Guest wtwest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 wtwest- the shooter in this unfortunate incident thought the subject looked like a cross between a bear and a gorilla, correct. that means he wasn't really sure. OK in the state of California it is to shoot an unknown wild mammal. what the regulations mean there is if you can't tell if what your shooting a squirrel or a pine marten and you can't make out what it is DO NOT SHOOT IT. Also if you think it is a bear and it has cubs with it, regulations say DO NOT SHOOT IT. it is also agianst regulations to shot a bear cub at any time. My point is this. I know plenty of hunters and they are responsible citizens that are carrying guns and that requires a good deal of common sense and experience in the field to handle the sport responsibly. know your regulations and act saftely. IMHO this incident was not handled safely. The shooter could have backed away . I also understand his grief and remorse the shooter has but that doesn't change the attitude of acting improperly in the field. I'm really not here to prosecute the shooter, I know he has a lot of grief as WE ALL Do, but your last post would seem like a "shoot first and ask questions later" attitude and that sort of mind set has not shown to be a safe outcome which was the result of that sort of mindset. Now we have two dead very rare species, and someone who is going to profit from his misplaced mindset. this sort of thing makes me ask those with the experience but not the proper minset to show a lot more caution when engaging in the field. I also understand that the shooter wouldn't have handled it the wat it went down in hindsight OK. so wt you may choose to handle yourself in the state you live in but certainly in the near future if your perform that shoot for profit attitude in California you may wish you never saw a bigfoot. ptangier Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think that General saw the baby bigfoot when he first shot the adult. There are no regulations about shooting a bigfoot, you are just puffing up your straw man at this point. If you think the authorities or the Fish and Game Commission would prosecute you for shooting this thing, you are wrong. If I did indeed live in California, and I was put in the General's situation, the only thing I would do differently is not shooting the baby bigfoot and not leaving the bodies. Sometimes sacrifices need to be made for scientific advancement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Strick Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I did just spend a few days with him and he seemed very healthy to me. Derek, I'm glad that you finally got to meet the General. Did your opinion of either his story or his character change just one iota from your time spent together? Also, did you get to visit the kill site? Can you confirm that its location is not where Lindsay reports? I just listened to the radio show you did a while back and found you personally very impressive. I totally understand your point that your faith in the General's account is backed up by your knowledge of the DNA results. I also (grudgingly) accept the NDA's. However, as I don't know the results of the tests I have to be a little wary of believing the accounts of others, especially when we're talking Bigfoot! I think it was JC Johnson who made some very good points about the capacity of individuals to lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) wtwest- the shooter in this unfortunate incident thought the subject looked like a cross between a bear and a gorilla, correct. that means he wasn't really sure. OK in the state of California it is to shoot an unknown wild mammal. what the regulations mean there is if you can't tell if what your shooting a squirrel or a pine marten and you can't make out what it is DO NOT SHOOT IT. Also if you think it is a bear and it has cubs with it, regulations say DO NOT SHOOT IT. it is also agianst regulations to shot a bear cub at any time. My point is this. I know plenty of hunters and they are responsible citizens that are carrying guns and that requires a good deal of common sense and experience in the field to handle the sport responsibly. know your regulations and act saftely. IMHO this incident was not handled safely. The shooter could have backed away . I also understand his grief and remorse the shooter has but that doesn't change the attitude of acting improperly in the field. I'm really not here to prosecute the shooter, I know he has a lot of grief as WE ALL Do, but your last post would seem like a "shoot first and ask questions later" attitude and that sort of mind set has not shown to be a safe outcome which was the result of that sort of mindset. Now we have two dead very rare species, and someone who is going to profit from his misplaced mindset. this sort of thing makes me ask those with the experience but not the proper minset to show a lot more caution when engaging in the field. I also understand that the shooter wouldn't have handled it the wat it went down in hindsight OK. so wt you may choose to handle yourself in the state you live in but certainly in the near future if your perform that shoot for profit attitude in California you may wish you never saw a bigfoot. ptangier Well Said, Sir, Well Said! From your lips to every *young* hunters ears....Monsters/BF are off limits unless your life is in imminent danger Edited August 11, 2011 by SweetSusiq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam2323 Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 HI all I work in Sacramento area in the Law enforcement arena. I know several of the F&G wardens and one of the deputy director. There is no investigatin and there isnt going to be one. Thier opinion is its just a big JOKE. Like everyone just keeping my figers and toes crossed that its all true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 PacNWSquatcher, GREAT QUESTIONS!! Yes there are three waterways leading away from the elevated area where this occurred. I think like you think, I think..lol. After the immediate area was searched, that's the first thing OP members concentrated on. We searched and combed every inch of the three channels. In my experience I've found more animal remains in creek and river beds than any other place. Paul Graves and I belly crawled for a total of about 14 hours in the closest brushy waterway, and I don't say brushy lightly..lol. Sorry, don't even know if brushy 's a word. I, like you also believe that waterways and river drainage's are Sasquatch travel routes, and as a mater of fact we're getting ready to camera trap many drainage's here in the Olympics that coincide with Salmon runs. For the last two, almost three years we've concentrated on ridge lines and game trails but it's time to switch it up a bit. BTW, no apology needed, I know this can be a tough story to wrap your brain around. Thank's for the positive input. I mean that. I'm curious about your research. If you get a chance please PM me. I'd love to talk to you more. Strick, another good question. Yes spending time with him did solidify what I already felt. He is a very straight up guy, and he knows his stuff. No ego, just a large thirst to know more. I really like him a lot. We went through many emotions on that trip. Considering the company there, I was amazed at his honesty and willingness to help and relive his description of the events as they unfolded. It was very powerful. wtwest, You are correct, the big one had already been shot before the little ones showed up. BobbyO, yes all the samples are in the study. I know Paulides has samples in and He's a big part of this study, as well as many other groups and researchers. I can't speak to Adrians involvement. I don't know if his stuff is in or not. DR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 11, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted August 11, 2011 .....No I can't prove it but I 100% believe him, and again, I know the test results. Derekfoot, is the above quote in reference to the Sierra Shooting sample, OP "other" samples, both samples or somebody else's samples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Strick, sorry I missed one. I can tell you that Lindsay is off with his sighting location. It's actually kind of funny. He is right about one thing, it's in Nor-Cal. I heard he and Stubstad went up there to look at the site. Hope they had a nice camping trip..lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I know the test results from the many samples that we, The Olympic Project have turned in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Not out for peer review? I'm really confused now. I may be misremembering but didn't the SquatchDetective program say it was out for peer review and that information came from Dr. Ketchum herself? Am I missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) Derek, when you said this above it gave me pause because I do believe you are sincere, and I thought you were speaking specifically about the Sierra Samples Test Results. No I can't prove it but I 100% believe him, and again, I know the test results. But now you saying the following, I have to ask if that's the case? I know the test results from the many samples that we, The Olympic Project have turned in. Please clarify will ya. I also do believe that you have submitted valid long term samples from the OP, no question. Edited August 11, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Prag, I was not there when the shooting happened, but I do believe the general and his description of the events. And I also know the test results from all the samples that we have turned in. What do you need me to clarify? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted August 11, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted August 11, 2011 Thanks Derek, appreciate you answering the questions.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 wt west- let me state it again so were not misunderstood. In California it is agianst the regulation to shoot unknown wild mammals. When I asked an official in the Sacramento office what that meant as to "unknown" he said basically that if you can't tell if it is a pine marten or a squirrel then don't shoot. Thats what "unknown" means, so for the benifit of BBF members that hunt in the state of California, if you can't tell if its a bear or a Sasquatch get back in the truck until you can get a positive ID. Derekfoot- to the shooter, my may plea actually was that when an unintentinal violation occurs you would hope someone would try to turn a bad situation into something that would benifit the victims, if not the Sas in this case but the general public. IMHO I am not trying your fried or trying to prosecute him, what is done is done. But on the other hand hopefully the shooter would consider making a public statement, sort of like a PSA to be used for hunting clubs some education purposes or for education purposes to the general public like campers in parksites. Kind of like a community service kind of thing. Just a thought on that end. On the other hand, this incident may lead to protection of the Sas people on the research end. BBF members- the post I made to the gentleman about shooting a bigfoot if he ever gets one in his sight I will take as a joke and move on there is no sense trying to talk to someone who really does not have saftey or consideration for our national resourses. ptangier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Rwridley, I didn't say that it's not out for peer review. I assume it is but I don't know for sure. That is her place to disclose that not mine. We are just the sample turner in guys...lol. We do our thing and she does hers. You can trust me when I say that there isn't anybody who wants this to happen as soon as possible more than I do, but being in this for as many years as I have I've learned patience. She has told me that she will let me know of any developments so I can post them here when the time is right according to her. This is her study and she's in the drivers seat. I know her well and she definitely has my respect. This is to important to rush. She says by the end of the year, and hopefully she's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wtwest Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) wt west- let me state it again so were not misunderstood. In California it is agianst the regulation to shoot unknown wild mammals. When I asked an official in the Sacramento office what that meant as to "unknown" he said basically that if you can't tell if it is a pine marten or a squirrel then don't shoot. Thats what "unknown" means, so for the benifit of BBF members that hunt in the state of California, if you can't tell if its a bear or a Sasquatch get back in the truck until you can get a positive ID. BBF members- the post I made to the gentleman about shooting a bigfoot if he ever gets one in his sight I will take as a joke and move on there is no sense trying to talk to someone who really does not have saftey or consideration for our national resourses. ptangier How many unknown animals do you run across in your daily travels in California? One of the biggest arguments from bigfoot believers is that they talk about how they would never mistake a bear for a bigfoot or vice versa. There is no precedent and there are no laws in any state stating that you cannot kill a bigfoot. If I identify a large apelike creature out in the wild that I can confirm isn't a man in a suit (pretty easy considering all the experience everyone has with suits and bigfoot), I'm shooting it. No questions asked. I'd bet you $100,000 that you wouldn't be charged with any crime, hell you'd probably be lauded by the scientific community for finally providing the proof that everyone has been asking for. Awesome, you had a conversation with an officer about "unknown" animals. I encourage you to take that into court and try to prosecute me for shooting a bigfoot. At worst I'll get a fine, at best I'll get off completely clean. Either way, I'll be laughing all the way to the bank. Edited August 11, 2011 by wtwest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts