hiflier Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 32 minutes ago, Huntster said: As you learned officially, recreational sasquatch "hunting" on federal lands is perfectly legal. That might not include "harvest" of a living animal, but it certainly includes dna, trace evidence (footprint casting, photographivpc, and hair recovery. I would agree. The Relict Hominoid Inquiry would be an excellent repository. Anyone can make statements. It's easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 1 minute ago, hiflier said: Anyone can make statements. It's easy. Yup. But when they're documented, and from authority, they become official. Then if it is to be recanted, that must also be done officially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 2 minutes ago, hiflier said: As you learned officially, recreational sasquatch "hunting" on federal lands is perfectly legal. You mean as we ALL learned don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 31 minutes ago, hiflier said: You mean as we ALL learned don't you? Well, we all should have learned. If you remember, I requested from you information on that documented statement. I know how valuable it is. Many just don't have the experience fighting government officially to understand how it works........or just don't have the desire to endure such BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 15 minutes ago, Huntster said: Well, we all should have learned. If you remember, I requested from you information on that documented statement. I know how valuable it is. Many just don't have the experience fighting government officially to understand how it works........or just don't have the desire to endure such BS. Maybe so. Getting ready to hit them again. You know, squeaky wheel and all. Thick skin. Whatever anyone wishes to call it. And if you remember, I gave you that documentation as requested Because yes, you know how valuable it is. But we need more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 22 minutes ago, hiflier said: .......And if you remember, I gave you that documentation as requested Because yes, you know how valuable it is......... Yup, and thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 11 minutes ago, Huntster said: Yup, and thanks again. Sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 (edited) The Forum seems a little slow so thought I'd put this up: Marion, NC May 2023 Bigfoot Festival. 185 vendors. An estimated 40,000 attendees. And that's only one of the at least 20 Bigfoot festivals/conferences each and every year. Anyone think government will give up that revenue, and way more from other sources, by saying Bigfoot doesn't exist? Think again. Edited January 16 by hiflier 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 (edited) And here's the thing. Because the Sasquatch has been witnessed in national parks and forests it make the issue of existence a federal matter. And forests cross state lines so...federal. But when looking up BFRO reports the geographic map is to show reports state by state. What I'm saying is that the Sasquatch isn't just a federal matter, it's also a STATE matter. It isn't just the usual alphabet agencies on the block here. It's state fish and game, fish and wildlife, whatever one wants to call them that is on the block as well. The truth, therefore isn't just in some federal agency. It's in a state agency as well. It is a respective state's logging industry, tourism, resources harvesting, revenue collection, and it where reports from the public go FIRST. The feds aren't the only ones benefiting from a Bigfoot festival, the state is benefiting, the city or town is benefiting. State fish and game has the wardens in the field, the game camera monitoring systems and programs, and the environmental DNA collecting in bodies of lakes, ponds rivers, and streams. In other words, at the genetic level, the state is the one on the front lines for discovery of an extant great primate other than Human. Just thought I would clarify that states are just as culpable as any federal agency when it comes to knowledge of the creature's existence or non-existence. And there is no argument that can justify or say otherwise. There. That oughta wake some people up Edited January 16 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted January 16 Moderator Share Posted January 16 1 hour ago, hiflier said: That oughta wake some people up I'm awake .. and urging a little caution in your assumptions. Lets suppose for a second that gov't in its various forms does know of bigfoot existence. If they already know from DNA that BF is some kind of person, not a dumb animal, then all fish and game agencies, state and federal, are outside their jurisdiction. The only agency that MIGHT have any authority would be the Bureau of Indian Affairs within Department of Interior .. and even that requires assumptions to assert which may not be true. Lets suppose, just for the sake of Tuesday afternoon goofiness, that bigfoot are indeed people. What if we already have a treaty with them and one of the stipulations is "no disclosure?" That would explain a whole lot of otherwise wackadoodle government behavior, huh? That treaty would then require that gov't couldn't admit that such a treaty existed. (Nah, I don't really believe it, but we gotta consider all the angles .. I think?) Have a good 'un ... I'm going back to sleep. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 Thanks for the caution but I have tossed caution out the window a long time ago as most here well know. Why? Because caution carries implications I'd rather not be associated with. And because all the caution (or lack of it?) in the world is useless if the creature is, first and foremost, never proved to even exist. It means all assumptions remain on the table- caution be damned. The real point being we ALL know how to settle this. But we all ALSO know no one's going to. Norseman says putting a bullet in one will settle it. It hasn't so far in a hundred years-if not way more than that. USFWS has implied the creature doesn't exist by saying "hunting "Bigfoot" is a recreational activity". I thought putting Bigfoot in quotation marks was pretty clever, if not outright hilarious. But even if the Sasquatch exists? Then hunting it could STILL be a recreational activity, right?. See how that works? Typical government yes/no-speak. No one here really cares though so I don't know why I even bother to point stuff like this out. I am, after all, just a random person.....and apparently not a very cautious random person at that. Do I care? Nope. And I wish more folks also didn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 4 hours ago, hiflier said: The Forum seems a little slow so thought I'd put this up: Marion, NC May 2023 Bigfoot Festival. 185 vendors. An estimated 40,000 attendees. And that's only one of the at least 20 Bigfoot festivals/conferences each and every year. Anyone think government will give up that revenue, and way more from other sources, by saying Bigfoot doesn't exist? Think again. Carnivals. Government isn't making money from that. The clowns are. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 2 hours ago, MIB said: ......Lets suppose, just for the sake of Tuesday afternoon goofiness, that bigfoot are indeed people. What if we already have a treaty with them and one of the stipulations is "no disclosure?" That would explain a whole lot of otherwise wackadoodle government behavior, huh? That treaty would then require that gov't couldn't admit that such a treaty existed.......... The United Nations recognizes a whole bunch of rights afforded to indigenous peoples: https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf Quote ........Article 9 Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned. No discrim- ination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right. Article 10 Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return......... And maybe honoring international treaty is easiest when the money changers, carnival operators, natural resource harvesters, public, lawyers, journalists, etc just don't know that these reclusive "people" live out there? Quote ........Have a good 'un ... I'm going back to sleep. Pleasant dreams! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) Hey, Hunster, did you see my downvote? VERY cool, LOL. And here I thought I wrote a pretty good post Now I don't think the clowns....er.....people would take too kindly to being called clowns. Besides, I've created something that a clown....I mean....a vendor would LOVE to have on their table. If they had any then guaranteed they would sell out in one morning. And I did my research, too. There's nothing like this out there anywhere. I could go public with it but need to be careful about when because once I do I'll have one year to get the design patent. And I WILL get the design patent and go public because the revenue will go towards DNA testing costs from running a wide program of eDNA collection from the environment. Edited January 17 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 2 hours ago, hiflier said: ........Norseman says putting a bullet in one will settle it. It hasn't so far in a hundred years-if not way more than that......... That's just the first step in that strategy. Getting the carcass to market, and successfully selling the meat might even be more difficult than placing the shot on target. Quote ........USFWS has implied the creature doesn't exist by saying "hunting "Bigfoot" is a recreational activity".......... That makes it legal on federal lands, most of which are in the west where the highest density of reports come from. You're in luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts