Olympic Np Chief Ranger Admits Bf Is In Park

[WSA]

A tail? Hmmm....

[Guest DWA]

I thought it said the witness didn't notice a tail.  It's a bit fine-printy for me and goes blooey when I zoom it, but I think that's it.

 

Or else ....well, people see what they see...

Terry:  Bigfoot sighting reports on the internet come from just about every kind of person you can imagine...including very well-respected rangers and scientists.  And very very rural people.

 

If this is all a sham it is the Great American Novel...because the voice of a continent wrote it.

Edited July 26, 2014 by DWA

[dmaker]

They said they thought they saw a tail.

Sounds like a credible report....lol

[Guest thermalman]

Is this the same Olympic National Park that produced the cow (bigfoot) thermal image?

[Guest]

What it boiled down to was, he could not produce a law for game cameras, so he ticketed me for abandonment...for leaving cams in the park.  He said if you leave something in the park for over 48 hours, it's considered abandonment.  I was not amused.  He then suggested that I could apply for a permit to hang cams in the park.  He then produced my cameras and informed me that they had erased some of the pictures on my card disks.  He said he erased the pics of him recovering the cameras.

 

According to national NPS regulations, you did not abandon your cameras:  http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=36248641c2aad3bb0f209de4e9b7f659&node=36:1.0.1.1.2.0.1.18&rgn=div8.  The NPS has the authority to impound property left unintended for more than 24 hours, but it is only considered abandoned if you do not claim it within 60 days.  They can bill you for reasonable costs of picking up and storing the impounded property, but $120 seems excessive for two small cameras.

 

I suspect it was unlawful to delete photos.

 

As to a permit, one is needed for commercial photography, but not for recreational photography.  A permit may be needed to do research of any kind.  One is certainly needed to leave property unattended for more than 24 hours.

 

Did you get a reason for the denial of your permit?  I suspect a rationale is required and could be compelled by a court.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Pteronarcyd

[Matt Pruitt]

If it was in a designated wilderness area within the park, different rules would apply.

[Guest]

^ Which rules are those?  All rules for ONP are here: http://www.nps.gov/olym/parkmgmt/lawsandpolicies.htm.

 

The only park-specific rule that might apply is a parkwide ban on equipment for night viewing of wildlife.  Because of the passive nature of a game camera, I'm not sure the ban applies.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Pteronarcyd

[norseman]

Is this the same Olympic National Park that produced the cow (bigfoot) thermal image?

image.jpg

 

When has the Park Service allowed cattle grazing inside of park boundaries? I understand this is a barb.........but a poor one.

[Guest]

Is t-man referring to the mutant cow with binocular vision?: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7Chrt2nsekE/UvLBAQ9YAvI/AAAAAAAAA6k/etjTkyXtJbY/s1600/Thermal-Bigfoot-Face.jpg.

[Matt Pruitt]

Wilderness areas have much stricter and varied rules. I am posting from my phone, so later when I have more time, I'll try to find a more specific rule set for that park and its wilderness areas. Here's a brief overview: http://wilderness.nps.gov/faqnew.cfm

[BobbyO]

Interested in that Matt, hope you have the time to write and thanks in advance for your reply already.

[Guest]

Wilderness areas have much stricter and varied rules. I am posting from my phone, so later when I have more time, I'll try to find a more specific rule set for that park and its wilderness areas. Here's a brief overview: http://wilderness.nps.gov/faqnew.cfm

 

I cited the page with links to all general and park-specific rules for ONP.  The general rules do not address wilderness.  The park-specific rules do, but there is no explicit prohibition of game cameras, unless they are regarded as devices for low-light viewing of wildlife, or unless bigfoot research is regarded as a commercial endeavor.

[hiflier]

Hello Pteronarcyd,

 

So as long as the game cams are only used for daytime pics/vids for research in proving to science the creature exists then it would be OK? That wouldn't, or at least shouldn't, be considered a commercial enterprise. Looks like a green light to me.

Edited July 29, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest]

I just read the rules; I don't enforce them.  From abundant experience I know the vast majority of bureaucrats don't know the rules they enforce.  Many of them make up rules as they go.  The ranger who jerked derekfoot around is a good example -- he claimed game cams are not allowed, and after failing to find a specific prohibition, wrongly accused and fined derekfoot for abandoning his cameras, which -- according to the national rules -- clearly did not happen.  If you take the time to read the rules, regulations, laws, or whatever is relevant, you will likely have a big edge on any bureaucrat who tries to mess with you -- assuming you are abiding by the rules.

 

The national rules do not allow one to leave property unattended for more than 24 hours, and any unattended property is subject to impoundment.  This rule is certainly an impediment to game cam use.  A permit would be needed to waive the 24-hour limit.

 

The ban on night viewing equipment seems odd.  If used for poaching or harassing wildlife that would be a problem, but poaching and harassing wildlife in any way is prohibited.  Watching wildlife at dusk or dawn, or watching nocturnal wildlife at night, seems to be a valid recreational activity appropriate for a NP.  I was stunned to think anyone camping in the park who happens to have a night vision monocular in possession is violating a federal law.

 

I've done a lot of work in NFs, and you always need a permit, but my work was a commercial endeavor and involved taking samples.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Pteronarcyd

[hiflier]

Hello Pteronarcyd,

 

You bring up some really good points. And even though rules are rules I guess sometimes it comes down to interpretation and whether or not the Ranger got up on the wrong side of the moss that day. I almost think "Finding Bigfoot" has bolstered the attitude of some Rangers a bit. Makes me wonder about the point of the show beyond the money. More folks in the woods harrassing wildlife by whooping and tree knocking makes for a good case to crack down on the legitimate researcher.

 

First the BFRO database is a piece of useless junk in which one only gets to read one report at a time out of the thousands and now the TV joke. I have to wonder about the whole point of the organization generally.