Hiding Evidence

[MagniAesir]

I think that I was getting close to hijacking another thread, so I thought I would ask this question

First off I am not an American and have no real knowledge of your version of the Endangered Species Act, that is why I am asking this question

My understanding is that the USA has very strong federal laws for the protection of endangered species and environment critical to there survival.

Now on my time on this forum, I have seen many claims of people having irrefutable proof of Sasquatch living on their property and/or property that they are aware of

In each of these cases, those people make excuses for not sharing the information

So my question is this

If you had evidence of an unknown species residing on your property and did not present that information to the EPA (or whatever the proper agency is), is that not a breach of Federal law?

[Guest]

I don't think so. In fact I would go so far as to say that the Federal Government would screw it up.

 

They can't even get the ObamaCare website up and running in any semblance of a coherent fashion.

 

The EPA is a joke under this Administration.

Edited October 25, 2014 by See-Te-Cah NC
Staff Edit

[MIB]

Nope, we're under no obligation to report an unknown species' existence ... to anyone.

 

MIB

[sheri]

The government doesn't consider it a real creature ? So no it isn't a breach of federal law. It has to be proven real and endangered first, which I don't see happening anytime soon. MIB is right you don't have to say a word.

Edited October 24, 2014 by sheri

[hiflier]

Hello MagniAesir,

I don't think it's the EPA here. BUT I would think a very discreet zoologist would be very interested. I say discreet because the local animal control officer might have some objections regarding child safety were word to get around. At least those would be the grounds they might use to remove the animal(s).

[Doc Holliday]

good luck reporting something that  the powers that be won't accept / recognize / or just cover up  ........whichever you prefer.

[OnlyASize12]

To be eligible for protection, a species must be placed on the list of endangered species by an act of the government.

Since bigfoot doesn't scientifically exist, it is not listed as endangered.

 

Tim

[Guest Crowlogic]

If you had real hard proof the government will accept it.  The proofers stay away out of a lack of this proof.  Remember each and every proofer from the beginning of the word Bigfoot has delivered zero proof.  This is where we stand.  Proof less yet courted by proofers.  I'll say it again we are 100% without rock solid real science proof/confirmation of Bigfoot.  

 

If the Minnesota Ice Man was real (it's not folks) and thawed out  Scientists would be lined up around the block to get in on the research.  This is the only kind of proof that will do.

Edited October 24, 2014 by Crowlogic

[norseman]

I think that I was getting close to hijacking another thread, so I thought I would ask this question

First off I am not an American and have no real knowledge of your version of the Endangered Species Act, that is why I am asking this question

My understanding is that the USA has very strong federal laws for the protection of endangered species and environment critical to there survival.

Now on my time on this forum, I have seen many claims of people having irrefutable proof of Sasquatch living on their property and/or property that they are aware of

In each of these cases, those people make excuses for not sharing the information

So my question is this

If you had evidence of an unknown species residing on your property and did not present that information to the EPA (or whatever the proper agency is), is that not a breach of Federal law?

 

The agency that enforces the Endangered Species Act is the US Fish and Game.

 

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/

 

I went through this whole question already when the question was asked if it was legal to shoot a Bigfoot. It is in fact illegal to kill or harass an endangered species even if it's on your property. Google wolves in Idaho or Montana to see how this has all played out. It's a battle ground.

 

An unknown species is not addressed directly, albeit the government does issue permits to universities to collect specimens and study nests and such. But you have to list the species you are studying on the permit. So this doesn't help the cause of Bigfoot at all.

[Guest]

I think that I was getting close to hijacking another thread, so I thought I would ask this question

First off I am not an American and have no real knowledge of your version of the Endangered Species Act, that is why I am asking this question

My understanding is that the USA has very strong federal laws for the protection of endangered species and environment critical to there survival.

Now on my time on this forum, I have seen many claims of people having irrefutable proof of Sasquatch living on their property and/or property that they are aware of

In each of these cases, those people make excuses for not sharing the information

So my question is this

If you had evidence of an unknown species residing on your property and did not present that information to the EPA (or whatever the proper agency is), is that not a breach of Federal law?

There are people in the US that do have multiple encounters with BF's living very close to their homes, but what incentive do they have to come forward???

1) People will call them nuts and attack them (not physically). They may be shunned in their community.

2) If they try to make money off of it, people will accuse them of lying.

3) Wanna be BF researchers will stake out and trespass on their property.

4) The Govt will stake-out, trespass and tap their phones.

5) If they call the BFRO, they may send some inept researchers and create a circus environment.

 

So again, since there is no moral pay-off to trying to help prove they exist, why bother...?

[bipedalist]

^ what he said.  How to get on the NSA, SS nutjob list in three easy lessons.  Evidence is an eye of the beholder type thing and only a core group of people would believe it even if you bronzed over the DNA and presented it to them on a silver platter.  The closest I've gotten is sound files and we all know how high the regard is for that type of evidence.  I've given up discussing it except within  tight circles as a result. 

 

I believe BF/Sasquatch is doing fine weathering everything we throw at them and is not an endangered species.  

Edited October 25, 2014 by bipedalist

[Guest Crowlogic]

There are people in the US that do have multiple encounters with BF's living very close to their homes, but what incentive do they have to come forward???

1) People will call them nuts and attack them (not physically). They may be shunned in their community.

2) If they try to make money off of it, people will accuse them of lying.

3) Wanna be BF researchers will stake out and trespass on their property.

4) The Govt will stake-out, trespass and tap their phones.

5) If they call the BFRO, they may send some inept researchers and create a circus environment.

 

So again, since there is no moral pay-off to trying to help prove they exist, why bother...?

You call Jeff Meldrum that's what you do.

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

Like others have astutely pointed out, you cannot be held accountable for failing to report an animal whose existence is not taken seriously. If some federal or state prosecution defied all the odds and actually proceeded, there are likely to be numerous arguments that could be used to bolster your case. You could just say that you thought you had lost your mind, considering that what you saw could not possibly have been there. Or you could argue that you knew you weren't losing your mind, therefore you must have been seeing a super-bear. Some argument of that nature anyway. And if the law only pertains to endangered species, there is no way that a prosecution could occur, since an animal must be accepted before it can be considered endangered.

 

Considering that your question is relatively straightforward, meaning that the answer does not leave a lot of room for discussion or debate once it is presented, let's ask ourselves whether there are people who have sasquatch living on or near their property. If there are individuals or families who do fall into this category, I think we can safely assume that for these people to have established as much they must have witnessed the animals on a somewhat regular basis. Otherwise you would not know whether the animals were around constantly, or if they were simply passing through. I would think that most people would report such an incident to a bigfoot research group before they would attempt to contact federal wildlife authorities, but that opinion is debatable. Either way, why would such witnesses not wish to report the sasquatch activity present on their property, knowing that it could lead to a scientific discovery more important than Chuck Norris' discovery of oxygen, or Al Gore's invention of pants?

 

So let's determine whether there are any acceptable explanations for failing to report such a situation. Perhaps a little forethought by the witnesses would alert them to the possibility that this could somehow disrupt their lives. Similar to how people will not take the initiative to change less than favorable situations unless their way of life is directly threatened, they also may not do anything that would directly threaten their way of life. Of course this argument is somewhat absurd considering how much could a person's life really be affected by reporting such information, even if there were all these people showing up at your house? It would be annoying I'm sure, but it would not directly threaten your way of life. Perhaps some just don't want people showing up at their house, and disrupting things. Plausible.

 

If there is a habituation scenario, meaning that the bigfoot are hanging around and have become somewhat accustomed to the humans on the property, it is quite likely that some form of bond would be formed, or the human would see it that way, and they would not want to threaten the relationship or the freedom and security of the animal itself. It would be harassed, no doubt, if the occurrences were reported. I don't mean habituation in the form of conversing with a sasquatch, or getting close enough to touch it, as it is highly improbable that such would ever happen. I just mean a relationship from afar, which is not that implausible. There are actually quite a few such cases of which I'm aware, if they are genuine. And people have a tendency to personify or humanize animals, as seen with pets, so I definitely can see a human being attributing some sort of bond or relationship with these animals, even if such a relationship does not exist.

 

There is also the possibility that a person has no real incentive to report such a special situation. They might view themselves as lucky, which they really are from a statistical point of view, and it could still be viewed as a betrayal of these animals to report them. One could also think that no good could come for the sasquatch themselves. I know how majestic I thought the sasquatch I witnessed, and I can only imagine what someone would think if they got to see these things on a regular basis, especially if the witness had ample time for observation. I can see a person cherishing such experiences, and not wanting to betray such awesome and powerful animals.

 

There are likely other reasons, but I will go ahead and wrap up this post. To tie in the above paragraphs with the initial post from the original poster, I would be willing to bet that even if there were a law passed saying one had to report any bigfoot activity, those who are in a sort of habituation situation would likely purposefully and willingly break the law. I can see there being a "spell" the sasquatch casts over a person when they can witness it on a repeated basis, but this is not paranormal or anything like that, rather it is just the emotional response of being thrust into a very special situation. This could be the same reason that some people refuse to share evidence they've supposedly collected from habituations. But of course one wonders why anyone would even know such a habituation was occurring, unless the witness told them, which is a bit counter-intuitive.

[MagniAesir]

Some of you are thinking about this too narrowly 

I will use an analogy 

 

I have a 5 acre piece of land I want to subdivide 

When I go to do it I find a new species of tree frog, never before discovered 

 

Would it be legal for me to just wipe out their habitat and thereby cause their extinction because they are not listed or would I be obligated to halt construction and notify the authorities 

 

Here in BC, they would be deemed protected and I would have to report the discovery 

[hiflier]

Hello MagniAesir,

Four things things: 1) How did you know it was new/unlisted and/or endangered? 2) How would you then know you might be the one causing it's extinction? 3) Yes, folks are looking at this a bit narrowly because of 4) Any habituator on this Forum is known by name. Not by us, but by those that took the information upon one's registering onto the Forum, also by the government. That said, anyone claiming habituation is a person who's info is in an official record. Any habituator can work to keep commoners out of the loop and off of their property. But I gotta tell ya, if anyone thinks this topic isn't monitored then think again.

Whether the government knows about Sasquatch or not, whether they even exist or not, Forums are monitored. I have a list I could post just on the Agencies and Organizations that watch the UFO Forums. It's as long as my arm. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the DOI knows who's who here. Oh and by the way, they SHOULD know if you ask me. So it's all good.

Edited October 25, 2014 by hiflier