Carnivore Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 There's been a couple interview/podcasts I've listened to that people have linked here on the forums where the person who shot one said that another Bigfoot picked up the body and took it away. If true, that would account for at least some of cases where one is killed but not recovered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 ^^^Yet another behavior that's been encountered in enough known species that to say it's Just An Excuse here may reveal how little one has read up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 The part thats got me confused is why the guns never have an effect. Weird.. Bf cant be killed? Fred beck from ape canyon said his buddy shot one in the head ,i believe twice,and it just kept running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I think somebody could always be mistaken about what his shot did. This Manitoba guy, one shot. If I had to put money on his veracity I would: http://bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=9552 http://www.sasquatchillustrationproject.moonfruit.com/#/manitoba-01/4533189920 Whoops. Forgot on which thread I posted the links (earlier today). No matter. This is one story on which everyone, regardless what they think on this topic, should be much better informed than most are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yeah i read that . Lucky shot if true . Dont see why he'd make it up though , but still.. A ton of reports say no effect.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I've read several reports of a hunter killing a bigfoot, but the bodies never seem to make it to science for proof? Are the hunters afraid of prosecution? Are bigfoots hiding so well, that very few are shot and killed each hunting season. Can you find a report of bigfoot that was shot and killed? A) The Justin Smeja story is a perfect example, of a traditional hunter, a monster in the woods, and freaking out once they get to the body. And I hear Darrell many of these stories are suspect. And this scenario being told over and over again could just be serving as a excuse of no physical evidence.B ) it's not beyond the realm of possibility, but I feel the positives outweigh the negatives. C) I think they are rare and elusive.......yes. Then odds come in, they have to be seen, they have to be seen by someone with a gun, they have to be then shot at, the shot has to be a good hit, the caliber needs to be large enough, the person needs to know how to track, so forth and so on....... D) all day every day and for centuries ...... Edited February 3, 2014 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WV FOOTER Posted February 3, 2014 Admin Share Posted February 3, 2014 The most convincing report I am aware of is the Manitoba hunter in 1941: http://bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=9552 http://www.sasquatchillustrationproject.moonfruit.com/#/manitoba-01/4533189920 I find this story - and the reasons he didn't just lop off a hand or something and bring it in - totally convincing, one of the very few reports, if any, that rival the Patterson-Gimlin film in power. There is simply no rational reason for this guy to be deluded or faking. Presuming that is credulity cubed. That was the first report that came to mind DWA. It is a pretty powerful story. Then there are the Highly questionable stories like Smeja. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Knowing that bigfoot exists, I personally believe that someone must have shot a sasquatch in the hundreds of years since the invention of firearms. It is just probable, especially considering the multitude of reports. I do not deny that many of such reports may be hoaxes, but I cannot accept that all of them are hoaxes. In my personal opinion, the more outlandish claims become, the higher the likelihood of them being hoaxes. But I still think that a percentage are definitely legitimate. So for instance, your standard Class A sighting report is not very outlandish. Usually the witness sees something, and one or both of them go the other way. I think that a significant percentage of such claims are legitimate, or are not hoaxes. Then a very small percentage of Class A reports will be misidentifications. Class B reports will contain a higher percentage of misidentifications than Class A reports as well. But then you have Class A reports like the Ostman encounter. Out of all similar reports, the percentage of hoaxes is probably going to be around 50% higher, just as a guess. But I don't think all are hoaxes. So I think there are some authentic claims regarding sasquatch being shot. Let's think of the sheer logistics of attempting to do something with a sasquatch body. A person is not going to be able to simply pick it up and carry it. And it is important to realize that most people in such a situation are likely to be feeling a variety of emotions. They may not be thinking clearly after they realize what they've done. A person can pull the trigger in an instant, without thinking as much as they probably should have, simply because they are viewing the animal they are shooting as just that...an animal. I think that once they really ponder the human-like characteristics of the carcass as it lays at their feet, they might feel enough remorse, as well as fear of potential prosecution, to want to keep it to themselves. I mean think about it like this...Someone shoots and kills a sasquatch, and stands looking at the body. They realize that they just shot an animal that is not supposed to exist. They could either conclude that they are going to be broadsided by public backlash if they tell what they've done, or that they will have the hassle of dealing with the police, etc. Some people might think that they should report it at the very least, and not worry about taking samples or gathering proof, since they've got the body right there. And they could call it in, but there is also no guarantee that the police would take such a thing seriously. A game warden might, just because they would want to ensure that some animal wasn't killed out of season or without tags or something, maybe like a bear. I am just brainstorming here by the way. Just trying to figure out what a person in such a position could be thinking and feeling. But I do think it is likely that someone, out of all the cases that are probably authentic, would have gathered some type of proof. BUT, even if this has occurred in the past, there is no guarantee that such information will ever find its way to the public, or on the internet. I know for a fact that there is evidence in private hands that is better than anything that has been released to the public, and if I have had an experience with someone holding such evidence, and I rarely beat the pavement researching, then others have likely ran into similar occurrences in the past. Some people apparently find it difficult to believe that extraordinary evidence would not be released, but I think it is more common than even those in the know realize. There just isn't any incentive to releasing such evidence, and that even goes for shooting a sasquatch. When all is said and done, why would a person potentially risk prosecution? What is in it for them? It is a huge unknown since it's never happened before, that most of us know of anyway. It should also be noted that there are probably many more hunters who have had a bigfoot in their sights and did not pull the trigger, than those who actually did. And I'm sure sasquatch have been wounded in the past as well. Which brings me to another point...A hunter shoots a sasquatch, but who's to say the animal actually goes down? I've seen deer run a long way after being shot, and I've seen them crawl into some of the most awfully hard to access places as well. And sasquatch are larger, and depending on where the animal is hit, it might take a larger caliber rifle. I mean one could bring down a sasquatch with a deer rifle of common calibers. For instance, a .30-06, a .300, or a .338. Those are all pretty large rounds. I'm sure one could even bear hunt with those rounds, although I know absolutely nothing about bear hunting. My point is that not all hunters are going to have calibers large enough, and are not going to shoot well enough, to bring down a sasquatch. So there have likely been wounded sasquatch over the years. But let's focus strictly on those who claim to have shot a sasquatch. In some of the reports the events allegedly took place many years before, maybe even decades. People didn't know as much about sasquatch back then as we do today. Or at least the information wasn't readily accessible to everyone like it is today, although some people knew a lot about the animals. And I think that, given the popularity of bigfoot today, someone who had an encounter back in the day may be more apt to report it nowadays than they were back then. But for someone to claim to have recently shot a bigfoot, and they don't have any evidence, I think they probably are lying. Why? Because there is a difference between letting years pass and then deciding to tell your story. I wouldn't expect someone to have evidence that they've kept all those years, since they weren't planning on going public with their encounter. But someone who recently shoots a bigfoot, and has already decided to go public, obviously they would have been more inclined to gather some type of proof. Plus, the availability of cameras in todays world means that there is not as much of an excuse for not gathering evidence. But like I said, it does depend somewhat on whether the person is planning on telling anyone at all. If it is something they want to forget about, they might not want to keep any evidence, because they only decided to tell their story years later. There is a whole host of possibilities regarding this type of event, and to be honest I've only hit on a small percentage of them. I am not sure that I have a definitive belief regarding this topic, rather I just have some ideas that may or may not be correct. In truth though, since each case is going to be different, these various ideas have likely come into play at one time or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Hello JiggyPotamus, Your "30.06" comment reminded me of this account in John Green's database Oct. 19, 1959 "Walter Stork (or possibly Peck ?) and Wayne Johnson went to place where Walter had seen a strange animal three days before. They saw it down the hill from a ridge they were on, but it also saw them and started up towards them. They fled but it appeared on the ridge behind them with incredible speed, then chased them, arms spread in a herding motion, apparently not attempting to catch up. They both fired at it, and Wayne stopped running several times to fire again with his 30.06. Twice it slumped until its knuckles hit the ground but got up and kept coming. At some point the creature screamed. The boys kept running, until they looked back and it was no longer there. A week later Bob Titmus interviewed them and went to the site, where he found clear footprints coming up the hillside, 5 toes, 8 inches wide, but only 11.5 inches long, with 5-inch-wide heels. Most of the tracks were an inch deep, but where there was a wet area on the side of the hill they sank 14 inches. "Bob could sink a heel print only two or three inches there by jumping downhill, and in other places he left no prints at all. Casts made. Down in the valley he found a bed of crushed vegetation 12 feet across at the site with a very strong smell. Site referred to on file card as Porter Hill." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted February 4, 2014 Author Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yeah i read that . Lucky shot if true . Dont see why he'd make it up though , but still.. A ton of reports say no effect.. This is what puzzles me. BF gets shot with hunting rifles several times but keeps running off when an elk or bear goes down. However a big black bear is 300 pounds when male BFs might average 500 pounds but these guys should go down. This is a mystery. Do most hunters shoot, freak, and run off never looking for the body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 ^^^There is more than one story implying "I didn't stick around to see what effect my shot had." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skookum Chuck Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Hi Jiggy. Great post. I watched a sasquatch through a rifle scope for 7-8 minutes as it came to within 100 yards. Didn't shoot because this giant hairy thing had hands and wasn't the Elk I held a tag for. I couldn't believe that some Giant Suicidal Dumbass would wear a brown, fur-covered suit to walk through a public hunting area on opening day of gun/Elk season. Now, this happened in the days before hunter orange was required but I never saw anyone else hunting that area that didn't have at least an orange hat or plaid shirt. Up until about 2006, I never reported this to anyone but my dad, who laughed at me at the time but I have never forgotten it. I was lucky, this happened at mid-morning, on a bright sunny day. It didn't see me at first and I had a loaded 7mm Magnum in my hands. I got a real good look at it for an extended period and I can tell you one thing........I don't ever want to come face to face with that in a dark forest anywhere! I still hunt and fish the same places....just always bring my friends: Remington, Browning, Smith and Wesson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 A tough subject to discuss with those not versed in hunting or firearms simply from a comprehension standpoint. One thing my hunting lifestyle & career has taught me is that every living & breathing animal can be killed if hit in the vitals with a weapon of sufficient power to reach and damage them. Whether the target is so damaged it goes down immediately or runs 200 yards, a hit through the heart/lungs (any deer or elk hunter here can tell you this from experience) is lethal. On the other hand, pull your shot and hit a deer/elk in the paunch or make a fringe muscle hit, you may never recover it. Many of these reports are clearly chance encounters when a hunter is not armed for an animal like a BF. Almost all are panicked defensive fire (fire & run) when unexpectedly confronted with a monstrous creature. IIn a case like this, it is reasonable that the hunter would defend himself with what he is carrying, even knowing there is a howl in hell he will kill the thing with his 22 or load of birdshot. There are also many reports like Skookum Chuck's where a hunter, armed sufficiently for large game, comes across one of these things and never having a thought of running into one or what to do if it happens, observes rather than fires as he feels (and most likely is right) that he has the upper hand if the animal gets aggressive. Skookum Chuck sounds like an experienced elk hunter. Had he chosen to fire and presuming accurate shot placement, I have absolutely no doubt that at 100 yards with a 7MM Magnum, he would have killed that booger. One has to see the wound channel & penetration a 7MM Magnum produces to comprehend it. He has all my respect for keeping his head in this situation and I think there is a booger out there that had best thank his lucky stars as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skookum Chuck Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Thanks NDT. If experienced means successful...yes, I've killed a few but mostly I have earned my bad knees from traipsing through some of the most rugged, awful and beautiful country in the west. Yes I agree all animals are different. I've shot elk at 200 yards that crumpled where they stood because I hit vitals....I've also shot one elk at 60 yards that took out both shoulders and heart and he went 250 yards before he crumpled. Both times I found my bullet just inside the hide of the opposite shoulder and a hellacious wound channel as you describe. I watched the sasquatch from about 2000 yards out (just recently found out how cool Google Earth is!) to about 100 yards. I don't know about keeping my head, what really freaked me out was I could make out huge, empty hands at 500 yards. The arms were too long for a man and the walk was weird.....wasn't a man's walk either. As it got closer I saw light brown and dark brown hair all over it and now I'm almost panic mode. It probably would have come closer but I couldn't take it anymore so I stood up and put crosshairs on it's sternum at 100 yards. It saw me immediately and recoiled like it was startled and made a 90 degree( OH SH*$!) turn and went straight up the canyon wall and over the ridge at the top. Weird thing was....that it was never really running up the side of the canyon but he was hauling ass! Didn't raise his hands (which were as big as dinner plates, BTW) and say " Hey Don't shoot me, I'm a guy! Just stopped and looked at me then boogied. In most public hunting areas, the only time that high caliber weapons are allowed are the 2-3 weeks of elk and deer rifle season. I would bet my last dollar this same scenario has happened many times. Many people who don't hunt think that hunters kill everything they see, when exactly the opposite is true. Legal hunters only kill what they hold permits to kill. Fear of shooting some giant suicidal dumbass in a fur suit will hold the majority of legal, ethical hunters from pulling the trigger on a big hairy thing not listed in the rules pamphlet. That is why I believe more haven't been shot and brought in. BTW --Just occurred to me...what a great name for a band----Giant Suicidal Dumbass 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 ^^^Plussed for Maybe The Most Important Thing The Average American Doesn't Know About Hunters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts