Guest Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 (edited) Posted today to our website: In 1958, construction worker Jerry Crew discovered some large footprints in the dry, dusty Northern California soil and a legend was born. Crew’s find was eventually related to the world via the Humboldt Times along with the name he and the rest of his work team had given to the maker of those tracks: Bigfoot.In the years that have followed, the name of this one individual (whoever or whatever it was) has come to stand for the entire phenomenon of large, hairy bipedal figures seen by people all over North America and the world, even though, in the minds of many, "Bigfoot" remains a solitary, presumably magical creature along the lines of the Tooth Fairy or Jack Frost. Eventually, the term "Bigfoot" was appropriated by the media as a proxy for the humorously improbable interests of simpletons and not the concern of serious, practical people. Our organization's mission is to help establish and conserve "Bigfoot" — through a partnership with governmental, academic, and scientific interests — as what we believe it is: an extant population of higher primates living in the forests and wild places of North America. In the course of our work we have found that using the popular vernacular often raises barriers when attempting to engage those outside our specific field of interest. "Bigfoot" is not something serious people, they feel, apply effort towards. It's a phenomenon that belongs to tabloids, late-night comedians and scoffing network news anchors. In response, we have adopted the term "wood ape" as a name for the animal because that's what all our observations and experiences tell us it is. Neither a joke nor a myth, but a living, breathing primate species deserving of protection and study. Jerry Crew's discovery may have created the legend, but the animal behind it has existed on this continent from a time far earlier than 1958. How much longer it’s allowed to survive and thrive alongside man is very likely dependent on establishing it as real. Whatever helps us do that must be done, up to and including unmooring ourselves from a legendary, often ridiculed, name. To that end, after long consideration by and following a unanimous vote of this organization's Board of Directors, we are pleased to announce that from this point forward, the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC) shall be known as the North American Wood Ape Conservancy (NAWAC). While we recognize changing how language is used is a long and perhaps quixotic endeavor, we feel that the needs of this amazing species are poorly served by the silly patina that has accreted over the term "Bigfoot." Hopefully, our efforts or the efforts of others will make the North American wood ape a serious topic. We believe changing the very words we use while getting there is an important part of that process. Edited March 16, 2013 by bipto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 (edited) we are pleased to announce that from this point forward, the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC) shall be known as the North American Wood Ape Conservancy (NAWAC). While we recognize changing how language is used is a long and perhaps quixotic endeavor, we feel that the needs of this amazing species are poorly served by the silly patina that has accreted over the term "Bigfoot." Amazing they think a name change from Bigfoot in their group's (pro-kill?) name to "Wood Ape" is serving this "amazing species" better! Good Luck. Edited March 16, 2013 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SquatchinNY Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 Thank you for posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 Amazing they think a name change from Bigfoot in their group's (pro-kill?) name to "Wood Ape" is serving this "amazing species" better Since collection of voucher specimine is standard practice in the scientific community when identifying a new species, we prefer the term "pro-science" as should anyone interested in the welfare of this animal. However, this announcement really has nothing to do with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 "In response, we have adopted the term "wood ape" as a name for the animal because that's what all our observations and experiences tell us it is. Neither a joke nor a myth, but a living, breathing primate species deserving of protection and study." You have chosen this category because through your observations and experience that the behavior and/or physiology is that of an ape. Would you mind explaining the difference between Ape behavior/physiology and non-ape primate behavior/physiology? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 I have extensively in the Operation Persistence thread but am willing to do so again once the conference is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 Cool. Though the Texas Bigfoot merchandise was especially appealing to me, this decision makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I have extensively in the Operation Persistence thread but am willing to do so again once the conference is over. Sorry I have not been following that thread. I have read bits here and there, but it is way too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I wonder if they are using ape and primate synonymously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pruitt Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 ^ ^ ^ All apes are primates, but not all primates are apes. Fun stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silent Sam Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey, even if it has a monkey kind of shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) ^ ^ ^ All apes are primates, but not all primates are apes. Fun stuff. Correct, I think the premise is, a non-ape primate could evolve to look like an ape, or look like a hominid, and be neither, according to OHZoologist's premise of convergent evolution, if I understand it correctly. http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/convergent_evolution.htm Edited March 17, 2013 by LTBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) If it doesn't have a tail it's not a monkey, even if it has a monkey kind of shape. It is not as simple as this. My question was directed to Bipto since this was his and his associate's classification. Edited March 17, 2013 by OHZoologist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 (edited) Sorry I have not been following that thread. I have read bits here and there, but it is way too long. Well...if it's too long for you to read...then it's probably equally "too long" for someone to regurgitate to you. It is not as simple as this. My question was directed to Bipto since this was his and his associate's classification. They simply concocted a name... "Wood Ape"....they didn't establish a new taxonomy. That's why they want to harvest a specimen. Sheesh.. Relax..... Edited March 17, 2013 by slabdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Pruitt Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 They didn't concoct it (nor did they claim to have concocted it). http://www.bfro.net/ref/theories/mjm/whatrtha.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts