Jump to content
masterbarber

The realism of the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject cannot be replicated with a costume so; what are the possibilities? (2)

Recommended Posts

Huntster
5 minutes ago, gigantor said:

We can't issue a hunting permit for an animal that doesn't exist, due to Department policy........

 

Please cite the policy by regulation number or source.

 

.........We must follow the policy which says that we can only issue hunting permits for animals in this list. If it's not on this list, we cannot issue a permit. Bigfoot's are not on the list..........

 

Please cite the policy by regulation number or source. That policy is clearly flexible due to the provisions published on page 142 of the Alaska Hunting Regulations regarding deleterious exotic animals, which is clearly not limited to the deleterious animals known to exist today and which might appear in the future, and which might include the sasquatch species. Further, this is not a proposal to open general hunting for sasquatches to the public. This is an application for a special use permit to kill a single specimen in order to scientifically establish their existence today and within Alaska so that they may be properly managed by the Department in the future.

 

..........Please contact the legislature and have them amend the list to include Bigfoot, then we will gladly issue you a hunting permit.

 

The Alaska Legislature has charged the Department to manage Alaska's wildlife by regulation IAW AAC Title 5, and that includes the ability and responsibility to issue special use permits upon reasonable application.

11 minutes ago, hiflier said:

.........emails are to test the waters. ..........

 

There is no reason to test the water. It is cold, stagnant, and officially off limits. What needs to be tested is the bravery (or cowardice, or resolve) of those currently keeping peopke out of the water. 

 

I say that they are official cowards, and they will blow in the wind like confetti. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor
8 minutes ago, Huntster said:

That policy is clearly flexible due to the provisions published on page 142 of the Alaska Hunting Regulations

 

There are no Bigfoot in Alaska, we need a permit for the state of Washington and Oregon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Huntster said:

I say that they are official cowards, and they will blow in the wind like confetti.

 

Agreed, but where is that wind blowing in from. As far as I can see it's only blowing from me, stagnant water or not. There are over 100 Bigfoot websites and not one of them is taking this approach. Not one in any of the 50 states. Correction, except for my own which I am doing. And Washington, which I am also doing. Why Solving for Bigfoot in this manner is not being generally done, or maybe not even generally thought of is more than a little bit strange.  

 

7 minutes ago, gigantor said:

There are no Bigfoot in Alaska,

 

And how would anyone know that? The statement itself would be a bombshell :) Who and how would anyone get such a statement?

 

7 minutes ago, gigantor said:

......we need a permit for the state of Washington and Oregon

 

Another bombshell if it were to ever happen.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier

I am going to say one more thing about this and then I will get off this thread with my sincere apologies for its derailment. I have been at this for 6 months now because I have thought it so vitally important.

 

This is about science. And because it is I would appeal to the Olympic Project to petition the WA DNR/F&W to seriously answer the questing regarding Sasquatch existence and here is why: Something made those nests. If it was Sasquatch they obviously NEED to build these structures for what ever reason and so any areas that these sites appear need to be restricted to give a wide berth of non-intrusion. If there are no Sasquatches then these sites STILL need to be given a wide birth of non-intrusion. If Sasquatch do not exist then whatever made those structures is showing undocumented behavior whether it be bears or Humans!!

 

If Sasquatch is declared to not exist then one would think it would lift the stigma which would free F&W to officially fund a study of them and maybe perform the necessary research to find others and understand why they are being built. Once know then DNR would be better able to advise timber harvesting entities, both private and commercial, on how to proceed should such structures be found on timberland slated for harvesting. Programs could be set up through the universities to monitor these kinds of areas and plans could be made to delicately harvest an area until an answer on what is creating these nesting sites has been revealed.

 

This is science and for that reason alone some kind of dialogue need to be pursued. For all I know it already IS being pursued but it may or my not revolve around the Sasquatch existence question. One thing I think I do know though, the outcome SHOULD result in a public statement regarding the reality or non-reality of this creature. The Olympic Project could spearhead this investigation into existence and in a way I think it must be doing just that. The issue remains though that either outcome will impact the flow of revenues. Officially stating Sasquatch doesn't existence will be extremely costly. Officially stating it does exist will be devastatingly costly. There is no way around either. But whatever the outcome, scientifically this is an enormous discovery for study. I cannot think of anything more to say on the matter. My position these past few months, my reasons for it, and my efforts at prying out the truth, though maybe not utilizing the best or most effective of methods, have all been to arrive at the truth. A truth which has a source whose knowledge is more than likely the best repository of the knowledge which would a state government agency.

 

I wonder what science has been doing already with this find? I wonder if anyone in science has petitioned the government? Especially since science would know that nothing in North America makes these kinds of nests. To me this is as big now, if not bigger, than it was at the end of reading the very first article on the subject. And I just can't let it go.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
2 hours ago, gigantor said:

There are no Bigfoot in Alaska, we need a permit for the state of Washington and Oregon.

 

That statement demonstrates that if there are sasquatches in Alaska (as lots of evidence suggests), they are indeed an exotic and deleterious species here, or that the ADFG is unfamiliar with its native species, and proof of their existence here is necessary for the Department to carry forth its charter.

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

Agreed, but where is that wind blowing in from........

  

Currently it's blowing from the mouths of the skeptic industry, but if their own regulations and responsibilities are used against them, they will be forced to blow with the stronger wind.

 

.........There are over 100 Bigfoot websites and not one of them is taking this approach. Not one in any of the 50 states........

 

That is incorrect. If the Olympic Project is operating in either the national park or national forest, they are likely operating under USFS permits, especially if they are removing samples of anything from the forest. We already know that Cliff Barackson has gained permission from the USFS to conduct sasquatch expeditions on national forest lands. What I propose is permission to kill a sasquatch from the primary agency of a state responsible for hunting regulations, and which regulations clearly prohibit killing anything not specifically listed with a hunting season. If a carcass is the only thing that will put an end to the mystery, how is it that they can prohibit going out and getting one?

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
3 hours ago, gigantor said:

 

There are no Bigfoot in Alaska, we need a permit for the state of Washington and Oregon.

 

I think there are more Sasquatch in SE Alaska than any place else on Earth with the possible exception of western BC.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NCBFr
4 hours ago, gigantor said:

 

There are no Bigfoot in Alaska, we need a permit for the state of Washington and Oregon.

 

Where did you come to that conclusion?  I could easily find a half dozen very credible reports of BFs in AK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor
47 minutes ago, NCBFr said:

Where did you come to that conclusion

 

I was kidding of course, trying to trip up Huntster, but he handled it beautifully.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NCBFr
24 minutes ago, gigantor said:

 

I was kidding of course, trying to trip up Huntster, but he handled it beautifully.

 

LOL.  That makes me the April fool.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
4 hours ago, Huntster said:

That is incorrect. If the Olympic Project is operating in either the national park or national forest, they are likely operating under USFS permits, especially if they are removing samples of anything from the forest

 

The nests are on privately owned timberland, beyond that I wholly agree with what you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
4 hours ago, norseman said:

I think there are more Sasquatch in SE Alaska than any place else on Earth with the possible exception of western BC.

 

I think it's the other way around. BC is Sasquatch Central now. A century ago, it was western Washington.

3 hours ago, gigantor said:

I was kidding of course, trying to trip up Huntster, but he handled it beautifully.

 

Your pitches were great. Throw more!

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

The nests are on privately owned timberland........

 

Now THAT is interesting, especially bringing DNR or F&W in to see what is found. There is nothing sweeter than government seeing the good stuff on private land!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
9 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Now THAT is interesting, especially bringing DNR or F&W in to see what is found. There is nothing sweeter than government seeing the good stuff on private land!

 

Yep. Even sweeter that it was made public, not only the discovery itself but the fact that DNR was there- private land or no.  Maybe you can see better now why I have been all over this for the past few months. There are some very large issues connected with this situation that could seriously blow the lid off the whole Bigfoot mystery.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

That is almost a mirror reflection of the Eric Muench nest find on Prince of Wales Island in southeast Alaska in 1989. It was on private logging land (Native/aboriginal) who then brought in state and federal forestry personnel as well as ADFG. The story is told by Robert Alley in "Raincoast Sasquatch".

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Huntster said:

That is incorrect. If the Olympic Project is operating in either the national park or national forest, they are likely operating under USFS permits, especially if they are removing samples of anything from the forest. We already know that Cliff Barackson has gained permission from the USFS to conduct sasquatch expeditions on national forest lands. What I propose is permission to kill a sasquatch from the primary agency of a state responsible for hunting regulations, and which regulations clearly prohibit killing anything not specifically listed with a hunting season. If a carcass is the only thing that will put an end to the mystery, how is it that they can prohibit going out and getting one?

 

 

As you recall Olynpic project did have some game cams on Oly Nat Forest (maybe Nat Park don't recall) but their cameras were found and the rule is abandonment of gear for more than 24 hrs is a violation of wilderness, park and forest regulations apparently (UNLESS YOU REPRESENT THESE). They were presented with a warning or citation but I don't believe confiscation.  Somebody with the project could tell you more or google the forum it was discussed by Derek R. of the project somewhere.  I would imagine they welcomed BF moving to nest on private timberlands with open arms to put it mildly.

 

And Hunster, I've got to admit you have a steeltrap memory for some of this Sasquatch minutiae

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
8 hours ago, bipedalist said:

I would imagine they welcomed BF moving to nest on private timberlands with open arms to put it mildly.

 

I think you imagine correctly. Actually I am working up a scenario for this whole affair from the viewpoint of a mainstream scientist who holds the idea that there is no such a thing as a Sasquatch. Might give a fresh perspective on things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...