Guest Cervelo Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) Guys just becuase it's the govt. doesn't mean they've all lost their sense of humor.... Dang some of us need to find some other interests LOL For most it could say unicorn as well as Sas it's just us that take something like this way to serious....yes yes let the investigation begin!! That's one crappy conspiracy...well it is the Feds, but I'm kinda think'in "heh heh what took'em so long"! Edited December 24, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 It's a legit document and is on the fws server. The question is, is this an inside joke or was this FWS seriously considering the possiblility that they might find Sasquatch tracks as part of their Fisher/Martin study? There are a number of emails listed for project participants and they are legit fws addresses. Why doesn't someone just email them and ask? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 Sasquatch 0 0 0 0 Score seems about right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 What it looks like is a poster that was presented at a conference. It was probably put there for laughs and to see if anyone would catch it. It's pretty funny actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 T, I love it, hilarious for sure! But what will be even more interesting/humerous/sad is to watch the spin cycle begin...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 Three things jump out at me when I read the pdf document: 1. The total number of sasquatch sign observed is zero (0). 2. Equipment and Logistical Support - included the Hoopa Valley Tribal Forestry. 3. Going back to the root of the web site address to http://www.fws.gov/yreka/ and that looks like a government web site, so if they are hosting the pdf, then it is logical to state that it is likely an official government document. It is unlikely to not be a government document that is hosted on their web site, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 April 1st is still a ways away... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) Three things jump out at me when I read the pdf document: 1. The total number of sasquatch sign observed is zero (0). 2. Equipment and Logistical Support - included the Hoopa Valley Tribal Forestry. 3. Going back to the root of the web site address to http://www.fws.gov/yreka/ and that looks like a government web site, so if they are hosting the pdf, then it is logical to state that it is likely an official government document. It is unlikely to not be a government document that is hosted on their web site, correct? It's absolutely a government document. However it looks like a poster presenting the results of this study at a conference. The study was a partnership between USFW, USFS, and several private groups. I present papers regularly at conferences as well as an NPS employee and I'll often throw in some humor though where i can to keep it fun. So that's the most likely explanation, imo---just a joke. And probably a joke that many of those contributors will regret when they come back from the holidays to find their inboxes full of emails from BF proponents accusing them of a cover-up. Seriously, why would you include something like this on a poster with no explanation, no positive results for BF, unless it's just a gag. Edited December 24, 2012 by Theagenes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) I could imagine it eliciting cheap laughs, but and a knowing nod amongst those who know. wink wink nudge nudge say no more . Edited December 24, 2012 by poignant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 That's certainly a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacemonkeymafia Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 I know an instance of a researcher down here that was told by a game warden to leave his campsite. He was there legally, no permits required. He was in an established campsite. He didn't have a tent but was sleeping in his SUV. Before turning in he put cameras in the vehicle facing out. He was hoping to record a curious bigfoot coming up to the vehicle at night. At daybreak while he was still asleep a warden knocked on his window to wake him up. He was questioned why he was there and more importantly why the cameras. Here's the fun part- he was straight up honest and told the GW he was a bigfoot researcher. That didn't amuse the GW and he was told to pack up and go home. He was told not to "research" in the future. I believe this person and I believe the various wildlife services do know they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 wonder what the penalty would be if this document turns out to be an inside joke /prank by somebody in the USFS ,fish & game etc. what would be the consequences for faking an official document?......especially if the BF crowd goes after it all OCD like many tend to do. but hey,whats the big deal right? just 50,000 or so BF themed emails shutting down their server, lol.....talk about opening up a can of worms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) It seems like a joke to me, but if you recall a few years ago there was a report on the old BFF forums about photos supposedly taken by a US Government research project on some sort of weasel like creature. The story was that the cameras had been set LOW to the ground to catch the weasel/martin/fishers on a game trails, but instead had captured several images of Sasquatch passing through. As I recall, the camera traps were spread out over a fairly long distance-several miles?- and the caught the BF at several points along the trail. I guess the cameras pointed up sometimes and they weren't noticed by the BF. My memory is that the survey took place in California. It came up as a topic because someone claiming to have knowledge of it (as a govt employee) had discussed it on some sort of internal Forest Service Forum, and the comments were read and passed along. Supposedly the site was then taken down or blocked something to that effect. I don't recall the details. Just FYI. GK Edited December 24, 2012 by gerrykleier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Primate Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 I saw this document about a year ago when I hit upon the "super-stealth " hacker idea of going to their website and using their search engine to look at the "bigfoot" and then the "sasquatch" related information . There is alot of interesting stuff there and I suggest everyone take a look and consider what they may and may not be telling us . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 I was thinking about this, how many of you have stories or comfirmation from someone in the US Government Agencies that have given you confirmation? http://www.fws.gov/y...Yaeger_etal.pdf KB I posted this link on FB a couple days ago and assume that kbhunter saw it there? Just wondering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts