2015 The State Of Sasquatch Science

[Guest]

I own Paterson's book in which Beck's story is published. I also think it is THE pinnacle story on which the Bigfoot Army philosophy hinges itself on. How credible is it? It could have happened. But much more prevalent is the story in which a hunter or hunters shoot one and it gimps off never to be seen from again.

If they run in troupes of ten to twenty (cabin attack strength)? We would have found them by now!

Maybe Beck and his mining partners had a claim in the middle of a Squatch family reunion? Or maybe they embellished the story abit?

Either way in a wounded scenario I don't think your going to have a better day if you stumble upon a wounded Griz. That's the point I'm trying to make.

It's the hunters ethical duty to track and dispatch wounded game.......even dangerous ones. If your scared don't take the shot!

 

Yeah I am not sure I would agree with that. There are reports after reports telling of individuals encountering one BF, then another eithers appears or was there all along, only to make itself clearly visible at the last possible moment either out of intimidation or curiosity. Beyond that however, I have a fairly large size number of reports (180) not in the thousands though, but there are numbers of multiple sightings ranging anywhere 2, 3, 5, 7, and one single report out of British Columbia, Canada of 20 in a group sometime during the late 1920s.  I was listening to an interview a couple weeks on Sasquatch Chronicles and the guest was a son of a biologist for the National Park Service. As boy growing up very close to his father’s circle of friends also connected with the same service believes they do accumulate a couple times a year in large size groups. It was purely his guess but he feels it may be mating or migrating purposes so really who knows?  I guess the reality of multiple animals roaming around out there is as possible people reporting them. – Just Saying

[Lake County Bigfooot]

My perception of the Ape Canyon incident was that there were several Sasquatch banging on the cabin, not an unusual behavior.

Were they truly attacking the cabin? well that is perception, did they want the miners to leave, most likely. I got the impression two

or three were involved, hardly an army, more likely a family group, or small troupe, well that group was apparently minus one after

the shot took one down, if that part of the story is true, these guys might have embellished a bit. After all they did lose a gold mine

to them, if they just chickened out and did not have a war story they would have looked awfully stupid for leaving.

Edited March 13, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot

[Yuchi1]

The Louisiana Hunt involvement was following up on a wounded UHS into a old growth thicket after said was gut shot by a (alleged) former military sniper. We trailed it to a large tree that had been blown down earlier that year as it still had foliage on the branches. As it flushed out the backside, after I had flanked the tree, a shot was taken that went over the top as there was a creekbed run it dove into that I was unaware of at that point. There were two others coming to it's aid, one from from behind me and the other on the other side of the blowdown from out of the adjacent ~5 year old clearcut scrub.  The hunt organizer then called us out to the perimeter as he may well have been concerned the other people in that area were getting trigger happy. One of the guys in with us was so frozen by the event (thicket), we had to lead him out by the hand.

 

The rush attained during that episode lacks proper wording in description.

 

Also, when we were invited back two weeks later to search for a possible body, one of the guys with us bailed and ran out of the woods (2X) to the truck/camp when we bumped into something huge while searching a ~80 acre thicket of dense brush with visibility measured in <6' at times.

 

The other three events occurred in Rogers county, Oklahoma with the same person cutting and running in one instance which forever severed my ties with that dude as he turned out to be a catfish, all mouth and FOS.

 

The Cookout Incident is where the apparent Alpha Male UHS approached our campfire 3X during the evening and took umbrage at us chasing after it the 3rd time and proceeded to slam over a 14' tower deerstand ~75 yards NNE of our location and then followed us up out of the bottoms to the landowner's house ~1/2 mile away then, hurling a softball size rock ~70-80 yards from out of the canyon rim into the front yard, making a divot in the lawn (~30' from us) and at which point, my attitude toward these beings made a 180 change.

 

Prior to that event, on another "hunt" is where two of the guys had the "big one" stride past them some ~25-30 yards away with both observing that no sound was made as it traversed the meadow and then into the timber. One guy is 6'3" & ~250# and (later that evening) making the comment,"I won't be back as we don't have big enough guns." We were carrying a 12 gauge shotgun, .30-06 rifle, .444 Marlin & .45-70 Marlin leverguns along with .44 mag. & .45 ACP handguns.

 

He never went back.

 

Bottom line, is I/we observed something that was huge, powerful, intelligent (much more than presupposed) and which meant us no harm as evidenced by the lack of malevolent belligerence toward us which could have been easily deployed and (in hindsight) probably should have been.

[BigTreeWalker]

Norseman, nice outfit. You will probably have a better chance than most if you do your hunting from horseback.

SWWSP, I agree with you. There are still sasquatch in the area. I've found 14" and 16" tracks near the edge of the blowdown NE of there.

[norseman]

^^^^^^^

So your group shot a Bigfoot, chased it, two other Bigfoot came to its aid.........and the leader called you off and you all walked back to the rally point leading one member by the hand cuz he was scared? Correct?

Not trying to be a jerk, but what you get from the Beck story is that if the Bigfoot had gotten into the cabin the miners would have been eviscerated. And you didn't lose one team member and you had no log walls to defend from? Why do you think that is?

People die trailing wounded Grizzly bears in Canada and Alaska all the time.

Wouldn't a higher moral obligation be to allow a likely higher order, sentient being to live?

No.

Because the moral imperative is to do what is best for the species. And that requires a type specimen to prove their existence so that they will be considered in forest and wildlife management.

[Lake County Bigfooot]

I ask these questions to myself, why would they continue to hang around area X after being shot at several times by the NAWAC. Or for that matter

others too many to mention who have claimed to shoot them at close range, and the creature just gets out of dodge. I am puzzled at this, and it does

not fit with the retribution scenario that I too think could follow. Maybe it is just the fear that is produced at the time, they fear the gun and steer clear.

In the absence of guns they eventually return, as in area X, so maybe they do not see the humans as so dangerous, just the gun. It is odd that they

also would come around hunters and steal their deer, incidence where they are attracted to the gunfire to obtain easy food. It is a puzzling picture. It

suggests a slightly different notion of their intelligence then some want to believe, or could it be that they just don't get that we are trying to harm them?  

Edited March 13, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot

[Guest DWA]

Well, bears approach camps and steal game, and we actively hunt bears.  Most of us haven't been in the situation of choosing between the chance of getting shot and the chance of starving to death.

GuyInIndiana, on 12 Mar 2015 - 7:49 PM, said:

Wouldn't a higher moral obligation be to allow a likely higher order, sentient being to live?

No.

Because the moral imperative is to do what is best for the species. And that requires a type specimen to prove their existence so that they will be considered in forest and wildlife management. 

--------------------------------------------

I don't think it's as simple as either of you are making out.  There are non-invasive ways of confirming species, as at least a couple of biologists discussing the "need for a body" have pointed out.  On the other hand:  the vast majority of species have been confirmed by a body, and it does not appear that any money or time is being tossed by the mainstream into non-invasive ways of confirming this one.

 

In other words:  a biologist could make the moral case for killing one, or not doing so.

[norseman]

^^^^^^^^^

We are at the 50 year mark since the PGF, if they had shot Patty instead of filming her? Think of where our understanding would be concerning this species.

I understand DNA has made big strides in recent years and that's great but it should not be the only tool in the tool box if your looking right at it.

Lynx, Grizzly, Wolverine, Wolf, Caribou are all endangered in the Lower 48, we know this because we know and study the species themselves. Sasquatch resides in the realm of pixies and gnomes and not flesh and blood animals therefore their habitat, food sources and migration routes are not considered in human planning.

[Guest DWA]

To me it's not a question of absolute morality but of getting the confirmation done.  Waiting until our species wipes out theirs 'coz I can't see killing one wouldn't be to me a moral way to go.

 

It will be an extremely unpleasant moment, that killing the first (confirmed) one.  It will be the nastiest guilty pleasure of my life.

Edited March 13, 2015 by DWA

[norseman]

Norseman, nice outfit. You will probably have a better chance than most if you do your hunting from horseback.

SWWSP, I agree with you. There are still sasquatch in the area. I've found 14" and 16" tracks near the edge of the blowdown NE of there.

I've just recently joined the backcountry horseman of Washington.

http://www.bchw.org

But I started out at the age of 19 taking a saddle mount and pack horse into the Kettle Crest and Salmo Priest wilderness. My buddy and I went in halves on a horse trailer so we could take our horses up into the mountains.

Since then I have packed into almost every wilderness in the inland PacNW. But now I've been working in the oil field since 2011, and have lost two john mules to old age and have a Molly mule that is old now. So I need some new pack animals. For now I've just been riding my Appy gelding and staying at the trail head, so not any packing for now.

But I always Pack my guide gun just in case!

To me it's not a question of absolute morality but of getting the confirmation done. Waiting until our species wipes out theirs 'coz I can't see killing one wouldn't be to me a moral way to go.

It will be an extremely unpleasant moment, that killing the first (confirmed) one. It will be the nastiest guilty pleasure of my life.

Absolutely!!!!

I don't want a Squatch head mount on the wall, anymore than I want a Orang or Gorilla. It really doesn't matter how smart or dumb they are, but the moral imperative is to prove the species to exist. It's that simple. Once that happens then we can pass laws to protect the species and their habitat forever.

Is one individual's death worth the future safety of a species? Yes!

But if DNA nails it first with a stool sample? Spectacular!

Edited March 13, 2015 by norseman

[SWWASAS]

Reading through this thread,  I was thinking about my first encounter and how I would have reacted if I had been carrying a gun and hunting BF.     At the time I thought they were chasing me down.    There were two,  I knew about.    I honestly figured I had a less than 50 50 chance in making it out alive when I heard the nearest one thudding up hill right towards me.  At the time I was not armed.   I was hoping all the stories about gentle giant of he forest were true but afraid they were wrong.    I was on a trail headed up a hill and could not do much but step off the trail and hope it went right past me.   Down hill where I could move very fast,  would have been right towards them.    If I had a gun at my location, I was about 20 yards from the undergrowth, so would have only had a second to get a shot off when it burst out in view.  At the rate it was moving, probably only one shot would have been possible, with some sort of bolt action rifle.      The second one was to my left down hill, and then I would have had to contend with it.    They were traveling together and whooping back and forth at each other.   That is how I knew there were at least two.    Probably the thing that  saved me was the one nearest me was carrying a juvenile and did not want me to see either of them or expose the juvenile to danger.     Given the distance involved,  my one shot probably would not have brought it down before it got to me and ripped me apart.   As fast as it was moving, even wounded, it would have closed that distance quickly.      Even though I was in the field looking for BF, the experience sort of left me in a state of shock.  The only thing similar I have experienced was near mid air collisions, with other aircraft where we missed each other by feet.   I was not shaking but sort of numb, and breathing very hard.      I had expected my first encounter to be a fleeting glimpse of one peeking out from behind a tree, not one thudding up hill right towards me, sounding like some sort of T Rex.  If I had a gun, I would have wished it was a bigger one.    For any hunter,  you might not get the well aimed,  100 yard, safe shot through the scope you dream of, but could come around a corner, or have one step out from behind a tree,  and be face to face with one, with no time to think or aim.   They control that, you don't. 

 

Same area, most likely same BF, second encounter, there were two also.     While I was trying to get close to see one I heard moving around, one flanked me and approached me from about my 7 o'clock position initially without making any noise.     They can work in pairs and a hunter should expect that.   Cleverly, the 7 oclock one broke a branch when I got too close to my 12 o'clock one.    At that point I realized I was trapped between them and started backing out when I heard a growl from the one in front of me.     Based on my experience, I would not hunt them alone, have someone to cover my back, and always expect more than one.    The only thing I can think of that seems as dangerous is close on a enemy position where you do not know their exact position, or numbers.    It is not like hunting bear, which other than a mother with cub are normally alone.    

Edited March 13, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[kitakaze]

2015 The State of Sasquatch Science...

 

[Guest DWA]

^^^To those who aren't paying attention, could not be more accurate.

[norseman]

2015 The State of Sasquatch Science...

 

^^^^^^^^

This perfectly illustrates the point I'm trying to make.

Pixies and gnomes......

[kitakaze]

Lynx, Grizzly, Wolverine, Wolf, Caribou are all endangered in the Lower 48, we know this because we know and study the species themselves. 

 

Yes, like so...

 

http://cascadescarnivoreproject.blogspot.jp/

 

Smack in the middle of Bigfoot country.

 

Sasquatch resides in the realm of pixies and gnomes and not flesh and blood animals therefore their habitat, food sources and migration routes are not considered in human planning.

 

 

When something goes hundreds of years without a stitch of reliable evidence, it rightly becomes considered as such.

 

You need not ever actually look for Bigfoot. Build two of the largest industrial nations in the world and if there's something there, it will be found just like every other actual living large mammal.