What Would It Cost To Get A Voucher Specimen

[hiflier]

Hi BobbyO I am in agreement with the reactions/dangers of a "cornered animal" concept. So would you have some ideas on a misdirection or a fake play plan? Sounds like you might have a suggestion that perhaps entails some kind of diversion? Anything would probably be better than what I suggested in the beginning which was set fire to the area LOL. The circle of drivers arching from road point North to road point South would set fire to the North, East, and South side letting the fire line go up the mountain and force the creature to the West- and the road  A ridiculous scenario really.

humans 

Edited January 18, 2017 by hiflier

[Celtic Raider]

On 17/01/2017 at 3:09 AM, Twist said:

My best idea is to start a bounty/reward.  It starts at 10 million for the first year, decreasing every year by 1 million.  When we hit zero the money is off the table. The bounty starts off big enough to draw in a number of types like big game hunters, military types, both single and possibly groups, new scientist, etc etc...  the decreasing reward is intended to invite a sense of urgency to produce results.  I also think an inherent competition will develop in the participants if it's a "bounty" or "reward" that is up for grabs.  

 

Of course this is not plausible for the liability reasons alone amongst other reasons I'm sure I haven't even thought of in the last five minutes when this idea developed.  

 

Wouldn't the best option in terms of value/realism be to sub-contract a number of experienced, trusted hunters. A little like the bounty idea but with a set reward - maybe $1m shared equally between, say 10. The 10 hunters can then pair up and work in areas specifically picked where Sasquatch has been spotted frequently. I would think the 'first past the post' bounty idea would encourage competition but might also lead to teams not working together or pooling resources or information - see Wacky Races or Cannonball Run for evidence of this 

 

Maybe have the 10 hunters work in teams of 2 to a plan set out and agreed with each team beforehand. Create an MO for when the  creature is shot - photos and blood samples taken, a foot and if possible the head are taken and the GPS co-ordinates of the kill are logged for future reference and a temporary tarp or something similar is placed securely over the body so that a future team can come in and take the remains away. The kill area could be rigged with a number of camera traps so that if other creatures came in to take away the body that would be recorded.

 

As for the theory proposed that the creature or others may attack after the first is killed, I don't see much evidence to support this - most reports of shootings or people who have shot at the creatures indicate that they just seem to act like most normal animals would and are scared by the noise and attempt to flee so I don't think that would be an issue. How much would a hunter typically make in a year? If there are 10 in total $100,000 should be a reasonable reward. The up front costs would be the only issue but I'd guess in the whole of the US and Canada there'd be a number of potential candidates. 

[BobbyO]

It's the same idea as i will go to the grave with where Project Grendel is concerned.

 

Normal Camping for as long as possible with no "BF'ing" whatsoever going on, in a pre-determined area, at a pre-determined time of year with even pre-determined days due to moon phases.

 

If i could have a dollar for every time i've read "On the first night there was nothing, but the following nights.......", i'd be better off financially than i am now

 

I believe the inquisitive nature of this animal could be its downfall, and the numbers do back that up.

 

A fake play or mis-direction would be being able to completely turn the tables on that scenario, and that would be done by covert/counter surveillance, very similar to what Bart Cutino happened upon in his good thermal video and how that situation played out.

 

That IMO is how to achieve your objective and i say it with the back up of what i believe the numbers point to.

 

The execution of the fake play or mis-direction would be with either a camera or a shotgun i'd say.

[hiflier]

Thank you. I truly appreciate it when someone states something that is supported by research and study. I could learn a few things from tht. Your "design" if you will is the best one BTW. Small team (I assume) or individual and simply wait for BF to find the intrusion irresistible because of its innate curiosity. Many things that we have talked about and learned do fall into place with that plan I have to admit.

[FarArcher]

When planning, one must be absolutely ruthless.

 

By that, I mean, you plan and examine every idea from every angle, and do your best to leave minimal variable to chance.  The devil's in the details - and once you have a plan, now you must be most ruthless.

 

You must put on another hat, and ruthlessly attack your own plan.  Do your best to destroy it by "what if instead of this - they do that?"  "What can my opponent do to defeat THIS portion of my plan?"  On and on, being absolutely ruthless.

 

Each time, you alter your plan as best you can to account for the unknowns to the best of your ability.  Just understand that every plan works great, right up until the moment of contact.

[Twist]

1 hour ago, Celtic Raider said:

 

Wouldn't the best option in terms of value/realism be to sub-contract a number of experienced, trusted hunters. A little like the bounty idea but with a set reward - maybe $1m shared equally between, say 10. The 10 hunters can then pair up and work in areas specifically picked where Sasquatch has been spotted frequently. I would think the 'first past the post' bounty idea would encourage competition but might also lead to teams not working together or pooling resources or information - see Wacky Races or Cannonball Run for evidence of this 

 

Maybe have the 10 hunters work in teams of 2 to a plan set out and agreed with each team beforehand. Create an MO for when the  creature is shot - photos and blood samples taken, a foot and if possible the head are taken and the GPS co-ordinates of the kill are logged for future reference and a temporary tarp or something similar is placed securely over the body so that a future team can come in and take the remains away. The kill area could be rigged with a number of camera traps so that if other creatures came in to take away the body that would be recorded.

 

As for the theory proposed that the creature or others may attack after the first is killed, I don't see much evidence to support this - most reports of shootings or people who have shot at the creatures indicate that they just seem to act like most normal animals would and are scared by the noise and attempt to flee so I don't think that would be an issue. How much would a hunter typically make in a year? If there are 10 in total $100,000 should be a reasonable reward. The up front costs would be the only issue but I'd guess in the whole of the US and Canada there'd be a number of potential candidates. 

 

Ohh I'm more than positive there are better options, that was literally an idea that developed as I typed it.  Your ideas would definitely refine my initial thought.  

[BobbyO]

4 hours ago, hiflier said:

Thank you. I truly appreciate it when someone states something that is supported by research and study. I could learn a few things from tht. Your "design" if you will is the best one BTW. Small team (I assume) or individual and simply wait for BF to find the intrusion irresistible because of its innate curiosity. Many things that we have talked about and learned do fall into place with that plan I have to admit.

 

Team of 4-6 I'd think would suffice, with everyone having rotating roles to play.

 

It's all about being able to get the time and resources that would allow it to happen for at least something like an initial 3 month period, minimum.

 

Resources would include scouting locations of course before hand but beyond that and outside of actual time, wouldn't cost a great deal at all.

[hiflier]

Heh, maybe "someone" (ahem) should mention that in some little Sasquatch hunting book somewhere  

[FarArcher]

1 hour ago, BobbyO said:

 

Team of 4-6 I'd think would suffice, with everyone having rotating roles to play.

 

It's all about being able to get the time and resources that would allow it to happen for at least something like an initial 3 month period, minimum.

 

Resources would include scouting locations of course before hand but beyond that and outside of actual time, wouldn't cost a great deal at all.

 

 

Listen to this man, he knows.

[hiflier]

Indeed he does.

[BobbyO]

No, unfortunately not.

 

Unfortunately no one does, that's the problem with this subject.

[norseman]

On 1/18/2017 at 7:25 AM, BobbyO said:

It's the same idea as i will go to the grave with where Project Grendel is concerned.

 

Normal Camping for as long as possible with no "BF'ing" whatsoever going on, in a pre-determined area, at a pre-determined time of year with even pre-determined days due to moon phases.

 

If i could have a dollar for every time i've read "On the first night there was nothing, but the following nights.......", i'd be better off financially than i am now

 

I believe the inquisitive nature of this animal could be its downfall, and the numbers do back that up.

 

A fake play or mis-direction would be being able to completely turn the tables on that scenario, and that would be done by covert/counter surveillance, very similar to what Bart Cutino happened upon in his good thermal video and how that situation played out.

 

That IMO is how to achieve your objective and i say it with the back up of what i believe the numbers point to.

 

The execution of the fake play or mis-direction would be with either a camera or a shotgun i'd say.

 

I think its a good plan, albeit i have been outdoors plenty and have never experienced anything i could definitely say was a squatch. Except the tracks in the snow.

 

But i also think packing heat while going about your outdoor recreational activity of choice increases our odds significantly if we can just convince enough people that being pro kill is not some evil endeavor.

[Explorer]

On 1/18/2017 at 7:25 AM, BobbyO said:

A fake play or mis-direction would be being able to completely turn the tables on that scenario, and that would be done by covert/counter surveillance, very similar to what Bart Cutino happened upon in his good thermal video and how that situation played out.

 

That IMO is how to achieve your objective and i say it with the back up of what i believe the numbers point to.

 

The execution of the fake play or mis-direction would be with either a camera or a shotgun i'd say.

 

 

BobbyO,

 

I am intrigued by your post because I have read different opinions on whether you can fool a BF.

Some folks claim that you can't fool BF's at all in their territory no matter how creative we think we are.

 

On the Bart Cutino case, I think it was very creative on his part to move away from the group and see who was watching, but I wonder if that BF did not know that Bart was there (I don't recall seeing the BF walk full body in front of thermal and it seemed to still be hiding behind trees, but my memory could be wrong).

 

I also recall reading (maybe it was Ron Morehead's book or some other book) about the idea that BF are not very good at math (counting people) and get confused keeping track of everybody when there is a large group.

I think Morehead's group of 5-6 tried that idea up in the Sierra camp, whereas they were all huddled together and suddenly everybody left at once in different directions except one who stayed hidden in a hunting blind (or maybe it was inside a log).

That experiment did not work well because the guy who was hiding got too cold and had to exit the hiding place and take a leak.

But, I think they were trying to follow the idea that you mentioned above of distraction and diversion.

 

I still will like to hear more ideas on how to fake play or misdirect a BF (specially for small groups of people that are not interesting in shooting one but on capturing one on film).

 

These creatures are very smart and know the land better than any of us, so to trick or fool them you got to have something really creative and take advantage of their weaknesses (which are not fully known).

I thought that BFRO guys (not the TV show, but the guys on the field) have been trying all sort of ideas, but they don't seem to publish what seems to work.

 

I know that in one WA BFRO expedition, two guys got a BF to approach them when they were playing harmonica, but they had no thermal and camera with them. And, in that case, they did not fool or misdirect the BF, but simply got him to be curious about the music.

 

 

 

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, Explorer said:

I also recall reading (maybe it was Ron Morehead's book or some other book) about the idea that BF are not very good at math (counting people) and get confused keeping track of everybody when there is a large group.

I think Morehead's group of 5-6 tried that idea up in the Sierra camp, whereas they were all huddled together and suddenly everybody left at once in different directions except one who stayed hidden in a hunting blind (or maybe it was inside a log).

That experiment did not work well because the guy who was hiding got too cold and had to exit the hiding place and take a leak.

But, I think they were trying to follow the idea that you mentioned above of distraction and diversion.

 

I have not read Ron Morehead's work but or course have been in discussion here on the Forum on the idea of misdirection/confusion as well as attraction by stimulating curiosity. Also was in discussions in the past regarding BF counting but no conclusions were arrived at. It was from these kinds of discussions that I was able to gather concepts to write a recent book for hunting the creature outright. Here is an excerpt from pages 57-58:

 

"Some of the actions or tactics as far as a camp goes may be able to take full advantage of the curiosity factor inherent in Sasquatch. Thinking it to be an intelligent creature people have given it some of the capacities that Humans possess whether deserved or not. The term is anthropomorphizing. Some even hold to the belief that the creature can even count. It really doesn't matter if it can or can't. It may understand that there's three hogs in the clearing and not two but knowing that doesn't mean it can count. It's really more about assessing attack strategies than anything close to rudimentary math.

 

If there are enough members in the team a trap of sorts can be set up. Rig up ahead of time a couple of cameras outside a target tent and hook them to USB ports of two computers inside the tent. The ploy goes like this: For a six man team start by having two members enter a tent. One comes out and two go in which means three are now in the tent. One comes out which leaves two in the tent. Then three go in and two come out. Then one comes out which will again leave two in the tent. This can be done alongside various diversions by outside members away from the tent to distract any observers. The members outside busy themselves with packing and going into various tents and returning and then walking behind tents and then reappearing. In the confusion the two that were left in the tent will turn on the computer in order to monitor the outside but otherwise should go unnoticed. Assemble the team and go noisily into the field to draw attention away from the camp. The trap has now been set.

 

The two left in the tent are armed and can now monitor at least two approaches to camp on the computer screens. The hardest part will be the waiting. If Sasquatch enters the camp then a major crossroad has been arrived at. Take the shot or don't take the shot. Again, refer to the section “To Shoot Or Not To Shoot” because that critical and potentially devastating decision deserves its own chapter. It is a surprisingly complex and sensitive personal safety issue along with its deeper legal, social, and psychological repercussions; Each of which could bear their own lengthy discussions. Add to that the chapter on “Getting Out” and the obstacles become even more compounded."

 

The Sasquatch Hunter's Field Manual

[Explorer]

Hiflier,

 

Thanks much for your summary extract from your book.

That idea (of distracting a BF) must have been floating around for a while (since Morehead tried a version of it in the 70's), but I wonder if anybody has tested it successfully in the field.

 

The other book where I read of a group trying the idea was in Monster Trek, where the author went with a BFRO group (believe it was in Oklahoma).

They had a large group hiking at night towards a hidden tent and distracted the BF and left one person in the tent (who then got zapped).

This person, however, did not attempt to photograph and had no fancy computer/camera setup as you describe above.

And, apparently, did not fool the BF since she got zapped.

 

At this point, this a hypothesis that needs to be tested in the field.  But I have not seen any photographs or videos captured using this method or variations of it.

At least people are trying them.

 

 

Edited January 20, 2017 by Explorer