BC witness Posted July 26, 2015 Share Posted July 26, 2015 BobbyO, MagniAesir pretty much covered it for you. The tributaries of the Fraser along this section flow N-S between numerous ridges of mountains, all part of the Coast Range, till they reach the flat land along the E-W flowing Fraser. Hwy 7 on the N side of the river generally runs a km or so S of the ends of those mountains, with farms and several reservations running from the Hwy back to their bases. Virtually all of this land is private or native, so there is no public access to most of it, which is great for the privacy of the creatures there, not so great for us researchers. There are numerous sloughs and marshes along the foot of those hills, as well, that provide water, fish and other freshwater critters, and edible marsh plants. I don't think you could find better habitat for Sasquatch, hence the long history of sightings in the whole area. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted July 26, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted July 26, 2015 I'm on it, thanks Gents.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 It is not hard at all to have more knowledge than the pro kill BF crowd. That part is too easy. Carrying a rifle is not the issue. Patterson & Gimlin did not set out to kill a BF. Your intent is to kill a BF which is why you clearly labeled the threat The Kill club. of that i do not deny......... But!!! so what your telling me is that Bigfoot has ESP??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Norseman if not mistake Mr. Gimlin said he also didn't shoot because he was a little shaken by the sighting and uncertain if it would be a clean shot. I have heard this but am not sure if this is fully how it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted July 31, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted July 31, 2015 What I have heard Bob say several times that he did not feel like Patty was a treat to either of them because most of the time Patty was moving away from them. He has said, that if Patty had turned on Roger, he would have shot her but other than her size and potential for danger, he did not think her an immediate threat. Remember that their reason for being there was to get film of BF in the wild to make a movie they could make money showing. A lump of dead bleeding out BF would not be very entertaining or even showable in movie theatres. In that day and age blood and gore was rarely shown in movies. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) I had a thought today. People seem against the idea of kill. They call for tranqulizing, which let's be honest can be just as dangerous. So what about GPS dart. We can inject a GPS chip in a dog why not rig it in a dart and bang. Track the movement? Would give a rough search area to go by. Narrows the search. If you see it go to a hospital you know it was a guy in a suit. I know sounds more simple than it is but still an idea. Though I do lean more to the kill club side of things. A body is hard to deny and harder still to ignore(after a while the smell starts to get to you). Edited August 4, 2015 by Woodslore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted August 4, 2015 Author Share Posted August 4, 2015 Ive had this discussion before but never concerning a dart with a tracking chip. My two concerns would be cost and the fear of the chip going on the fritz and losing my "proof". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted August 4, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted August 4, 2015 I can just picture Norseman's face if he had a successful shot with a chipped gps dart, with the Sasquatch just pulling it out, throwing it to the floor and storming off.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Hello All, Really what is being discussed is a transponder. My dog has a chip and all it's for is to identify the dog by some kind of "reader". It is not a GPS locator. I don't think any of them are. The owner does have to pay a small fee to keep the chip info on a database though. If the owner no longer subscribes the chip is pretty much useless. The idea being if your pet is lost the company will issue an alert to shelters and veterinarians who, if so equipped, will scan the pet and retrieve the identifying data. No subscription, no alert. The pet therefore may never be found. Bigfoot would have to be targeted with an actual transmitting device for the plan to work. just like the collars or things biologists tag whales or other creatures like sea turtles with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Hiflier Yes more of a transponder though the size of a chip. They have been used to track people before. Some have been used with a darting gun. If there was a away to combine this "chip" with a biopsy dart than not only is the target tracked and location known but DNA data to test and see what is the result. As for a data base given today's tech I bit someone could make their own free data base for the purpose of study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted August 5, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted August 5, 2015 I don't think there is a chip sized GPS transponder. Animal chips have to be very close to the reading equipment to work. A GPS tracker puts out a signal strong enough to go a couple of hundred miles in space. All GPS devices are larger and more in the form of a tag since for the most part for a GPS signal to be sent, it has to be external to the body as a GPS frequency does not penetrated moisture very well. The useful time is battery dependent. Ask anyone who puts their cell phone in map which turns on the GPS feature, and you know how quickly the battery runs down, and a cell phone battery us pretty large for some sort of animal tag. Then again, if someone darts a bigfoot, it is going to pull it out as would anything with hands. Somehow I don't think a BF is going to like being darted very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 They do have GPS chips but the range is limited (between 5-10 yards also had to step out of a defined area. link below to a company that produces chips and other types of equipment). Like I said it is a plan but one that sounds simpler than it really is. Though given the technology of today i have no doubt a person could modify a current GPS chip to work with existing technology. Not saying this is the best idea. I just thought it was an interesting one. There has been a number of issues pointed out with the theory, to which I thank you all for you input, though no real difference in the issues or potential problems as tranquilizing darts or biopsy dart. They pull the dart out, yes true so would they with a tranquilizer dart or biopsy dart. Still data collection right there. If you shoot it with a bullet they can't pull that out. I only offered an idea in the range of the argument between Pro Kill/ No Kill. If a person is interested they will find a way, we need only look to history to see that fact.http://www.biotrack.co.uk/index.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted August 6, 2015 Author Share Posted August 6, 2015 i think once they are proven to exist? this technology would be used by biologists, absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted August 6, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted August 6, 2015 They do have GPS chips but the range is limited (between 5-10 yards also had to step out of a defined area. link below to a company that produces chips and other types of equipment). Like I said it is a plan but one that sounds simpler than it really is. Though given the technology of today i have no doubt a person could modify a current GPS chip to work with existing technology. Not saying this is the best idea. I just thought it was an interesting one. There has been a number of issues pointed out with the theory, to which I thank you all for you input, though no real difference in the issues or potential problems as tranquilizing darts or biopsy dart. They pull the dart out, yes true so would they with a tranquilizer dart or biopsy dart. Still data collection right there. If you shoot it with a bullet they can't pull that out. I only offered an idea in the range of the argument between Pro Kill/ No Kill. If a person is interested they will find a way, we need only look to history to see that fact. http://www.biotrack.co.uk/index.php If you read the specs of these devices they talk about harnesses etc. They are apparently strapped on a bird somehow. A biopsy dart is designed to fall out so you can recover it and the tissue inside it. So it makes no difference if they pull that out. Tranquilizer darts require some idea of the weigh of the target to determine the dose. Overdose and you kill it. Underdose and you better to be ready to defend yourself. Given the choice of biopsy dart, tracking dart, tranquilizer dart or a gun adequate to down a BF, I think the safest thing to choose for the person doing the shooting would be the gun route. Unless you kill it, it is likely to kill you. You really do not want to enrage a BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted August 6, 2015 Share Posted August 6, 2015 SWWASquatchproject. The links I posted is related to quote A company that produces chips and other types of equipment. Not saying it produces micro gps, however it produces a wide range of equipment in that field. Thus the equipment is there to work with. It just need to be modified. In regards to the dart coming out etc. Yes a biopsy dart is designed to pop out, not debating that. A Tranq dart has to stay in for the full effect to work, and yes the risks. It has been stated here in this thread that like anything with hands a Sasquatch would pull it out. However please read the rest of what was written. I state if you shoot it with a bullet they cannot pull it out. I am simply putting forward an idea. I have also stated as you did before in other posts the risk of tranquilizers. Not saying this is the best course of action, Chipping, Tranq. In fact I states several times that I am more in favor of pro kill. Less risk to the animal and shooter if done right. Key phrase, done right. I am only trying to open an ave. to discussion, to consideration. People seem apposed to the idea of killing one. Understandable. Thus is there another way? Is there something in existence currently, that can be used or modified to help? The idea also serves another purpose. We throw out all the problems and can than either trouble shoot and fix them or throw the idea away because they exist. If we throw it out than it looks like we have one less idea, or theory to work with. So now the field is lowered. No matter how many idea that come about the act of producing a body, a real body is hard to ignore. They say dead men tell no tales. That's only true when we fail to listen to what they are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts