Guest Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Kill-No Kill....................seems like nobody will change another's mind. But..........letting "The Government" SAVE them is WAY more fantastic, optimistic and misguided than anything else I've read here. Currently in my home State of Washington, "The Government" is shooting bighorn sheep to save them from a disease that they can't prove the sheep have caught yet! Meanwhile "The Federal Government" is re-introducing supposedly endangered wolves into the range of the Selkirk Mountain Caribou herd. Those caribou are the most endangered large mammals in the United States!!! Say what you will about peoples views ( beliefs) on Bigfoot's place on the animal / human scale. The belief ( faith ) in "The Government" doing the right thing and saving isolated Bigfoot populations is so naive to be laughable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Would I shoot one? Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 (edited) Though I still like the idea of making friends with one and being his hiking buddy. Have'n old Sasquatch watching your back in the woods, that be amazing. yep, and it would sure beat the heck out of pepper spray if needed to keep the bears at bay Edited November 2, 2010 by slicktrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted November 2, 2010 Share Posted November 2, 2010 Hey I heard a few stories like that where property owners hunters etc leave food out as a peace offerings (7-10 ft off the ground). As funny as it sounds that works with us too. I do miss the moose or deer steaks I use to get for helping people identify their night visitor. Now its usually a few cold beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted November 2, 2010 Admin Share Posted November 2, 2010 Kill-No Kill....................seems like nobody will change another's mind. But..........letting "The Government" SAVE them is WAY more fantastic, optimistic and misguided than anything else I've read here. Currently in my home State of Washington, "The Government" is shooting bighorn sheep to save them from a disease that they can't prove the sheep have caught yet! Meanwhile "The Federal Government" is re-introducing supposedly endangered wolves into the range of the Selkirk Mountain Caribou herd. Those caribou are the most endangered large mammals in the United States!!! Say what you will about peoples views ( beliefs) on Bigfoot's place on the animal / human scale. The belief ( faith ) in "The Government" doing the right thing and saving isolated Bigfoot populations is so naive to be laughable! Not really. As you said yourself look at the success of the wolf reintroduction program. Look, the Government doesn't always make the right choices....obviously. But a species such as a Sasquatch has very little chance of survival, if they are not officially recognized. We will bulldoze them under with human growth. What is the upside to them remaining a myth? And as far as the Selkirk Caribou program? It's been a joke for quite sometime, we are talking about 43 animals here. Either they need to to a proper reintroduction like the wolf, or they need to just let the program die. And leave Canada to the management of woodland Caribou, where there are sizable populations left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 yep, and it would sure beat the heck out of pepper spray if needed to keep the bears at bay Kind of makes me think of Hairy and the Henderson's myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagniAesir Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 Former no-kill BRFO obtains conclusive evidence of the elusive bigfoot on latest expedition. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtOirkQSk2c&feature=related RayG Best part of a very stupid movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted November 10, 2010 Share Posted November 10, 2010 Probably the only part that really cracked me up. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 It is one of the best ways though to prove it's dead. Based on what we *know* about bigfoot, what would be the downside? **** Have all of you thought this through?***** What do you do with a 800-1000 pound dead animal???? Take pictures or body parts?? If you are deep in the woods what other resources would you have? It would be impossible to carry unless you cut it up or just take pieces unless you are lucky enough to kill one by a road or large path. I'm sad just talking about it after reading all of the BF shooting reports I recently discovered. Their lives are difficult enough without us hunting them for a specimen unless that specimen could have them protected from hunters with stiff fines and jail time for injuring or killing them except in self defense after they are officially verified... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Kill-No Kill....................seems like nobody will change another's mind. But..........letting "The Government" SAVE them is WAY more fantastic, optimistic and misguided than anything else I've read here. Currently in my home State of Washington, "The Government" is shooting bighorn sheep to save them from a disease that they can't prove the sheep have caught yet! Meanwhile "The Federal Government" is re-introducing supposedly endangered wolves into the range of the Selkirk Mountain Caribou herd. Those caribou are the most endangered large mammals in the United States!!! Say what you will about peoples views ( beliefs) on Bigfoot's place on the animal / human scale. The belief ( faith ) in "The Government" doing the right thing and saving isolated Bigfoot populations is so naive to be laughable! You need to rouse the hunters with this issue and have them rally around this cause. Hunters are mostly good people and care about the land and the wildlife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 I'm in favor of kill to prove. The only thing that will prove it will be a full fledged DNA analysis and that won't happen it seems as bigfoot seems to evade us when alive so shoot to kill in the long run it'll move the issue properly into science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bsruther Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 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. What if he only appears to be in attack mode, but you're not really certain that he is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 "I've also been contacted in the last few months by a man from New York who is willing to hire retired military commandos to go into the field to capture or kill a Bigfoot." Retired military "commandos" would be my last choice and I are one. Once again I ask "why is a SEAL, SF or Recon the top choice for Bigfoot hunters?" What can we do that civilian hunters in good physical shape cant? NavySEAL Navy Seal, You ask that question seriously? What can't Navy Seals do? I'm not saying that hunters aren't sharp, but my son, just a common soldier, would be better prepared to handle an angry animal than my hubby I believe and hubby is trained to react in an emergency, but seeing an animal that does not exist can startle and freeze most anyone. Spec ops are trained to react to whatever danger they are facing and usually do not freeze, but react correctly to sudden stimuli.. Surprisingly I've reacted well in frightening situations in part due to my nursing career I think, but a BF suddenly appearing, I'd probably freeze in place and hope it would leave me alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 What if he only appears to be in attack mode, but you're not really certain that he is? If he was acting mad but not running at me I would stand still and s l o w l y quietly back a w a y while looking at it, then collapse when it's gone Do you guys think making eye contact with a BF would be considered an aggressive manner towards it? I keep eye contact with angry dogs showing my authority or my dominance while softly speaking to it while slowly backing away. That behavior has kept me from being bitten a couple of times so it has worked for me so far.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Why does this all remind me of one of my favorite Gary Larson comics, with two field researchers finding a journal in the woods with clothes and equipment scattered around and the caption.... "Tomorrow I will test my theory about the sense of humor of these gentle giants of the forest with a joy buzzer handshake." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts