Justin Smeja Incident?

[ShadowBorn]

52 minutes ago, Doug said:

I'm guilty of doing this sometimes too.

We are all guilty of this, Doug. But you do have to admit we do get to read allot of great info on this subject. The good thing is that it just never gets boring.   

[Wooly Booger]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

 

If you are an archeologist? Find some caves in the Olympic NP, pull the necessary permits and perform a dig.

That is something that is certainly in the planning stages. 

[norseman]

3 hours ago, Wooly Booger said:

That is something that is certainly in the planning stages. 

The more fishing lines the Bigfoot community has in the water? The better the odds it will catch a fish!

[Doug]

And like fishing, different waters, tackle, and methods from shore or boat or drone or kite,  some how, somewhere, some one will use their creativity and get a bite.  Landing it, on the other hand, that's a whole nother ballgame.

[Wooly Booger]

Bigfoot is a real flesh and blood primate. For those of us who have examined the evidence there is very little doubt about this creature's existence. 

 

What we need now is proof. Our primary goal should be attaining this proof. I am not "No Kill." However, for me personally, killing a type specimen is an absolute last resort after all non-lethal options have been exhausted. I know some of you will disagree, and that is okay. There is room for disagreement in the Bigfoot Community. But my primary goal in documenting the species existence is either finding the remains of a dead one, or collecting DNA evidence. 

 

However, if these options after being exhausted, and exhausted again for good measure have failed to provide the proof that science needs, then I might revisit the option of collecting a type specimen. But if a "Pro Kill" Bigfoot researcher decides to take a type specimen using lethal methods, I have no problem with that either. 

Edited June 13, 2021 by Wooly Booger

[BFSighting]

10 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Bigfoot is a real flesh and blood primate. For those of us who have examined the evidence there is very little doubt about this creature's existence. 

 

What we need now is proof. Our primary goal should be attaining this proof. I am not "No Kill." However, for me personally, killing a type specimen is an absolute last resort after all non-lethal options have been exhausted. I know some of you will disagree, and that is okay. There is room for disagreement in the Bigfoot Community. But my primary goal in documenting the species existence is either finding the remains of a dead one, or collecting DNA evidence. 

 

However, if these options after being exhausted, and exhausted again for good measure have failed to provide the proof that science needs, then I might revisit the option of collecting a type specimen. But if a "Pro Kill" Bigfoot researcher decides to take a type specimen using lethal methods, I have no problem with that either. 

I would like to add that because there are presumably so few of these creatures in existence, killing one would be detrimental to the entire population of Sasquatch. Therefore, I agree with you that killing should be reserved as an absolute last resort (or should be off the table altogether). It is my opinion that killing one isn’t going to be any more compelling than tranquilizing one or getting clear, undeniable footage of one. 

[norseman]

39 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

Bigfoot is a real flesh and blood primate. For those of us who have examined the evidence there is very little doubt about this creature's existence. 

 

What we need now is proof. Our primary goal should be attaining this proof. I am not "No Kill." However, for me personally, killing a type specimen is an absolute last resort after all non-lethal options have been exhausted. I know some of you will disagree, and that is okay. There is room for disagreement in the Bigfoot Community. But my primary goal in documenting the species existence is either finding the remains of a dead one, or collecting DNA evidence. 

 

However, if these options after being exhausted, and exhausted again for good measure have failed to provide the proof that science needs, then I might revisit the option of collecting a type specimen. But if a "Pro Kill" Bigfoot researcher decides to take a type specimen using lethal methods, I have no problem with that either. 

Here is my take. We as a community take the FIRST opportunity. It makes zero sense to be digging in the ground for maybe nothing. Or following the thing around for a stool sample IF the creature is looking right at you..... 

 

Once the first type specimen is delivered to science? THEN we fight like mad to protect the species! At that point we can spend the rest of our days digging for fossils or collecting stool samples. And we will find there will be a bunch of Johnny come lately’s all clamoring to help.

 

Not everyone needs to be trigger man either! There is plenty of other ways to help out.

 

 

[norseman]

32 minutes ago, BFSighting said:

I would like to add that because there are presumably so few of these creatures in existence, killing one would be detrimental to the entire population of Sasquatch. Therefore, I agree with you that killing should be reserved as an absolute last resort (or should be off the table altogether). It is my opinion that killing one isn’t going to be any more compelling than tranquilizing one or getting clear, undeniable footage of one. 

Not true.

 

Ask any Biologist. If killing one is that detrimental? The species is going extinct anyhow. And better to document it to science than to let it slip away quietly.

 

And there is no such thing as “clear undeniable footage” concerning Bigfoot. We have beat that horse to death.

 

Tranquilizing one would be great if we were scientists. We are not. You may be successful. But you may also either kill it with too large of dose or be killed by too small of dose. There are no guidelines for tranquilizing a Bigfoot. And I don’t work at a zoo and do this daily.... So my suggestion is, if you really want to stay with non lethal methods is buy the tranq gun but buy biopsy darts with it. You shoot the dart, the dart collects a dna sample and then hopefully the dart falls out or the creature pulls it out and you can then retrieve it after it’s left the area.

 

It would be smart to have lethal back up while attempting a biopsy dart.

[gigantor]

Tranquilizing a BF is a pipe dream. We're hard pressed to even see one. 

 

 

[Wooly Booger]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Here is my take. We as a community take the FIRST opportunity. It makes zero sense to be digging in the ground for maybe nothing. Or following the thing around for a stool sample IF the creature is looking right at you..... 

 

Once the first type specimen is delivered to science? THEN we fight like mad to protect the species! At that point we can spend the rest of our days digging for fossils or collecting stool samples. And we will find there will be a bunch of Johnny come lately’s all clamoring to help.

 

Not everyone needs to be trigger man either! There is plenty of other ways to help out.

 

 

I agree with you to some extent. Our priority after proving the species existence needs to be protecting the species under the Endangered Species Act. Like I said, I have no problem with killing one type specimen in order prove the species existence. What I don't want to see happen however, is the instilling of a "kill culture" where a bunch of people go out trying to kill multiple Bigfoot.

 

I have no problem with hunting. I enjoy hunting deer, turkey, and black bear for meat. But this isn't an ordinary hunt. If one must be killed in order to prove its existence, then it needs to stop at one. This species must not become the target of trophy hunters after it has been scientifically documented. 

 

I am all for going out into the woods armed. I am armed every time I go out into the field. In fact, saying that I go out armed is an understatement. I go out heavily armed. But my firearms are there for defensive purposes, not for the purpose of acquiring a type specimen. My goal is at this time to document the species existence using non-lethal means. At this time, even though I am properly armed, if I see a Bigfoot I will not open fire. Even if I have the opportunity. Unless of course the creature decides I'm on its menu lol. 

 

I agree that tranquilizing the animal poses an entirely different set of problems. For one, we don't know the proper dose needed to safety sedate the animal without killing it. Though based upon size descriptions, I would guesstimate that the amount necessary to take down a large brown bear should get the job done. But still, getting within range and actually being trained to use the tranquilizer are essential. And of course if the dart only grazes the animal, or the dose isn't strong enough to knock it out, then the researcher had better be appropriately armed or chances are they might be ripped to shreds by an enraged apex predator. 

 

Another problem with tranquilizing a Bigfoot and releasing it back into the wild would be that very act could inadvertently drive the species to extinction. As a primate, Bigfoot are undoubtedly susceptible to all manner of human disease. And their limited contact with man would mean that they more than likely did not develop an immunity to most human diseases. This is a scenario that we would be very wise to avoid. 

Edited June 13, 2021 by Wooly Booger

[MIB]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

Not everyone needs to be trigger man either! There is plenty of other ways to help out.

 

Would you expand on that a bit?   What other ways of helping would you suggest?  

[7.62]

1 hour ago, gigantor said:

Tranquilizing a BF is a pipe dream. We're hard pressed to even see one. 

 

 

Pretty much 

but then we have members that keep saying they see them in trees but can't get a good photo because they are 1000 yards away.

I volunteer if he takes me out where he says he keeps posting blob Bigfoot photos . I will set up my Barrett .50 cal on a bipod and will take one out of the tree.

 

That's a guarantee if one is there . How can so many members keep seeing these creatures and some never do. Are these members making lies ?

 

I don't know 

[Arvedis]

The idea of using tranquilizers is one area that sasquatchery has already learned from. It was standard belief in the 60s that it stood a chance of working. Some researchers even carried around the dart mechanism.

 

But of course we know today it would fail. If bullets don't bring them down then what are the chances.

Edited June 13, 2021 by Arvedis

[norseman]

1 hour ago, MIB said:

 

Would you expand on that a bit?   What other ways of helping would you suggest?  

The really big one is helping a shooter get set up in the right location. Researchers are pretty secretive.
 

Other ways of helping could be lodging and logistics. Or even monitoring a radio for coordinating a larger effort.

 

A shooter doesn’t have to be even apart of the Bigfoot community. It simply could be a big game hunting buddy that is willing to humor you. But hasn’t taken an interest in the subject until you talk them into it. They are leaning on you to give them wisdom and supposed traits.

 

Imagine going on Safari to Africa. Your a North American hunter but know zilch about Africa. You need a guide. 
 

 

1 hour ago, 7.62 said:

Pretty much 

but then we have members that keep saying they see them in trees but can't get a good photo because they are 1000 yards away.

I volunteer if he takes me out where he says he keeps posting blob Bigfoot photos . I will set up my Barrett .50 cal on a bipod and will take one out of the tree.

 

That's a guarantee if one is there . How can so many members keep seeing these creatures and some never do. Are these members making lies ?

 

I don't know 

That would definitely get a Bigfoot out of a tree!!!

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Wooly Booger said:

I agree with you to some extent. Our priority after proving the species existence needs to be protecting the species under the Endangered Species Act. Like I said, I have no problem with killing one type specimen in order prove the species existence. What I don't want to see happen however, is the instilling of a "kill culture" where a bunch of people go out trying to kill multiple Bigfoot.

 

I have no problem with hunting. I enjoy hunting deer, turkey, and black bear for meat. But this isn't an ordinary hunt. If one must be killed in order to prove its existence, then it needs to stop at one. This species must not become the target of trophy hunters after it has been scientifically documented. 

 

I am all for going out into the woods armed. I am armed every time I go out into the field. In fact, saying that I go out armed is an understatement. I go out heavily armed. But my firearms are there for defensive purposes, not for the purpose of acquiring a type specimen. My goal is at this time to document the species existence using non-lethal means. At this time, even though I am properly armed, if I see a Bigfoot I will not open fire. Even if I have the opportunity. Unless of course the creature decides I'm on its menu lol. 

 

I agree that tranquilizing the animal poses an entirely different set of problems. For one, we don't know the proper dose needed to safety sedate the animal without killing it. Though based upon size descriptions, I would guesstimate that the amount necessary to take down a large brown bear should get the job done. But still, getting within range and actually being trained to use the tranquilizer are essential. And of course if the dart only grazes the animal, or the dose isn't strong enough to knock it out, then the researcher had better be appropriately armed or chances are they might be ripped to shreds by an enraged apex predator. 

 

Another problem with tranquilizing a Bigfoot and releasing it back into the wild would be that very act could inadvertently drive the species to extinction. As a primate, Bigfoot are undoubtedly susceptible to all manner of human disease. And their limited contact with man would mean that they more than likely did not develop an immunity to most human diseases. This is a scenario that we would be very wise to avoid. 

Your on the right track. Your just not there yet.

 

At some point maybe a decade into the future your gonna become impatient like the rest of us!😜

 

And just so your aware? If they were giving away free Gorilla hunts in Africa? I wouldn’t go. I have no plans on eating close relatives and I think they are far more interesting alive than dead. This is something science demands as proof. And I think they are far more safe recognized by science than dwelling with pixies and gnomes in the mythological section at Barnes and Noble.