The Echo Incident

[Guest]

BTW, Thank you for this forum.

You're quite welcome, but my forum is dead and gone. This one's here due to the hard work and dedication of others. I'm merely a humble member like anyone else.

[Guest parnassus]

One concern I have with any and all shooting at animals is that the shooter should know what is in the background should the hunter miss.

Over the 17 years that we have lived in this area which is on the edge of our city limits, I have often heard loud gunfire coming from the open land area in front of our home.

At first I was alarmed but soon discovered that hunters were hunting near here. Through the years I have been out walking my little dogs and have heard the shot followed by a buzzing sound past my head heading towards the golf course.

Needles to say, we soon put in an enclosed dogrun for our dogs only along the back of the house where bullets would have to go through the house first to hit our pets.(and me )

I'm still startled by the loud booming sound when shots are fired sounding as being fairly close to our home.

Thankfully, There has not been as much shooting in the past few years, so I'm hoping that perhaps the hunters have found a better spot, plus new homes are being built over near that area and may have made the hunters look for new hunting areas.

Needless to say, sounds of gunfire close by frightens me since those experiences, and this subject reminded me of being close to a discharged bullet myself..

Not much you can do sometimes but firing across an improved road is a crime in most states. Firing a weapon so as to endanger another person is a misdemeanor in many states. These laws are regardless of place or hunting. A call to the sheriff would likely at least prompted notification of the landowner, which would likely put a stop to the irresponsible behavior, because once a landowner is informed, some liability for the conduct also attaches. Your attorney could accomplish the same thing , and so could you by merely visiting your courthouse to find out who owns the property and sending them a registered letter. Of course, some people just don't care.

[Guest Strick]

You're quite welcome, but my forum is dead and gone. This one's here due to the hard work and dedication of others. I'm merely a humble member like anyone else.

Yes, but I very much doubt we would all be here now if you hadn't created the old one in the first place.

After all, nobody would have bothered turning out to see the Empire Strikes Back if there had been no Star Wars!

Great new episode of the Bigfoot Show, by the way. I like what you did separating the one about the Sierra-style vocalisations from the new one, or the former would definitely have been overshadowed by all this stuff. That was a smart move.

Edited October 31, 2011 by Strick

[Guest parnassus]

In Oklahoma, it is legal to carry weapons on private property as long as you have permission from the property owner.

We have protocols to handle the collection of any evidence. That's about all I'll say on the matter.

The Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy is a 501©(3) tax-exempt non-profit scientific-research organization, as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service. We generate revenue from three sources: membership dues, personal tax-deductible contributions, and revenue from our conference. Our board of directors establishes an annual budget that is essentially divided into three areas that support our mision statement: Education/Outreach, Marketing/PR, and Field Operations. The bulk of our money goes into field operations to purchase equipment such as cameras, audio records, etc. Each of these three divisions has a director who oversees them. I'm the group's marketing weasel and mouthpiece, Daryl manages field operations, and Alton in responsible for our educational activities (such as speaking to school groups, clubs, and the general pubic).

In comparison, the BFRO isn't any kind of legal entity and has no formal structure. The only other 501©(3) that I'm aware of in this field is the AIBR, though there may be others.

Which legal entity are you organized as: trust, corporation or association?

[southernyahoo]

The idea that the TBRC was masquerading as a "no-kill" group is false, though to say it's "pro-kill" would also be incorrect.

Sorry, but this is not true, I'm an ex-member and have witnessed on the TBRC private message board that probationary members have been flat told that if they were looking to kill one that the TBRC was not for them. This has obviously changed. This was around 2006 which was before you joined up. Have DC tell you about the time that the GCBRO invited them to a debate on the kill / no kill issue.

[Guest]

Which legal entity are you organized as: trust, corporation or association?

Pretty sure we're a corporation, but I can find out for sure.

I'm an ex-member and have witnessed on the TBRC private message board that probationary members have been flat told that if they were looking to kill one that the TBRC was not for them. This has obviously changed.

Without getting too far into the politics of organized bigfoot research, I'll only say that things change over time. The TBRC you're talking about doesn't exist anymore. It was replaced by the incorporated TBRC founded in 2007. With the advent of an elected board, the "official" position of the group was no longer the byproduct of the group's leader.

[southernyahoo]

Pretty sure we're a corporation, but I can find out for sure.

Without getting too far into the politics of organized bigfoot research, I'll only say that things change over time. The TBRC you're talking about doesn't exist anymore. It was replaced by the incorporated TBRC founded in 2007. With the advent of an elected board, the "official" position of the group was no longer the byproduct of the group's leader.

I left in 2008, after the change from "center" to "conservancy" The earliest reference to condoning the taking of a specimen is used in "the echo incident" article on the TBRC site, which I presume was after Woolheater left.

[Guest]

The first official statement on the subject was posted to our site last December: http://www.texasbigfoot.com/index.php/news/news/191-wordfromchairman

[Guest]

Which legal entity are you organized as: trust, corporation or association?

Actually questions like these are better addressed to the organization itself. Bipto has been more than gracious is his replies and it's time to get this thread back on topic. Equally there is already a thread specifically to discuss the Kill/No Kill issue.

Thank You,

Grayjay

[Guest]

I am confused here, why would he need a hunting license to hunt Sasquatch?

Here in BC I need a hunting license to hunt animals specified in the Hunting regulations as having an open season.

I do not need a hunting license to carry a firearms in the woods if not hunting (that is what my PAL is for)

Since there is no open season here in BC for Sasquatch I couldn't get a tag for one anyways.

Another reason researchers should always know the hunting and fishing regulations for a state they will research in. The hunting regulations in Oklahoma state that if you are carrying a rifle or shotgun in the woods, unless you are the property owner on your own property, you have to have a hunting license.

[Painthorse]

Bipto, being that the group has been researching this property for several years, other than it being remote, has anyone connected the dots on if there is a unique target of interest of the b/f's that make that specific property / general location appealing for the activity to be ongoing?

The report that was posted in this thread said that the incident happened in July, has there been any type of pattern for the seasons, summer, fall, etc. where the activity increases?

Do the property owners have livestock, if yes has there been any issues with their animals or feed?

Also, do the property owners grow crops or maintain seasonal gardens, any issues?

[Guest]

Operation Endurance was the first step in "connecting the dots". No livestock, no feed, no crops or garden. Just wilderness and creek and some old wooden cabins.

[MagniAesir]

The hunting license is sort of a catch-22 thing. You can't get a Squatch tag, but then again, you can't hunt without a valid license They are hunting, right? No matter what you say, they'll interpret it the way it looks to them. If they admitted to hunting anything to a game warden, and were carrying an illegal hunting weapon, or stalking something with a weapon, it could technically be a sticky situation. There may be open carry laws in a lot of places, but if you're caught creeping through the timber without any valid tag, good luck explaining it. And please....Don't ever tell

them you are hunting BF:) I doubt you'd get in trouble though. It's just one of those situations where you'll be standing around getting a lot of questions asked of you.

It depends on how the states hunting regulations were written.

Here in BC under the old wildlife act you needed a hunting license to hunt game as listed in the regulation.

You then had a list of animals that it was lawful to kill on your property if it was damaging your property. Then there was a list of protected animals.

Any animal not on one of those lists was deemed as being legal to shoot.

Under the new act there is a critical difference. Any animal that does not appear on one of these lists is deemed as being unlawful to shoot

A big difference, so it depends on how your state/provincial laws are written

Once again using BC as an example while hunting with a shotgun it can have a maximum capacity of 3 rounds, however if not hunting such as when using as camp protection, or hiking then it could have 6 or even 9 rounds

Edited November 1, 2011 by MagniAesir

[Guest Jodie]

Operation Endurance was the first step in "connecting the dots". No livestock, no feed, no crops or garden. Just wilderness and creek and some old wooden cabins.

Did you look at mineral content of the soil?

[Guest]

Hmm. No, we've never done that. Are you thinking salt deposits?