Questions About The Smeja Shooting.

[Guest]

In my humble opinion the scenario you are proposing Branco could have played out. I believe that the males are never very far from their families at least here that seems to be the case. I think that the first thing the remaining juvenile would have done was go find its father or another male adult from their clan.

I saw very clear evidence of this behavior a couple months ago when someone sailed in on a day sailer the evening before and juveniles went to get an adult to show them what was sitting on the little beach that wasn't supposed to be there. There was a stick glyphs that clearly showed one adult male and several male and female juveniles heading to the site. I found tracks of one large afult and a bunch of juveniles up closer to where the sailboat still sat waiting for the tide to come back in. The tracks were behind some brush where the little boat could be observed but they would not be easily seen. At the time I marveled at how close their behavior parallel that of young kids of the non hairy variety. The ones here are very closely connected to their families and to the other families in their clan.i see evidence on every foray into the woods just how much interaction takes place.

IMHO one of the reasons we are not making much progress in learning about them is because the overall belief is that they are animals and behave like animals. While I cannot speak for other parts of the country, the ones I have interacted within North Florida are very human like with the same strong connection to family and relatives that we might have.

I suspect the guy in the boat had a rather interesting night since I seriously doubt that at least one juvenile would have been able to resist the opportunity to count coup by smacking the side if the little boat.

I agree with you, I think much more can be learned of the species if we focus more on the social behavior of the species.  Learning what is important to their culture, if they posses the intellect and curiosity you have witnessed then they are sure to have some type of social hierarchy that can be examined.  This might be the key to learning where and how they can be easily found for observation and further study.  

[Guest]

Good point LT ...

[MIB]

The key to learning where they can be studied, such as it is, is to stop ridiculing habituators.  It's not just the scoftics and denialists, honest skeptics and outright believers who insist on "ape camp" thinking are just as much part of the problem when their rude jabs drive away the very witnesses that have the information that could solve the puzzle.  

 

Quite a few years ago now a researcher suggested we'd be ahead to look at cultural anthropology instead of wildlife biology.   That is insightful even today but it was radically insightful at the time and drew no end of ire.   I agreed then, I agree now.   The behaviors I've experienced are not the behaviors of mere dumb animals.   There's a gray area inhabited by big, hairy, seemingly technologically primitive, but otherwise quite sophisticated bipeds.  

 

We can't see them because on the whole we refuse to look where they are, we only look where we dare to find them ... in the confines of the paradigms we're comfortable with.

 

MIB

[Guest WesT]

Hi Lightheart, good post! I was left a ground glyph and the best I can tell it was a symbolic representation of the family group. I interpreted 2 females, 1 male, and 1 child with the male and the child having a close bond.

Cultural Anthropology is the way to go. Hunting techniques falls under that study. I got lucky and found 2 unique ambush set-ups. Sasquatch or not, I learned something new.

Edited August 7, 2015 by WesT

[JKH]

Plusses for several folks, but especially MIB, well said.

Edited August 7, 2015 by JKH

[Guest]

Hi Lightheart, good post! I was left a ground glyph and the best I can tell it was a symbolic representation of the family group. I interpreted 2 females, 1 male, and 1 child with the male and the child having a close bond.

Cultural Anthropology is the way to go. Hunting techniques falls under that study. I got lucky and found 2 unique ambush set-ups. Sasquatch or not, I learned something new.

 

Hello West T, would you mind describing exactly what a glyph for those viewing this thread who do not know and secondly, was it made of stone or constructed by a series of sticks if so, how long were and how were they arranged? Were they facing an easterly point of the compass? Were there any other stick formations in the immediate area?

[bipedalist]

This story has never rung true for me and I agree with those that speculate Smeja was poaching that day. I've been hunting for most of my life and have a fair amount of experience, scouting in the off season, for locations to set up tower or ground blinds. When scouting, I never take a rifle with me as I don't need it. Rifles are cumbersome and just get in the way. I may carry a side arm, in case I need a gun, for some reason. However, in the past 25 years of being a member of a hunting lease, I've never had occasion to fire my side arm while scouting for locations to hunt.

 

Why was Smeja carrying a rifle; if he was simply scouting, especially from a vehicle?

 

Regardless, the part of the story that I'm certain is a lie, is the shooting of the juvenile and then holding it in his arms as it died.

 

Again, I'm a hunter and own and use a number of different rifles in different calibers. I don't have a 25.06, but I have a 30.06, 7 mag, 308 and 300 Win Mag; which are calibers Smeja mentioned in other versions of his story.

 

I don 't know the exact size and weight of the purported juvenile Sasquatch, shot by Smeja. However, I assume it would have been, at most, 150 lbs, if Smeja was able to cradle it in his arms. In my mind, I pictured it around 75 lbs.

 

Whether 75 lbs or 150 lbs, a shot to the neck, from a 25.06, or any of the other calibers I mentioned, would have been instantly fatal. I rarely take neck shots on animals as its a fairly small target, especially once you go beyond 100 yards. However, if you hit the neck square on, its very effective because it will sever the spinal column and kill almost instantaneously.

 

According to Smeja, he shot the juvenile and then had time to pick it up, cradle it in his arms, observe its eyes and face, as it died in his arms. There's no way he shot an animal of this size, in the neck, with a 25.06, and had time to do these things before it died. Furthermore, I was under the impression that Sasquatch have almost no visible neck because the head is slung low, on the shoulders, and these overly developed neck muscles, as well as a sagittal crest, are used to support a large jaw for chewing and grinding fibrous foods. I would assume the juveniles, of this species, have similar anatomical features as the adults?

 

Either way, this part of the story is impossible to believe. Not to mention the fact that he was unwilling to take a body with him, nor even samples from the body.

 

Smeja's story is simply nonsensical.

 

Smeja on more than one occasion said that hunting from a road and a truck was legal in the area?    Is that so?   Doesn't sound quite sporting to me but maybe the Golden State has its own set of rules.  Now that the story is old news I can say I asked him what type of scope he used on his 25.06 and he told me but I can't seem to find that documentation now.  Not sure if he mentioned otherwise in other interviews or not.  He did say something about the female BF being so white or light like a coyote that he couldn't figure out how they could hide during the daylight hours.  As I remember though the sample retrieved tested out ursinus dna, Mionczynski on site said it smelled of coyote to him as I recall. 

Edited August 14, 2015 by bipedalist

[HOLDMYBEER]

The claimed shooting did not occur for at least three reasons:

 

1- Justin has told me of certain circumstances at the time of the alleged shooting that make clear to me it did not occur. I would spell this out but I don't want his story to morph.

 

2- Justin has on several occasions made statements about the primary event and the aftermath that display "distancing behavior". Some people do this consciously (and sometimes unconsciously) so as to separate themselves from alleged facts. Such behavior tends to indicate a concern about the veracity of the facts as related.

 

3- The encounter with the authorities at his front door did not happen as he states. I say this for several reasons. One of the reasons I will point out is the alleged conversation that Justin relates makes no sense under the laws of California (or under the US federal code).

 

The totality of these reasons indicates to me the event did not likely occur. Those who might fret about the death of a baby sasquatch, fear not.

[Guest WesT]

Hello West T, would you mind describing exactly what a glyph for those viewing this thread who do not know and secondly, was it made of stone or constructed by a series of sticks if so, how long were and how were they arranged? Were they facing an easterly point of the compass? Were there any other stick formations in the immediate area?

Thank you for your interest hiflier. Actually it's all in the wood structure tree manipulation thread. But to answer your questions, it was a series of sticks. They were oriented north-south. And yes,wood structures were, and still are, nearby.

Lightheart and bipedalist have seen them also. They know more about them than I do.

But to get back on topic, I just don't believe the story. I have my reasons And I'll just leave it at that.

Edited August 14, 2015 by WesT

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Bart Cutino and some other researchers supposedly had some encounters in the area where the shooting happened. They also found some tracks. That's really mainly what makes me think he might be telling the truth, but also, some of the specific details about the juveniles seems compelling as well. He doesn't seem like he's some genius, so overall I think his encounter probably happened. It's a shame it ended the way it did though.

[bipedalist]

Also, he stated the only thing he removed the day of the killing was bloody clothes (and the boots he was wearing).  I would imagine the bloody clothes would not survive as evidence if he was anticipated a visit from Cal Fish and Game or was warned of a visit.    One thing that always confused me was that at one point I thought he stated he had cell phone pictures of some of the site and samples, then later there was nothing more than a clinical photo of the sample submitted to Melba.