The Echo Incident

[Guest]

while I still think the "what gun" debate is somewhat of a derail, I just want to throw my two cents in again.... (guess that makes me a bit of a hypocrite)

Big-bore hunting rifle...? the conditions have been stated as heavy brush with only limited clearings, dense wooded areas etc etc... I'm not personally sure this would have increased his odds/ performed much better.

Also I'd have to take into consideration the vast distances that rifle bullets will travel, and me personally, I'm pretty sure I'd feel more comfortable if I knew the guy that's 100 yards ahead/behind/either side of me is carrying a shotgun in conditions where he cant see very well, and is unsure of his backstop.

I've had the pleasure (and resulting bruises) of firing my brother's .458 Win-Mag a few times over the years.. (the **** shells are way too expensive to be target shooting with). On one occasion we set up a blaze orange target on a 2-3 foot diameter fir tree about 100 yards away. After firing a few rounds apiece, we walked over to assess the damage/accuracy. We were amazed at how the bullets had simply blown straight through the solid tree, and were easily traceable as they went up through the woods behind it- taking a notch out of this sapling, and the one behind it etc- you could line it up in a straight line, and the distance traveled and continuing damage were something to behold.

Part of the report states that the shooter took into account the makeup of the area he would be in, and felt that a "up close" weapon would actually suit him better.... (also thinking about the possibility of being charged by more well known creatures im sure as well).

Lastly- at 25-30 yards, I happen to agree that a .12 gauge shotgun loaded alternately with slugs/buckshot is a very lethal combination to be carrying. Debating what barrel (how long, rifled -vs- not etc) I'd understand, but as I said above- I've seen the effects of 00-buck on a black bear (granted it was much closer) but I know for certain I wouldnt want to get hit with it.

25-30 yards is kind of close to be ripping off high powered rife shots in my opinion, especially with other's in the area, and not knowing exactly what direction i'm pointed in, and where those folks are in relation to me....

I've gotta say- standing there, and knowing/believing what I do- I probably would have grabbed the shotgun as well- even if the other rifle had been right there on the rack with it...

But as someone else mentioned, hindsight is always 20/20- so its easy to second guess even your own decision and to figure you might have done better with a different weapon.

Just my thoughts.... your mileage may vary.

Art

[southernyahoo]

Bipto, What team recorded the speech sounds? Was it before or after the Echo incident?

[Guest]

Bipto, What team recorded the speech sounds? Was it before or after the Echo incident?

It was Delta. The sounds were recorded about a week before the incident.

[Guest]

If we get a picture, I guess we'll find out. We've had cameras out for more than five years now.

Bip, Have any of my numerous ideas about how to camouflage and make the cameras smell and look like it belongs in a forest helped any?

Truly, It seems to me that the Echo incident shows the acute need of species recognition and then protection if possible, and excellent pictures can further that pursuit.

I was sincerely hoping that some of the ideas could assist with being able to get some great shots from your cameras.

[GuyInIndiana]

Truly, It seems to me that the Echo incident shows the acute need of species recognition and then protection if possible,

I'm curious how the Echo Incident "shows the acute need" to recognize the species and protect it? Laws will never stop anyone who has the intent and desire to kill something, from doing so.

[Guest]

Bip, Have any of my numerous ideas about how to camouflage and make the cameras smell and look like it belongs in a forest helped any?

We're having lots of discussions about how we'll deploy cameras next year, many of which have been instigated by comments here on the BFF. Thanks for your input!

I'm curious how the Echo Incident "shows the acute need" to recognize the species and protect it? Laws will never stop anyone who has the intent and desire to kill something, from doing so.

For clarification, I think I can speak for those in the TBRC who believe a voucher specimen is required when I say nobody *wants* to kill one of these animals. No one is looking for a stuffed sasquatch for their library or approaches this like a big game hunt.

I'm in the middle of reading Searching for Sasquatch: Crackpots, Eggheads, and Cryptozoology and I found a passage that I think perfectly summarizes the POV of many in the group:

From the start Krantz openly called for a specimen to be obtained, if not as road kill then by purposefully shooting one. He understood, in ways many Bigfoot aficionados did not, that as distasteful as shooting one of the creatures would be, allowing them to go extinct for lack of proper wildlife management, or simple recognition, stood as an even more unpleasant alternative. While not a field biologist, Krantz did go driving through the woods on occasion armed with a rifle so that if he encountered a Sasquatch—he never did—he could acquire it himself the hard way.

Regardless of how these animals are finally proven to exist, I think you'll find the TBRC in the front of the line of those pushing to have them and their habitat protected.

[Guest]

@ BIpto

"We're having lots of discussions about how we'll deploy cameras next year, many of which have been instigated by comments here on the BFF. Thanks for your input!"

Do you guys use flir in aircraft to search that area?

I don't know if anyone tried an rc blimp with flir or hd camera ? I found these online and I think they would be great for

the project. only downfall would be weather.

altafoto.com

phodia.com

[Sunflower]

Pardon me if this question has been answered already....but is the owner of the property Mr Branson, kill or no kill? What does he think of the shooting? I'm very curious because of something I read here about him saying the hairy guys were "nice people" or was he speaking of the TBRC members?

[Guest]

I'm curious how the Echo Incident "shows the acute need" to recognize the species and protect it? Laws will never stop anyone who has the intent and desire to kill something, from doing so.

Guy, What you say is true, my thought is that once the species is recognized they will eventually be protected legally, or at least limited hunting of them will come into play.

I'm hopeful that hunters will respect any laws that are passed for the BF species protection.

Hunters are generally good people who eat or preserve their kills. Bf is not something I could ever imagine eating, nor having preserved and mounted for display.

I feel that there are few of them left, and I would hate to see them killed off indiscriminately.

But I'm a female,a wife, a mother, and I'm protective of my family, plus I have a tender heart..

Edited November 8, 2011 by SweetSusiq

[Guest]

OK, here's the sound file I played on the show. There is a lot of cicada noise, but you'll hear a kind of moaning sound followed by a barking kind of sound and then the "chatter".

For the sake of my inbox (where I get notifications to posts to this thread), could discussion of the GCBRO event be taken elsewhere?

Great audio Bipto! Very good capture

[Guest]

Pardon me if this question has been answered already....but is the owner of the property Mr Branson, kill or no kill? What does he think of the shooting? I'm very curious because of something I read here about him saying the hairy guys were "nice people" or was he speaking of the TBRC members?

I could be wrong. But my take on Branson's response was that he is no kill. If that is indeed the case, then the greatest offense would be the possible deception of the people visiting Branson's land he so graciously gave for observation and study. They may have hidden their true agenda from the man himself. If for 10 years people were there never really indulging their true intent for the landowner so he could give his approval on shooting one, maybe shots have been taken at the bigfoot before..who knows. Can you trust people who have been decietful to tell the truth after the fact?

It may be the fact that the gentleman ran after hearing shots, and told Mr Branson, then he responded the way he did, and made statements on a radio show that THEN needed to be addressed for damage control..... this may never have seen the light of day on this forum if it were not for Bransons response and comments on the radio show.

Please don't jump on me for my opinion on this. I think my opinion has merit.

Edited November 10, 2011 by driveroperator

[Guest]

I could be wrong. But my take on Branson's response was that he is no kill. If that is indeed the case, then the greatest offense would be the possible deception of the people visiting Branson's land he so graciously gave for observation and study. They may have hidden their true agenda from the man himself. If for 10 years people were there never really indulging their true intent for the landowner so he could give his approval on shooting one, maybe shots have been taken at the bigfoot before..who knows. Can you trust people who have been decietful to tell the truth after the fact?

It may be the fact that the gentleman ran after hearing shots, and told Mr Branson, then he responded the way he did, and made statements on a radio show that THEN needed to be addressed for damage control..... this may never have seen the light of day on this forum if it were not for Bransons response and comments on the radio show.

Please don't jump on me for my opinion on this. I think my opinion has merit.

He let them back on the property within a week (and are still there) after the shooting so I doubt that is the case.

[Guest]

Well Maybe so, but we may never know the meat of that conversation that took place. Would like to know from Branson's side of it.

[Guest]

All the family members with whom the TBRC has had contact understand the full scope of the group's operations in the area. Our policy regarding the collection of a voucher specimen has been posted on our website for nearly a year. I don't understand how we could be accused of deception with such a public announcement. We continue to have access to the property. I think that fact alone should help allay any fears that we've deceived anyone.

Edited November 11, 2011 by bipto

[Guest]

I've heard one of Branson's interviews, and at that point his version was that someone was shooting an AK-47 on the property. Even with that version he went on to say that they had talked about it, and everything was fine, and the researchers were back on the property. He did not make one comment that would lead you to believe he was upset with anybody, and certainly did not state that he was mislead about what was to go on in the area.