Sasquatch In The Modern Era

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

Better odds of success, but politically impossible. The state blessing a sasquatch hunt would bring all the crazies out, attacking fish and game offices statewide.

Oh, I don’t think the state ever would bless such a thing. I’m just comparing the approach. But it would have to be planned by average people.

 

Here is a photo I took this fall in my hunting area.

[Huntster]

1 minute ago, norseman said:

Oh, I don’t think the state ever would bless such a thing. I’m just comparing the approach. But it would have to be planned by average people.

 

It would still be problematic if a private group tried, say, a bounty approach to bagging a sasquatch. For example, it couldn't be done legally on government land, which is the vast majority of sasquatch habitat.

 

A sasquatch could legally taken on Indian land.......until they were scientifically recognized as human.

[norseman]

2 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

It would still be problematic if a private group tried, say, a bounty approach to bagging a sasquatch. For example, it couldn't be done legally on government land, which is the vast majority of sasquatch habitat.

 

A sasquatch could legally taken on Indian land.......until they were scientifically recognized as human.

I think it would have to be kept on the QT for sure. But if people are hiking around on Nat Forest with guns? That’s not a crime. 

[hiflier]

7 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said:

I did have a chance to talk to two DNR officers about the big guy in my state of Michigan. But I chickened out. I just figured that they would just laugh at me.  Michigan is a great place but not for Bigfoot.

 

Nothing ventured, nothing gained- but I see your point SB. It's a fair one but I'll bet your curious anyway about what they'd say. You were probably wise to let it slide although a couple of members here did ask when in the field where it was safe for an authority to talk in private.

[Huntster]

8 hours ago, norseman said:

....... if people are hiking around on Nat Forest with guns? That’s not a crime. 

 

True. But would a person hiking with a rifle get hassled if they didn't have a hunting license?

[ShadowBorn]

45 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

True. But would a person hiking with a rifle get hassled if they didn't have a hunting license?

I would say that it would depend on the rifle the area that you are in. In Michigan we are split into two sections where the lower part of Michigan is only allowed shotguns during hunting season. In the up part of Michigan you are allowed rifle and shotgun.  As far as hiking I am not sure what the DNR would think of what they would see a person carrying either one of these. Yet, here we are an open carry state so I am sure that they might not say nothing.   

[hiflier]

That might depend also on whether or not there was one person who was armed or six. Whatever the person or group turns out to be, someone should have a device that detects the infrared beam that motion cameras emit. It would be one way to possibly know if there's monitoring going on in the area one is moving inside of. Trail heads and trail intersections are usually where such monitoring devices get placed. Keeping one's phone on would be okay as long as it's kept in either a sealed mylar envelope or well wrapped in tinfoil with no gaps. Any documentation can be visually and audibly recorded with a device that isn't digitally connected to anything. These days, WiFi is almost everywhere. I read a study out of China that was conducted in 2014. It showed that now, and in the future, shapes and even identities can be determined simply by monitoring disturbances in the WiFi frequency field.

 

That kind of monitoring is getting more precise with things like finger motion on a keyboard or even lip reading and the capability of "seeing" and identifying individuals- even picking a target out of a crowd with over 80% accuracy. More current studies were being conducted in 2016 https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~wenh/zhang_dcoss16.pdf so one can only imagine where that capability is today. Keeping this kind of information in mind has helped me greatly in presenting the subject of monitoring Bigfoot's locations in the wild. Read up on it as I see it as a "Brave New World" advancing into its best (or worst?) current form. 

Edited October 31, 2020 by hiflier

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

True. But would a person hiking with a rifle get hassled if they didn't have a hunting license?

Roll up a target in your back pack and say your going to target practice. Or it’s for bears. Around here? No. People are always armed. But maybe some places not so much.

[hiflier]

23 minutes ago, norseman said:

Or it’s for bears.

 

LOTS of people arm themselves for defense against bears so it's pretty common and very sensible. More with handguns than rifles though so your idea of having a target in the pack is a good one. Is it a fine line on needing a "just in case" bear tag? I know good animal killing forensics can determine a self defense scenario so maybe not?

 

And BTW, I've been studying surveillance capabilities and technology since I joined this Forum back in June 2013. Not because I'm paranoid but because I have been chronically curious how the technology is progressing. Mainly to understand whether or not it could thwart the securing of a voucher specimen (and getting it to science) in the aftermath of a takedown, or even after finding a dead one. In either case, I think efforts at becoming a "digital ghost" before, during, and after such an endeavor is more than just a suggestion. 

Edited October 31, 2020 by hiflier

[ShadowBorn]

Who knows what the Gov has on these creatures. They just will not open up on them and there is no telling how much info they have on them. What there is one or two places that we can look for answers. These places are the border and Area 51 and 52 on the technology that can be used to detect these creatures. Some of these things are so sensitive that they can detect snakes. 

 

I know that when first had our first encounters up in northern Michigan we used these these tool. David had brought these sensitive seismic detectors that were used in Vietnam  war. We placed these detectors out side the perimeter of our camp site. He was ready with his Thermo camera so when these creatures made there move we would detect the area of movement.

 

Now this was way before anyone started using thermo's or flirs to detect these creatures. So who is to say that the Federal Government does not do better then what we or any other researchers that out there are doing. They have the funding and can be hidden from the public when needed. These creatures have been around for a long time through out the ages . They have been reported by some people who may not be wish to be known who are very credible. But with the technology that we have today it is not hard to believe that our Gov does not know these creatures actually exist in our national forest.

 

Hiflier

You bet I reget not asking those DNR officers. Especially when one of them was a higher up officer and the other was a lower end officer. I was with my wife and my son and we were eating noodles and I was drinking my beer and saki. Still I could not ask them about Bigfoot. It did not seem right to ask them.  I did run into a hunter on a trail last week late in the evening though. All I seen was a shadow and i was walking out of the woods with my light off. When i seen him he was bent down tying his boot. Since I did not have my flash light on I flashed him with my light. I apologized and said to him " I thought you were Bigfoot ". The freaky thing about what I said to him is that he did respond to what i said to him. He heard me but did not say a thing to what I said and said that he was waiting for his friend to come out of the woods.

 

       

[hiflier]

Ah yes, sake. A real delicacy that I had enjoyed on special occasions in the 1990's before I quit drinking altogether (2000). It was difficult to make a decision on which kind because there were so many different ones. Never did get to the level of being a connoisseur.....not that I remember anyway  

Edited October 31, 2020 by hiflier

[MIB]

14 hours ago, Huntster said:

True. But would a person hiking with a rifle get hassled if they didn't have a hunting license?

 

Depends on the state.   They would not in Oregon.   

 

MIB

[Madison5716]

On 10/29/2020 at 4:40 PM, hiflier said:

The past twenty years have seen incredible advances in monitoring and surveillance both terrestrially and beyond

 

We saw our sasquatches this summer using a FLIR. We would not have known they were there, otherwise.  We could hear brush breaking but the most logical assumption would have been deer. What we saw were not deer!

 

Also, I really like the advantage seeing in the dark that technology gives you. It's awesome.  This is how they will be verified. 

[SwiftWater]

On 10/31/2020 at 8:34 AM, Huntster said:

 

True. But would a person hiking with a rifle get hassled if they didn't have a hunting license?

 

If you're outside of firearms season here in VA or in WV you would. Outside of hunting seasons it's illegal to carry a firearm in a NF unless you have a CCW permit.

[Incorrigible1]

I'd be good, then.

 

Odd it takes a state ccw license to become legal in a national forest. Time for state-issued ccw to become akin to a driver's license, and recognized in 50 states.