Bigfoot: Would You Shoot One?

[Guest Wendigo]

I wouldn't have the balls to do it. It would be like shooting an innocent human for science.

That being said, I am "pro-trap".

[Guest]

Sadly, the only way we can learn from this creature, physically, would be an autopsy and the only way to do so is with a dead Sasquatch. I would only shoot one in selfdefense but unless we capture one, keep it in a cage for years and wait for it to die then do an autopsy, what kind of life would it have then? I do not advocate research groups going into the woods with guns in the pursuit of shooting one, I feel this will all come about when the first hunter to 'bag' one then we will be able to set up legal protection for them.

[Guest BCCryptid]

Not one of you can say you would until you have it in your scope and you make the call.

I am on the fence for now, which I guess means I am anti since to be pro you would need to actually carry the gun into the woods with ammo, on a sasquatch expedition, which I have not done yet. Most expeditions though have a strictly no guns policy.

I do think they will not be accepted by science until we have some large physical evidence, unfossilized bones or a body.

[VAfooter]

So what are the differences in the Swamp Ape of Florida and the giants of the PNW? Differences between the North American, Yeti, Yowie, Russian, and Chinese versions? What about the differences between brown and black, black and red, red and orange? Male and female? How many specimens would you need to have a coherent understanding of the creature and the different subspecies?

Just wanted to throw a few things out there for thought.

Edited September 27, 2010 by VAfooter

[Guest]

Not one of you can say you would until you have it in your scope and you make the call.

You know, as someone who has always claimed they would shoot one to prove the species and hopefully subsequently force protection for both the species and its habitat, I've got to agree buddy.

It's easy to sit behind the relative comfort of a keyboard and state emphatically what one would do and I've certainly done it myself.

I've always been struck by those hunters who have had sightings and said they just couldn't shoot because it looked too human.

So, while I still think I could, you're right....I don't know for sure.

[Guest]

The book is way better than the movie btw

You are correct, sir. In fact both books are better than the movies.

[TKD]

Have the automatic shotgun with the drum and I hope you would have enough fire-power...

[Guest]

Perhaps you speak of the AA-12? I doubt you would even need the whole 20 round drum. Especially if you were chucking out mini grenades. Seriously, that thing is a cannon.

[Guest Penamunde]

Capture Should be the question and it's not that far out of the question for some.

[Guest sambx]

It depends. If he's coming at me in attack mode, then yes I would shoot him. But if he's being peaceful, then no way.

[Guest Robert]

Shoot it & mount it, they make a great conversation piece to show it off to your friends ~

Aight Timmy, what's the story on this one? Some taxidermy man havin' a good time?

[norseman]

I want everyone to read this letter that the Smithsonian sent out as a blanket statement:

http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2010/01/smithsonians-formal-reply-letter-to.html

With this part of the letter of particular interest:

With the large publicity the "snowman" has received in recent years, many popular articles of little scientific value have been written. Some of these are convincing to read, but they are mostly based on circumstantial evidence of "sightings," tracks, hair, scats, and some doubtful pelts and skull caps.

While most scientists believe the likelihood of the existence of such a creature is small, they keep an open mind as scientists should. One cannot prove anything on the basis of negative evidence, and the only satisfactory proof that an animal fitting the description of the "snowman" exists would be either to capture one and study it or to find undisputed skeletal evidence. Only these kinds of finds would result in the universal recognition of the "snowman" by all scientists.

Although not news to anyone really, there it is in black and white. Without a body, science isnt going to recognize ANY species, let alone a north American bipedal ape as a legitimate species without a specimen. Period, end of story.

If people want to go out on expeditions to cast footprints, collect hair samples, take pictures or video, or interact with one, that's fine and dandy. If you have seen it and know it to be real and have no desire to prove it to anyone else that is fine and dandy as well.

I personally am 100% pro kill, and I wouldn't hesitate for a moment if I saw one. The reasoning behind my position is this, shooting ONE specimen isn't going to endanger the whole of the species. And the species faces much greater threats than bullets from mankind. Logging, mining, depletion of fisheries, water pollution and housing encroachment have a much greater chance of eradicating a species of shy apes than anything else. And the faster we can prove their existence the faster we can place them on the endangered species act and grant them the protection they deserve. Look at the controversial introduction of the wolf to the lower 48. It's been more successful than any biologists most wild expectations. Montana and Idaho are now selling hunting tags for wolves to help CONTROL the population.....that's how successful their return has been. (Not that I would ever support a sasquatch "season")

I'm a hunter and have been so my whole entire life. This is not in any way shape or form what drives me to shoot a sasquatch. I take keen interest in the great apes, their self recognition, memory tests, signing and just fascinating interaction with humans. I truly see them as our cousins, and feel a kindred spirit with them. So to many I'm sure my position is seen as a oxymoron, but I truly believe that if you truly care about this species, you owe it to them to prove their existence to the scientific community and our government. If we could convince science without a body, then I would not be pro kill, the next best alternative is to find a body that died of natural causes.......that would be perfect.

But I fear that we are simply as a species (homo sapiens) are ignorantly grinding them under to extinction without us even knowing about it. And the longer we (as field researchers) take in proving it's existence the greater the chance that they while disappear right out from under our noses. I find that very sad.

Now on to the grisly discussion of taking a specimen. For one, I would never, ever take a long shot on a sasquatch. I think it would be very hard to determine if what I was seeing was the real deal or a fool in a suit. For the many of you that have hunted (especially with a bow) there is something about hunting at close range that would without a doubt take 99% of the guess work out of it. I would know if a 600 lbs creature was walking in front of me or if it was some guy in a suit. At that range you could also verbally challenge it as well for added insurance. I think any hoax would come to a screeching halt if a guy in a suit was confronted with a person with a gun at close range. It would be the call of the shooter, and nobody is probably going to care if you screw up and take somebodies life. That right there probably stops a lot of people in their tracks. It's a very serious situation and judgement call.

The other problem is that they seem to be active at night. Yes, there is plenty of varmint and military gear out there that would allow a individual to accurately target something at night. But I feel that situation becomes even more serious and calls one's judgement into even a higher risk. Night operations are complex and risky both to the shooter and to anyone else residing in the area, as well as any shenanigans posed by hoaxers. Not to mention trying to explain to the game warden that you really really are after sasquatch and not poaching. "No son, I don't consider a .375 Holland and Holland to be a VARMINT cartridge...."

As far as the question of retribution by a family of sasquatch. Does anyone remember Albert Ostman's tale about being abducted up around Bella Coola BC? Supposedly when he fed the "old man" his snuff can, and he ran off to the spring to get water and Albert made his break for it. The female ran after him.......and one shot from his .30-30 over her head sent her right back from where she came from. Animals don't generally retaliate, not so sure about great apes, but gun shots are not something they typically stick around for. A wounded animal is a completely different issue and is well documented, especially with dangerous game, which we could probably assume that a giant ape would be. When hunting a person is trying to make a good shot on a animal without wasting meat for consumption. They will also tend to wait it out, and track the animal so not to push it. This is not a consideration in this case, we would be interested in a specimen for science and collection would be paramount. I would shoot until the animal was on the ground, not only for safety sake but for an insurance policy to make that collection. More along the lines of LE or military training than hunting per say.

Lastly, if you failed in your endeavor to stop it and was attacking and killed by it? Then as a big boy going out there looking to collect a specimen, you must be ready to accept the consequences of your actions. There are no guarantees in life and especially in hunting dangerous game. And there are plenty of things out there that can kill you that are much more mundane, such as falls, bad weather, navigation errors and cranky mules.

[Guest Kerchak]

Shoot it & mount it, they make a great conversation piece to show it off to your friends ~

He must have been going like a bullet when he hit that wall.

[Branco]

I'm pro shoot. But could I, personally? I would have to be in the situation to be sure. I like to think I could but I can see how a somewhat human looking primate could cause one to hesitate.

Only those who have never seen one of the animals would say they could and would shoot one. BS-ers all.

[Incorrigible1]

Only those who have never seen one of the animals would say they could and would shoot one. BS-ers all.

And a good photo is out of the question?