Viewpoint, Or Not?

[Guest LarryP]

I've seen photos of Norseman's ordinance and read his plan of action. If BF does exist, one is indeed in trouble if Norse finds it.

 

Or vice-versa.

[WSA]

This discussion is probably better conducted on the NAWAC thread so that Bipto can weigh in, but really, he has fairly and frankly addressed many of the points made here, many, many times. I understand these are only your opinions Yuchi1, and in truth you probably have some basis for those, but....my impression of the NAWAC folks there in the field is that they are far from cowboys and take safety very seriously. I've never gotten the impression the shooter had any doubt of what he was targeting as it was plainly visible at close range. Admittedly though, you or I could never know and all we can do is take their word on that, or not. As well, any shotgun "sprays" slugs. It is what they are for, as you know.  I don't claim to be an expert on OK gun laws, but I can't imagine any state (especially not OK) prohibits the carrying or even the discharge of a shotgun on private property, outside of any season and absent targeting any game animal. 

 

Again, taking Bipto at his word, a chain of custody for the blood sample was documented, along with control DNA samples from everyone who had contact with it.

 

I don't say this applies to your point of view, but my reading of many of the commenters who were critical of the NAWAC's handling of the Echo Incident are drven by the presumptive agendai that Wood Apes don't exist at all (so how could shooting at one ever be a  safe practice?), or are firmly anti-kill (so any argument to deter that is valid).

[Yuchi1]

This discussion is probably better conducted on the NAWAC thread so that Bipto can weigh in, but really, he has fairly and frankly addressed many of the points made here, many, many times. I understand these are only your opinions Yuchi1, and in truth you probably have some basis for those, but....my impression of the NAWAC folks there in the field is that they are far from cowboys and take safety very seriously. I've never gotten the impression the shooter had any doubt of what he was targeting as it was plainly visible at close range. Admittedly though, you or I could never know and all we can do is take their word on that, or not. As well, any shotgun "sprays" slugs. It is what they are for, as you know.  I don't claim to be an expert on OK gun laws, but I can't imagine any state (especially not OK) prohibits the carrying or even the discharge of a shotgun on private property, outside of any season and absent targeting any game animal. 

 

Again, taking Bipto at his word, a chain of custody for the blood sample was documented, along with control DNA samples from everyone who had contact with it.

 

I don't say this applies to your point of view, but my reading of many of the commenters who were critical of the NAWAC's handling of the Echo Incident are drven by the presumptive agendai that Wood Apes don't exist at all (so how could shooting at one ever be a  safe practice?), or are firmly anti-kill (so any argument to deter that is valid).

 

_WSA,

 

_{The following excerpt from the NAWAC report: ..."Using his Remington 1100 Tac-4 12 gauge auto-loading shotgun, loaded with 000 buckshot followed by slugs, he attempted to collect the animal for scientific analysis, firing all the rounds in rapid succession"...  is where the buckshot verbiage came from.}

 

_{Buckshot was illegal at that point in time for possession in field for any hunting purpose. It has since been OK'd for feral hog hunting. Shotgun slugs are single projectiles designed to be precisely fired much like a centerfire rifle cartridge. Sabot slugs in particular are capable of 4" groups out to 200 yards, so they really aren't a "spray" type of ordnance in any instance.}

 

_{Will go find this thread you speak of.}

 

_Thanx

Edited May 7, 2014 by Yuchi1

[norseman]

I resent the cowboy slam........two cowboys got us the PGF!

And a couple more things........show me in the Oklahoma fish and game regs, where it says it's illegal to shoot a Bigfoot with buckshot? Be careful with that, technically wood knocking is wildlife harrasment per us fish and game regs, so would be call blasting.......as I learned one year when I took my elk bugle to Yellowstone.

I think you simply have an axe to grind with the NAWAC, and your over trumping your assertions with fanciful propaganda.

Are we to believe that a man with a black hoodie absorbed multiple hits from a 12 gauge?

[Guest]

This discussion is probably better conducted on the NAWAC thread so that Bipto can weigh in...

 

Yes.

 

...but really, he has fairly and frankly addressed many of the points made here, many, many times.

 

Many, many times indeed.

 

...my impression of the NAWAC folks there in the field is that they are far from cowboys and take safety very seriously.

 

I like to think so.

 

I've never gotten the impression the shooter had any doubt of what he was targeting as it was plainly visible at close range.

 

There was no doubt, as our statement on the matter made clear.

 

...a chain of custody for the blood sample was documented, along with control DNA samples from everyone who had contact with it.

 

Absolutely. DNA swabs from every person who handled the samples or who were near the samples was collected. The remaining samples have been prepared and stored by an expert in DNA collection and analysis techniques. There was no "contamination" or mishandling. The blood, as we have already said, was found about a week after the Echo Incident and had been in the sun and had degraded. The failure to extract any useful information from it is based on that degradation.

 

...my reading of many of the commenters who were critical of the NAWAC's handling of the Echo Incident are drven by the presumptive agendai that Wood Apes don't exist at all (so how could shooting at one ever be a  safe practice?), or are firmly anti-kill (so any argument to deter that is valid).

 

Agreed.

Our statement on the matter is 100% true and accurate and was released in an attempt to set the facts of the incident straight. At the time, there was a great deal of misinformation being disseminated by people who were not present and had no way of knowing what happened. Whether or not anyone wishes to accept the veracity of our statement is up to them. The incident went down exactly as we said it did. Any other version of the events is based on rumor, speculation, or an intent to mislead.

[Yuchi1]

I resent the cowboy slam........two cowboys got us the PGF!

And a couple more things........show me in the Oklahoma fish and game regs, where it says it's illegal to shoot a Bigfoot with buckshot? Be careful with that, technically wood knocking is wildlife harrasment per us fish and game regs, so would be call blasting.......as I learned one year when I took my elk bugle to Yellowstone.

I think you simply have an axe to grind with the NAWAC, and your over trumping your assertions with fanciful propaganda.

Are we to believe that a man with a black hoodie absorbed multiple hits from a 12 gauge?

 

The ODWC regs do not address hunting UHS/BF entities. However, at the time of the shooting the possession of buckshot while in the field "hunting" was illegal.

 

I have no axe to grind however, your reactionary responses are somewhat telling.

 

Now, we're talking about a human in a black hoodie?

 

Really?

 

The shooter (per the report) has absolutely no forensic evidence of what he fired upon so speculation and conjecture are the OOD on this event.

 

Pro-Kill/No-Kill is a personal choice and I respect each individuals' path they choose.  My issue with this event was how public safety concerns apparently went out the window with the resulting FUBAR.  IMO, speaks volumes about competency.

 

Edited May 8, 2014 by Yuchi1

[norseman]

Look, it's not illegal to hunt unicorns with silver tip bullets either........drop the fake "concern".

[Yuchi1]

Look, it's not illegal to hunt unicorns with silver tip bullets either........drop the fake "concern".

 

It is illegal to discharge a firearm w/o knowing your target. Once LE puts the silver bracelets on your butt, you'll find out that "reckless endangerment with a firearm" is a felony.

[Guest keninsc]

It is illegal to discharge a firearm w/o knowing your target. Once LE puts the silver bracelets on your butt, you'll find out that "reckless endangerment with a firearm" is a felony.

 

 

Oh BS! You obviously have no clue what you're talking about but can't stop for fear that someone will see you have no clue. Sorry but you'ere busted. "Silver bracelets"? Really? A clue you have not, but funny you are to read.

[Guest]

 

 

When Colyer rounded a bend in the road and entered a clearing in front of the West Cabin, he witnessed a large, brown, upright, hair-covered figure walking in front of him at a distance of roughly 25-30 yards. Colyer noted it had long hair on its shoulders and the back of its head, which was distinctly conical in shape. He saw it from the left side and slightly to the back; its front was not visible to him at any point. Upon later comparison with a 6'3" tall NAWAC member, the creature was estimated to have been both more massive and somewhat taller. 

 

He knew exactly what he was shooting at. 

[Guest]

The difference was the incidents were unrelated (timewise) and bullets were being sprayed all over the place by the operation's participants, many more than reported by the organization and that a competitor/rival organization was also in the area conducting similar operations, hence the apparent sense of urgency (to produce a body) by all concerned.

 

This, by the way, is total poppycock. 100% unmitigated natural and organic fertilizer. 

[Yuchi1]

He knew exactly what he was shooting at. 

 

OK...so, he's just a **** poor shot or got a case of "Ape Fever"?

[norseman]

It is illegal to discharge a firearm w/o knowing your target. Once LE puts the silver bracelets on your butt, you'll find out that "reckless endangerment with a firearm" is a felony.

You sir have no idea what your talking about........

But I will say that LE frowns upon a hunter shooting a human being. What evidence do you have to support that?

OK...so, he's just a **** poor shot or got a case of "Ape Fever"?

A shotgun lacks rifling which makes them inherently inaccurate.

On top of that lead shotgun slugs and buckshot are very soft making them less than ideal for large dangerous game.

I run hard cast bullets in my 45-70 for maximum penetration. The bullet does not deform like soft lead when it hits bone.

[Guest]

OK...so, he's just a **** poor shot or got a case of "Ape Fever"?

 

He took the gun he thought he'd need and he was wrong. Clearly not a bad shot in that we believe he did hit it based on the blood find and other evidence, but not enough to knock it down. 

[Yuchi1]

You sir have no idea what your talking about........

But I will say that LE frowns upon a hunter shooting a human being. What evidence do you have to support that?

A shotgun lacks rifling which makes them inherently inaccurate.

On top of that lead shotgun slugs and buckshot are very soft making them less than ideal for large dangerous game.

I run hard cast bullets in my 45-70 for maximum penetration. The bullet does not deform like soft lead when it hits bone.

 

Search Title 21 of the Oklahoma Criminal Statutes.

 

What evidence does NAWAC have to support the target wasn't homo sapien?

 

As his shotgun may have had the RemChoke system in it, did he have a rifled tube in it?

 

Foster style slugs (designed for smooth bore shotguns) are capable of 2" groups at 50 yards (as you should know) and with the range (~30 yards) he fired upon the "whatever", should have hit the target with a high degree of accuracy. This is the basis for the lack of marksmanship comment earlier.

 

If shotgun ammo is (in your opinion) not appropriate for "dangerous game" (so, is UHS/BF a now game animal?) then why was he carrying a shotgun in the first place?

 

Your implications appear to paint Mr. Colyer in a less than flattering light.

He took the gun he thought he'd need and he was wrong. Clearly not a bad shot in that we believe he did hit it based on the blood find and other evidence, but not enough to knock it down. 

 

So, a teaching moment that left "something" wounded to possibly go off and die a painful death.

 

Back in my pro-kill days (2002) on a night hunt, one of the original 4 guys that went to Talihina (Humphrey's) earlier that year had an encounter with the big one (9-10' est. ht.) at a distance of ~30 yards.  On the way home, early that AM, JW commented "I won't be coming back" and when asked why, stated "we don't have enough gun".

 

That's why (prior to evolving to the state of no-kill) I had considered purchase of a Barrett .50 caliber for use in long(er) range and heavier ordnance applications.

 

Bottom line, your group is engaged in an activity wherein the risk of something going wrong is markedly higher than any legal hunting situation. As far as I know, there is no liability insurance policy available for such endeavours.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Yuchi1