Bigfoot Discovery - Kill or No Kill

[Trogluddite]

NCBFr - I meant Sasquatches who are scientists, not people who research Sasquatch!

[Believer57]

It's always a good idea to start with a search for information on the BFF. However, new threads or polls on old topics help us to be engaged members. By using the latest information at our disposal, perhaps our opinion has changed over the years.

 

[Marty]

Strictly pro-kill, it is the only way science will recognize the species outside of amazing, irrefutable video evidence. Though I am not going to be the one to kill it, as I personally just don't agree with it since they're so close to humans but it needs to be done if we cannot get good video OR, by some miracle, capture a live specimen. 

Edited February 11, 2021 by Marty

[hiflier]

OOOOOR, finds irrefutable DNA evidence that there is a primate other than Human that inhabits the wildernesses of North America. From what I've been able to ascertain, this is doable as long as the right person gets involved. Eventually I'll find such a person, I know they're out there.

[NatFoot]

5 hours ago, Believer57 said:

It's always a good idea to start with a search for information on the BFF. However, new threads or polls on old topics help us to be engaged members. By using the latest information at our disposal, perhaps our opinion has changed over the years.

 

 

I agree. Lively discussion would be preferred to me rather than reading a thread that started 9 years ago.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

19 minutes ago, NatFoot said:

 

I agree. Lively discussion would be preferred to me rather than reading a thread that started 9 years ago.

Agreed.  New points of view and new opinions are more interesting than a decade old thread populated by inactive members.  I am here for the discussion.  If I just want to read I will buy another book.  

[norseman]

 

Science has spoken, it needs physical evidence. THIS IS THE 800LBS GORILLA IN THE ROOM. A single tooth or pinky bone is more valuable than 10,000 foot casts or 10,000 PGF’s. The evidence doesn’t get heavier and heavier to science as the numbers grow. There IS a line in the sand. If your evidence doesn’t cross that line? It goes into the giant carnival bin. It lays next to Pixie and Gnome “evidence”. 

 

Someone brought up the point that Sasquatch numbers are not healthy enough to harvest a specimen. If they are truly going extinct? One specimen is not going to matter. Better to document what’s left of the unknown species than to let it slip off quietly into the night.

 

Are there other methods than shooting one? Yes. Dr. Disotell in the million dollar Bigfoot bounty showed researchers how to collect evidence. Everything from hair to scat to collecting mosquitos for their blood in their stomachs. Archeological digs could unearth bones. Even walking around in the forest may produce bones to collect. EDNA may hold promise in the future by simply sampling waterways for a complete map of the local fauna. But running samples does cost $$$$. But so does gas, food, dental resin and hi tech video and audio equipment. And none of those produce physical evidence.

 

If your a squatcher that just likes to go out and have “experiences” in the woods. Hey! It’s a free country, right?

 

But if your invested in science? Research LEADS to a discovery! A discovery that must be confirmed by a panel of your peers.

 

Self reflection isn’t an easy task. And it’s easy to loose sight of the goal. 
 

Here is my list of things we as a community can improve on.

 

1) Physical Evidence #1 priority 

A) Actively hunting the creature

B) Collecting trace evidence for DNA samples (Hair, Scat, Blood, etc)

C) Noting footprints or tree breaks or screams in the night are fine and dandy. So long as they don’t become the focus of the pursuit. Elk hunters don’t record Bull Elk bugles and call it a day. You follow the sign to the animal itself. You don’t document sign and go home.

 

2) Share knowledge!!!

A) Science requires peer review. Hiding locations of activity? So your the sole “experience” storyteller makes you look like a quack. If your a biologist discovering a new species? Your gonna try to come out with a type specimen. Short of that your going to document the area so that follow on researchers can easily find what you observed. Maybe they will finish what you started. Which IS science. Humans building knowledge in a collective effort.

B) Its not about you, your organization or your TV show. It’s about an unknown species. It’s about conservation.

 

3) Be prepared!

A) A 800 lbs omnivore primate is not your friend. Study early hominids and cannibalism. Cannibalism still exists in our own species. Look at Indian legends. Just because your not actively hunting it doesn’t give you a free pass. You could be attacked for the same reasons as a Bear. Territorial dispute, offspring, mating, startled, etc. Or maybe it just hates humans.

B) Your knowledge should range from correct bullet calibers to map and compass reading to tracking to survival and first aid. Knowledge is power. But power needs to be applied. So practice, practice, practice.

 

4) Strength in numbers

A) It’s rare and elusive. The best way to combat that is by increasing our numbers in the woods and be ready to collect physical evidence. It’s number 1 strength is that it can hide from us. But it cannot hide all traces of itself. Spread out until the net makes contact and then close in.

B) Dont avoid the steep and deep. Because it will not. Think about where humans don’t tread in wilderness. Swamp bogs, mountain peaks, steep canyons, brush, deadfall, etc.

 

Please feel free to add onto the list.

 

Its my observation that the pro kill mindset is more prevalent than it was 10 years ago. Why? Probably because the conventional wisdom of the Finding Bigfoot crowd has failed. The secrecy, the whooping, tree banging, foot casts, the blurry videos. With that said they are a well organized group with a wealth of sightings reports. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel. We just need to get it rolling down the road.

 

 

 

 

30 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Agreed.  New points of view and new opinions are more interesting than a decade old thread populated by inactive members.  I am here for the discussion.  If I just want to read I will buy another book.  

I understand. But it gets tiresome repeating oneself over and over and over again. 

[hiflier]

That has got to be one of the finest posts I've read in a long time, and there have been some very good ones along the way. But paring down the main issues confronting us in order to delineate the path forward takes being able to back away and look at the entire picture. Norseman has done that and he did while respecting everyone here. It wasn't a post that criticized as much as it spoke to having everyone's knowledge and ability channel into the larger end goal of getting this creature exposed for its own good by whatever physical/scientific means available to us. It has been difficult to persuade this community to work together and not follow the usual pattern of isolated and fragmented research. Maybe we can turn the corner on that hold a more collective effort for discovery. At this point there isn't a darned thing to lose by doing so if our BF research history has anything to teach us.

 

And we can have science on our side in this effort. Trust me, there are some potentially good things currently happening in that regard as I speak.

Edited February 11, 2021 by hiflier

[NCBFr]

On 2/10/2021 at 10:56 PM, hiflier said:

 

And here I thought we'd gotten better about that.

I consider you the exception to the rule:}

[BlackRockBigfoot]

18 hours ago, norseman said:

 

I understand. But it gets tiresome repeating oneself over and over and over again. 

Eh.  Let's just use the forum as a reference material and stop new discussion then.  The older threads are difficult to navigate, especially since most of the former members handles are removed.  

 

New discussion, even of older topics, kind of helps keep the forums feel fresh...at least it seems that way to me.  But, if it a pain in the neck to the core members...the newer members can migrate elsewhere for active discussion and just read the old threads here.

[Wooly Booger]

Even though I personally take the "No Kill" position, I respect the arguments of those who believe it necessary to kill a type specimen for the purpose of proving the animal exists.  As a recreational fisherman and hunter, I have no problem with harvesting wildlife.  My reservations of harvesting a specimen in this instance have to do with the fact that the species is almost certainly rare and endangered.  We don't know if killing one will have a negative effect on the health of the species existing population.  And although I consider the Sasquatch to more than likely be an unclassified species of non-human primate, or an ape, there is still the possibility that the species could be a type of human in which case killing one would constitute homicide.

 

I would be in favor of harvesting a specimen if I could be assured that killing one would not harm the existing genetic line of the species and that the species was not a type of human.  But as I said, I do respect the opposing viewpoint, and their are convincing arguments on both sides of the issue. 

[Believer57]

19 hours ago, norseman said:

Its my observation that the pro kill mindset is more prevalent than it was 10 years ago.

Not to mention that norseman got my upvote for this new tidbit of information. 

 

[norseman]

58 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Even though I personally take the "No Kill" position, I respect the arguments of those who believe it necessary to kill a type specimen for the purpose of proving the animal exists.  As a recreational fisherman and hunter, I have no problem with harvesting wildlife.  My reservations of harvesting a specimen in this instance have to do with the fact that the species is almost certainly rare and endangered.  We don't know if killing one will have a negative effect on the health of the species existing population.  And although I consider the Sasquatch to more than likely be an unclassified species of non-human primate, or an ape, there is still the possibility that the species could be a type of human in which case killing one would constitute homicide.

 

I would be in favor of harvesting a specimen if I could be assured that killing one would not harm the existing genetic line of the species and that the species was not a type of human.  But as I said, I do respect the opposing viewpoint, and their are convincing arguments on both sides of the issue. 

But here is the rub.

 

Without a type specimen? 
 

1) We will not know it’s relationship with us on the tree of life.

 

2) We will not have the backing on the scientific community to get funding, and hire biologists to go study this species and it’s habitat.

 

Boiled down to brass tacks? With OUT scientific recognition? We are leaving this species to its fate. If it’s habitat is being swallowed by shopping malls and hydroelectric dams? Too bad. It doesn’t have a voice. Unlike Grizzly Bears, Wolverines, Lynx, etc.

 

Based off morphology? I can safely say it’s NOT a Homo Sapien Sapien. Is it in the same genus? It’s Possible. But thus far does not exhibit any traits of the genus Homo. (Tool manufacture and fire) It is bipedal. But there are many species of bipedal ape men in the fossil record who do not belong to the genus Homo.

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Believer57 said:

Not to mention that norseman got my upvote for this new tidbit of information. 

 

 

Your poll:

 

12 yes

6 no

5 maybe

 

Go back and look at my old thread. I bet that number was easily reversed, or more.

 

 

[Wooly Booger]

23 minutes ago, norseman said:

But here is the rub.

 

Without a type specimen? 
 

1) We will not know it’s relationship with us on the tree of life.

 

2) We will not have the backing on the scientific community to get funding, and hire biologists to go study this species and it’s habitat.

 

Boiled down to brass tacks? With OUT scientific recognition? We are leaving this species to its fate. If it’s habitat is being swallowed by shopping malls and hydroelectric dams? Too bad. It doesn’t have a voice. Unlike Grizzly Bears, Wolverines, Lynx, etc.

 

Based off morphology? I can safely say it’s NOT a Homo Sapien Sapien. Is it in the same genus? It’s Possible. But thus far does not exhibit any traits of the genus Homo. (Tool manufacture and fire) It is bipedal. But there are many species of bipedal ape men in the fossil record who do not belong to the genus Homo.

I find your argument very persuasive.  You are making me think about this issue from a different perspective.