Guest Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 Its only the 1st day of deer season, so I can't blame Mr. big for not showing. But this ain't over because I have the patience of Jobe. Ok, back to the topic, I have never sent an email to you, Shaun, but I did correspond to to Rob who runs the Alberta Sasquatch site. It sounds like he may have forwarded you one of my emails. Dude, you don't know me but you talk like you do. That was why I responded to you ONCE on that forum and told you I would never respond to you again. The same applies to this post. Gary decided to engage you over it and your argument is really with him. I was fortunate enough to be the 1st one to talk to Justin about the incident. There are thousands of hunters out there that will, or would shoot a Sasquatch if given the opportunity. Justin is simply one of those hunters. At present there is no law stopping anyone from shooting a Sasquatch. As far as my investigations into other shootings, why do I have to prove it to you? It's none of your business. I am trying very hard to work with people outside the bigfoot community as they are the ones that matter most post-discovery. That's not to say that there isn't some very good people trying their best to solve this mystery, but there is a generous helping of flakes as well. A respected researcher from Vancouver Island once advised to keep a number of these people at "arms length". How right he turned out to be. As far as the Erickson matter, I have had many long conversations with Adrian and he has told me some amazing stuff. Things that nobody has uncovered yet. I really, really like Adrian and I don't blame him for not wanting to get involved with the whole "circus aspect" that some of this has turned out to be. It was Gary who contacted Adrian and told him about the Sierra kills, and Adrian in turn contacted me. It was only then that I learned how much more there was to the story. Somebody very recently called me and asked if I was responsible for recent leaked information. I told them no, but that call alone tells me 2 things. 1] they don't know who leaked it, and 2] some of it must be accurate. So, Everybody that I know that knows Justin seems to really like him. I don't blame him for shooting a Sasquatch, I blame those whos job it is to protect them, and I blame those who keep proof a secret. They may even be the same people. And one last word to the person who drew me into this thread. Kindly stop talking about people you do not know. It's rude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 (edited) If you are looking for normal you have definitely landed in the wrong place. Edited November 1, 2012 by CTfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 1, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 1, 2012 Experts and Bigfoot = oxymoron I do think informed opinion has a place in this thread and I'd like to think that we just got one from Skywalker and I for one am grateful to have a few crumbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted November 2, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 2, 2012 "I blame those whos job it is to protect them, and I blame those who keep proof a secret." Sky walker May ,I ask who you are implying? These creatures do not need protection since the more we go looking for them the deeper into the forest they go. Not just that it is them who decide if they wish to be found never us finding them. They find us and whether you are implying that we are protecting the well that's not how it works. They have a free will and are more then able to make their own choice. If you study these creatures you will understand . I just do not like the idea that they need our protection cause they do not. They are more then capable to protect themselves and as far as keeping secrets about them well that is a great idea since hoaxing is a possibility . If I ever have to shoot one of these creatures it would have to be in self defense . I would never shoot them in cold blood and yes I have thought about it every time I have gone bow hunting.but knowing what I know now I would never do it. Like I have said before I would go to court for Justin ( General) since I do have good knowledge on them. Though it might feel good that they have shot a Sas ,the aftermath is what they have to deal with now and it is all a memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 2, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 2, 2012 .... which will be relived time and time again including the emotions of the aftermath. Hopefully the payoff was (will be) worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jimmy_simpson Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 If you are looking for normal you have definitely landed in the wrong place. LOL... very valid point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Julio 126- Protection could come in many differant forms. Game regulations, education, land mediation and possibly scientific restrictions. Since this thread is about the sierra shootings let me statr with the root problem that IMO can be addressed quite simple. Justin says that he didn't know what he was shooting. Before we go "off point" and talk about how a shooter is suppose to know what he is/was shooting before discharging the firearm, lets look at what some education explaining what a BF would possibly look like and be presented in a hunting manuel so that hunters would be aware of tat possiblity. As I have stated in some of this threads past posts that a hunting regulation for a possible very close to homo sapien would be needed because the BF live in the WILD. If the BF lived in houses then we wouldn't need a law, the exsisiting laws would work, however BF lives in the "line of fire" and is susseptable to mis-identification as in the sierra shooting incident. To address another form of protection, and that is land mediation. Unnessesary IMO because that would restrict the BF and how do you restrict an 600-800 mammal that has a wide range of habitates anyways. IMO that is a big stumbling block to any regulation anyways as far as a governmental agency setting aside land for BF across the country. I believe they should have a Free- Roam policy adopted to them as in the case with a lot of mammals(in Ca.) anyways. Scientific restrictions are usually adopted a lest tempoaraly and limited to acredited scientist when endangered populations are discovered or at the very least posted(not needed) but for argument sakes whos' to know anyone says they are just camping. A lot to consider as far as WHAT kind of protection! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 3, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 3, 2012 (edited) Error to me is introduced into the equation getting everyone to think they are all 600-800 lb. mammals. That for one is imprecise. Until we know more about the bell-curve of sizes, shapes, weights, colors, etc. We are just taking pot-shots in the dark. Perhaps some of the painted cave drawings (ala Pete Travers) could be made into silhouettes (with permission) that would be a starting point for sexual dimorphism and body-type id under poor or distant conditions (not saying those were the conditions of the Sierra Kills.... will we ever find out? who knows) like they did with WWI and WWII AAA gunners to distinguish aircraft friendlies from enemies. Edited November 3, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 There is already a framework in place for the protection of rare and endangered species. I believe they will be placed within this framework immediately. The Native American communities will likely get involved as they will get official credit for discovering the Sasquatch [whether we like it or not] and they will eventually get status as an indigenous "species" of people. One of the shootings I investigated was shot while on all fours much like the Manitoba incident. He thought it was a giant bear until it stood up screaming and ran away with both hands covering the exit wound. The other was shot by a native out cone picking. He knew it was a Sasquatch but it approached his kids and he shot out of fear. Some sort of protection will be necessary because as careful as these beings are they still get shot from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Bipadalist, Skywalker- both are valid points. Still the general public and hunters still need to be educated as to what the BF llok like, appropriate behavior towards them in chance encounters, and some sort of immediate prohibition on shooting of them. In our state(Ca.) general prohibitions are drafted as in the Bobcat specifically so that all parties are aware. Two examples are county oddinances adopted in Whatcom Skamania counties in Washington. Sometimes the general public or hunters do not know all the guidelines enacted every year so that the public can be informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Way to many people wanting to protect something they know absolutely nothing about. Notice how all the forest creatures go silent or display extreme fear and flee when the big hairy guys are around, that’s not normal. They don't act that way when man is in the woods, and why do you think that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Ahh everytime I go in the woods it gets pretty quiet, it's only after you sit down and shut up that I've ever heard the forest sounds come back...maybe your experience is different. Or maybe I'm Bigfoot!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 I agree that the woods do go quiet when humans walk through as well. Reminds me of the documentary of Joe Hutto's experience imprinting turkeys. He found that going in the woods with his turkey brood really opened his eyes regarding the quantity of wildlife in woods near his home, woods that he was quite familiar with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 I saw that.... absolutely amazing stuff wouldn't it be cool to have the time to do something like that! How about when he got his butt kicked by one, I had a similar experience when I "ran" down a wounded turkey...found out once cornered they will fight for their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Not to stray from thread topic, but I've been thumped by geese and swans. Powerful birds... .... yeah, the part of the documentary that really hit home for me was after the brood left him, then his awareness of wildlife diminished. Last I heard we was off imprinting other species in the Rocky Mountains (deer?)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts