Guest Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Not to sound crass MagniAesir but this is the US and not Canada. We still have this little thingy called the Constitution. Been diminished a bit over the last few years but thus far it is still in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yeah I think if the government is monitoring these forums they're doing so with a bowl of popcorn and a good laugh. ( I'm picturing Chevy Chase and Dan Akroyd from Spies like Us). Or we have a mole amongst us...ooohhh the conspiracy. Still good reading though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted October 25, 2014 Author Share Posted October 25, 2014 Not to sound crass MagniAesir but this is the US and not Canada. We still have this little thingy called the Constitution. Been diminished a bit over the last few years but thus far it is still in place. Not sure your point here, are you saying you are free to destroy an endangered speciesThat goes against everything that I gave heard about your endangered species act Funny how the spotted owl was protected, I don't recall people saying it was their constitutional right to destroy them I seem to recall numerous cases in the USA where protection of endangered species took precedence over landowners rights 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.Who cares You are reading stuff into the question that doesn't exist It is a simple question You know it is a new species You know it's habitat will be destroyed and that likely means the extinction of the species It doesn't matter how you arrived at this conclusion, but if it makes you feel better you had an environmental impact study done and the biologist involved determined this What now are you legally required to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) Hello MagniAesir, If a biologist was brought in then it could very well be no longer in your hands. Legally? if it' on an endangered species list one would be bound to reporting it.......legally speaking: ANIMAL PROTECTION "The Federal ESA prohibits "taking" of an endangered or threatened animal. This means that you cannot "harm harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect any threatened or endangered species." "Taking" can also mean habitat alternation resulting in harm to the species. Whether on private or Federal land, whether intentional or unintentional, the "taking" of a listed animal is illegal. Protection in addition to this may be afforded through your State's Endangered Species Act." Edited October 26, 2014 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hello MagniAesir, After some digging I have found NO legal requirements for a private landowner to report an endangered species on their property. If I am wrong like I think I was in the above post then maybe someone could let us know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) Well MagniAesir my point is that you keep referring to BF as an endangered species yet their existence has yet to be proven. As such how can they be endangered? The spotted owl was well known to exist when those protective measures were put in place. So, anyone that knows me knows that for years and years I have promoted the culling of 1, and one alone, to prove their existence. Used to think I wanted to be the one to do so but I've changed my mind about that. Still, it will take a body or some undeniable DNA to prove their existence to the scientific community IMHO. Once proven, I would assume protective measures would be put in place. I've NEVER advocated *destroying* them and I'm not sure where you got the impression I did. Edited October 26, 2014 by HRPuffnstuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I would be afraid that the federal government would exercise their rights for eminent domain until they could establish whether bigfoot was endangered or a nuisance species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudeman Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Personally, I think the feds have evidence of bigfoot. The reason they suppress it is the timber industry is a multi billion dollar a year industry and to put it on the endangered species list would halt everything timber related. As always, follow the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted October 26, 2014 Moderator Share Posted October 26, 2014 If you want to climb out the limb called "the feds know and are suppressing evidence", might as well go all the way out to the end and check the view. What if they have that evidence and the DNA says "human". Does the ESA apply to genus Homo? If not, what's the legal paradigm for "management?" I'm not asking anyone to accept this idea as truth, just suspend disbelief long enough to look at it from the perspective of where they'd fit in our legal system. It'd be no different than if Ishi, 2014 version, popped out of the woods with 5000 of his cousins. What would we do? Gets messy, legally ... very messy indeed. No ... I'm not convinced, just thinking out loud. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudeman Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I really don't know. My guess is it would go down like any of the other "savages" found in the world. Missionaries, then disease and even though they succumbed, in the end they were saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David NC Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The united states has a lot of public and protected lands now that are already protected for them to live on, national forest, nature preserves, greenways, state parks, national parks etc. Canada has very similar that if I am correct is called "Crown Lands". Animals cannot be put on an endangered list without 1. being a known/classified animal and 2. a habitat, population study would be needed to decide if they were in fact threatened by low population. I do not see the population/distribution study going very well with the Sasquatch even if they were classified as a known animal today. I do not believe they will be going extinct unless we cut down all the forest. We do not cut down all the forest, they are managed so that the cut areas are regrowing to maturity while others are being cut, so they may have to move around some to stay in mature forest but I believe they will always be some mature forest for them as they need it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted October 27, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted October 27, 2014 If you had real hard proof the government will accept it. . Crow, I thought you said that you thought that the PGF was real and that they went exist not long after it ? If so, why didn't the government except it then on that basis as that surely had to be considered as real hard proof as it stares you literally right in the face ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 If that's the case, Bobby, the government won't have to provide anymore proof, as they're already extinct, as Crowlogic contends. As one that believes bigfoot might exist, I certainly do NOT believe the US government knows any more than the rest of us. It's silly, ask Mr. Snowden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted October 27, 2014 Moderator Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sure, our Gov knows! So why should they even try to show proof of it's existence. There is no need for the public to know so why even say it does. If you believe that we live in a free society then why should anyone even express acknowledgment of their existence. It is no one's business what anyone knows and if that is how it should be kept then I am in agreement. The only time that they should be responsible is when these creatures are a danger to us as humans. I have no problem with this and as it stands it is none of our business ,if they do not wish to share. The more secrets that are kept from us is either for our own protection and or theirs. In which I believe that they do not need our protection, They have all what the need. They have do so for all these years and refuse to just stay from us. It is better to just leave things alone and never say on what one knows. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I wonder what agency is in charge of the bigfoot project and where can I sign up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts