service's press release and Matt Pruitt's version of events. Neither mentioned a thing about the Park Service being concerned about behavior in " Finding Bigfoot," except that they were under the impression that they were filming in the National Monument without the required permit for such a commercial effort. I have also read all of Derek's posts in this thread -- not once has he used the word "shenanigans"; wudwosa put that word on the table. In fact, Derek has not once bad-mouthed "Finding Bigfoot" in this thread; but, wudwosa seems determined to do just that every chance he gets, whether it makes sense or not, and whether his claims are factual or not. As you have appointed yourself defender of wudwosa and RayG, please answer my questions: What shenanigans did the Park Service express concern about. Hint: They did no such thing. Thus, what gives you and wudwosa the ability to speak for the Park Service on the matter. Are both of you mind readers? If you are expressing your opnions, is it too much to ask you to do so rather than to misrepresent them as opinions of government officials? What gives a government employee the honor of being deemed reasonable for presenting erroneous conclusions? Edited April 7, 2012 by Pteronarcyd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Which is why we have no one to blame but ourselves for allowing and encouraging such mismanagement. Zerohedge.com had an interesting article about a week ago, which nicely summarizes the problem in economic terms. In 1984 adults 35 and younger in the US had a median net worth of $25K (in 2012 US dollars). Adults 65 and older had a median net worth of $264K, about 10-times as much as the youngsters. In 2009 the elderly demographic's median net worth (again, adjusted for inflation) had dropped 31%, to $181K; the young demographic's median net worth, shockingly, had plummeted 85%, to $4K. Our children are inheriting a broken economy, which, in turn, is breaking them. Under the circumstances one can understand why the goverment, at all levels, scrounges for any fee they csn charge. It is one of the prices of mismanagement -- at all levels. We had a surplus not terribly long ago. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out the source of the mismanagement and what needs to be done to fix it. These problems aren't insurmountable. People need to educate themselves and vote. In a democracy, there's no one else to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Us Olympic Project guys don't do things like other expeditions. We don't beat on trees in the middle of the night, or broadcast calls till 5 am. We look for and gather, and document evidence. That's what we do. Our impact on the land is almost non existent. I know this sounds really GREEN, but we are very environmentally conscious. We want to study the habitat, not hurt it. That's why I think in some way that makes us a little unique compared to some of the other activity's that fall under these permit conditions. This is essentially the type of researching I do. I look for their impact on the environment, to deduce what it is they do and how they live. I have spent a lot of time in the forest during the day, and I have had quite a few incidents I would consider suspicious to out right worrisome. When you start messing with and poking around their stuff, there is a good chance they will be watching. Nighttime is good for an increased chance of interaction, but knocking on trees and making calls is probably quite unnecessary, if you went to the right places (near your camp site) during the day. Frankly you guys and gals with your I hate govt. mantra might want to consider in my experience with anyone associated with a NP, state park ect have been nothing but the most helpful, gracious, group of people I've every dealt with in any branch of the govt.! Most bureaucrats are pretty good, if you are just looking for the normal, mundane, every-day stuff. Go into a park as a normal user and ask about normal sorts of things, and they are plenty friendly and accommodating, usually. Ask about something which *should* be within their job, but is a bit of a special circumstance or would normally be handled by a different office, and be prepared for blank looks and misinformation. On the other hand, there are so many miles of red tape, so many flaming hoops, and so many bureaucrats out to make certain you pay proper homage to government, that normal interactions with government employees sound like the shake-down stories my grandfather tells about his gas station in Brooklyn. For example, I heard one lady tell a story about how she used to own a small ice cream shop. One day, the State inspector came in and discovered that she was batch pasteurizing her ice cream in large pots. The inspector told her that the batch processing was a violation, and she must use one of the continuous pasteurizers from a State approved list. The pasteurizers were far too expensive, so she shut down her shop. Of course the bureaucrat was wrong; the State had no restriction on batch pasteurization, as long as the process is well monitored and controlled. I know other company owners and managers who have described constant harassment by government officials. The incompetence, lack of effort, lack of caring, and abuse go up and down the entire bureaucracy, with normal, gifted, and other employees scattered throughout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 We had a surplus not terribly long ago. Only if you conveniently ignore unfunded liabilities. The current situation: http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/us_debt/us_debt.html. If my math is correct our debt plus unfunded liabilities now comes to more than $400K per person. And this is despite government fudging inflation numbers in an attempt to hold down annual increases in Social Security payments. Given the situation, Derek is lucky that the Forest Service doesn't make him hand over one of his kidneys as the price of his permit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts