If You Shot One, Would That Be Poaching?

[norseman]

^^^^

I would not support this. And I think with a type specimen proving the existence of the species that it would not take long for protection laws to be enacted.

There of course still could be black markets like with black bear gall bladders, that would need to be dealt with. But looking at how many opportunities we have had to harvest a type specimen thus far? Being rather nil I dont see discovery bringing whole sale slaughter.

Put it this way, I believe that if the mountain gorilla was a undiscovered animal with no laws to protect it and no rangers patrolling the jungle?

They would be extinct. Its better for a species to have a global support network, than to be left in the dark.

Edited March 23, 2016 by norseman

[Yuchi1]

^^^ Your operative words "I think" are predicated upon a situation that (presently) you don't know or could control any of the possible outcomes.

[norseman]

No one knows what the future holds for sure.

But of course that includes Yuchi as well.

Edited March 23, 2016 by norseman

[TD-40]

One body would be enough to satisfy science. State and Federal protections would quickly come next. No hunting! No harassment! No nothing. Look at what they did with the Spotted Owl and rare snails in deserts. It would take them no time to enact similar protections for an 8' tall apeman.

[Yuchi1]

^^^ With the Spotted Owl and other similar critters, the biologists had a good idea of what they were, how many of them were left and where they were in order to enact protective legislation. BF are (if you accept only a fraction of the thousands of reports) coast-to-coast so, where do you set up the refuge? Are there different versions of BF? Yep, better tag & bag one or more of each.

[Guest BDK]

One body would be enough to satisfy science. State and Federal protections would quickly come next. No hunting! No harassment! No nothing. Look at what they did with the Spotted Owl and rare snails in deserts. It would take them no time to enact similar protections for an 8' tall apeman.

 

 

It would take a goodly amount of time, because you'd have every energy company and timber lobbyist out in force with in case they would lose land to protect the BF.

[norseman]

^^^

I understand what your saying but I think a discovery like this would bury them. If the spotted owl brought about the NW forest plan? Imagine what a clamor a NA Ape would cause.

[Guest BDK]

I wish I could have that confidence, but I could see the long term DC crowd being further entrenched than they were during the Spotted Owl.  

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

I wonder if Bigfoot would go better a wine and butter sauce.

[FarArcher]

I wonder if Bigfoot would go better a wine and butter sauce.

 

I'll never find out.

 

You gotta just know that is some stringy, touch meat.

[TD-40]

I can't find the link but I was looking at the Idaho Fish & Game website where it said that ALL wildlife is state property and that harvesting any without license or out of season was against the law. So the first government body that would lay claim to a bigfoot carcass would be the State wildlife agencies and you would probably be in trouble with their Enforcement Division. After that, the Feds and Smithsonian would be lined up to get a piece of it. You would never be able to keep possession of the body, not that you would really want to anyway...

Edited March 24, 2016 by TD-40

[Yuchi1]

IIRC, the end game of the infamous Louisiana Hunt organizer was to "offer" the body to the various timber interests in that area for seven figures.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

 

 

I think they are a variant of Homo, but certainly not Sapiens.

 

 

Here lies the problem. What is a "human"? Are other Homo species "human"? If they are, then the laws that protect/govern/regulate "humans" apply to them too because when the law (at least US law) mentions "humans" it does not identify the human as H. sapien sapien, but merely human or some derivation thereof (ex "man", "woman", "child").

 

 

Since they are not recognized yet and have not been classified yet, I would argue that they could not charge you for murder of a human species if said human species was only recognized as a result and thus after your shooting.  As stated, the 2nd one shot would be a tragedy and should be subject to charges based on whatever protection they are granted.  

 

 

Please note the word "if" in my post.

 

Homicide in the US has varying degrees, ex. first degree, second degree/manslaughter.

 

Here's Black's Law Dictionary's definition of "homicide": The killing of any human creature. If BigFoot is identified as Homo sapien bigfootensis or Homo bigfootiens, killing BF is homicide because hominids are scientifically classified as humans per their genera identification.

 

But we all know that the Law does not have to follow science (please see the US Supreme Court's ruling of Nix v. Hedden, where the Law disregarded science and classified the tomato as a vegetable.) So it's quite conceivable that even if BF is a "human creature", killing one might not be legally considered "homicide" because the Law is under no obligation to follow Science.

I wonder if Bigfoot would go better a wine and butter sauce.

 

If BF is a hominid, then wouldn't eating a BF be cannabalism?

Edited March 24, 2016 by ChasingRabbits

[JDL]

And vice versa.  It brings to mind FarArcher's list of Native American names for bigfoot that include the word cannibal.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Pattypithicus, it is a new species...

 

You heard it here first 

 

But is it the same genus?

 

I'll leave it to the genius('s).

 

PS: does shooting the same genus qualify?

 

or is it the sad same old lullaby.

 

Just don't shoot the genii. (us's)

White wine goes with chicken.

And I hear hominid's taste like chicken.

That is what the cannibals say.

 

Alas for poor yorik.

Edited March 24, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna