Why has bigfoot not been listed as an endangered species?

[Huntster]

13 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

 

A fair question. When they say it it is a recreational activity it would be just as easy to follow it up by saying because it doesn't exist. Or simply say sorry, there is no such creature in the US. Why bother quantifying it as recreational at all?

 

 

Why limit such a permit to sasquatches? Why not publicize the recreational permitting of any or all mythical creatures under a blanket, general permit? The state of Alaska has such open permits for crossing flowing waters with motorized vehicles. Some waterways are listed under the general permit, but crossing those not listed requires requesting and the granting of a permit which names the waterway, the crossing location, the vehicles permitted, and the crossing dates allowed. I have requested and obtained such a permit fir my private use, and I have also requested and obtained various state land use permits for U.S. Army use. Alaska also has a recreational permit process for gold mining. This is for operations under the commercial level and is limited to small dredges in certain waters. Earth moving is not permitted under a recreational permit. 

 

Thus such permits are specific. So why no recreational mastodon hunting permits? 

Edited October 29, 2023 by Huntster

[norseman]

20 hours ago, georgerm said:

That was so true and a super reply that explains the crux of the matter. Is it within the bounds of Bigfoot Forum to have volunteer members join forces to write up an application for getting Bigfoot listed as an endangered species at the federal level?

 

The paper would need to show bigfoot and logging are compatable. This would be a different thread so this thread remains on the rail road tracks.  The fact that most states probably don't care if bigfoots are shot bugs me. Anyone else? 

Thanks.
 

Sure. You could start a thread that could be responsible for a petition letter to the USFWS. But I don’t think it will be successful without physical proof.

 

Thats why I advocate shooting a type specimen. After the creature is proven to science? I would be very much in favor of protecting the species forever.

 

I see this as putting the cart in front of the horse.

 

 

[hiflier]

So the criteria could be mythical = non-existent. Hunting is recreational and requires permits of all kinds as well as quotas. And, therefore, because animals/fish/birds exist, Bigfoot shouldn't have even reached an official USFWS recreational designation.

 

But the real point is that I had asked to speak to a person who could verify the existence or non-existence of the creature commonly known as Bigfoot or Sasquatch. I DID NOT ask if the creature was real. Nor did I ask if hunting it was okay. My request, as it was written never made it, AS IT WAS WRITTEN, to a direct answer OR a person. The answer received was a complete non sequitur and had nothing to do with my original request.

 

13 minutes ago, norseman said:

Sure. You could start a thread that could be responsible for a petition letter to the USFWS. But I don’t think it will be successful without physical proof.

 

Go for it, georgerm. Ironclad wording that leaves no wiggle room would be key. Just be aware that if AI gets a hold of it, which it probably will, then wording in the petition may not end up as originally drafted.

 

13 minutes ago, norseman said:

Thats why I advocate shooting a type specimen. After the creature is proven to science? I would be very much in favor of protecting the species forever.

 

Agreed. And if you succeed then I think it will PUT that horse in its proper place: In FRONT of the cart.

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

3 minutes ago, hiflier said:

.........Hunting is recreational and requires permits of all kinds as well as quotas. Because those animals/fish/birds exist. The point being Bigfoot shouldn't have even reached an official recreational designation. "Since hunting (fill in your pet belief here) is a recreational activity....".

 

But the real point is that I had asked to speak to a person who could verify the existence or non-existence of the creature commonly known as Bigfoot or Sasquatch. I DID NOT ask if the creature was real. Nor did I ask if hunting it was okay. My request, as it was written never made it, AS IT WAS WRITTEN, to a direct answer OR a person. The answer received was a complete non sequitur and had nothing to do with my original request..........

 

I'm sorry (not ready to spend the time searching for the copy you posted), but did the reply you obtained permit the recreational HUNTING of sasquatches, or was it the recreational "searching", or "researching", or "viewing", or "photographing" of sasquatches? If it Was HUNTING, and there was no further reference to the regulations for such hunting (season, harvest limit, weapon types, persons permitted or not permitted, etc), then that document could be handed out to our friend Mr.Norseman, and he would then have a "get-out-of-jail-free" card in his endeavor to obtain a carcass. Hell, I'd love one of those, myself. If on federal lands, I'd feel a lot more legally entitled if I happen to be presented with a good shot and one of those documents was in my license/permit wallet.

[hiflier]

25 minutes ago, Huntster said:

....but did the reply you obtained permit the recreational HUNTING of sasquatches, or was it the recreational "searching", or "researching", or "viewing", or "photographing" of sasquatches?

 

The wording was: "Since hunting "Bigfoot" is a recreational activity....."

 

25 minutes ago, Huntster said:

If it Was HUNTING, and there was no further reference to the regulations for such hunting (season, harvest limit, weapon types, persons permitted or not permitted, etc)

 

It could be a stretch, but the wording "hunting Bigfoot" was clearly stated and with no other considerations. But there still may be other blanket regulations for actually taking one down. But since USFWS didn't admit they were real, even without actually saying "mythical", then it would appear to be game on.

 

I hope this Forum as a whole understands how important this whole thing is. No one has ever, to my knowledge, succeeded in getting such a revealing statement regarding Bigfoot from any government agency. Question is, is it of high-value to the BF community-at-large? Personally, I think it is. And I think it presents opportunities for the truth that we've not had before and needs to be delicately handled if anything is to come of it.

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by hiflier

[hiflier]

24 minutes ago, Huntster said:

.....then that document could be handed out to our friend Mr.Norseman, and he would then have a "get-out-of-jail-free" card in his endeavor to obtain a carcass. Hell, I'd love one of those, myself. If on federal lands, I'd feel a lot more legally entitled if I happen to be presented with a good shot and one of those documents was in my license/permit wallet.

 

That would be up to Norseman.

[norseman]

I already have a hunting permit….

 

(No government agency is going to issue a permit to hunt a mythological creature)

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

 

The wording was: "Since hunting "Bigfoot" is a recreational activity....."

 

 

It could be a stretch, but the wording "hunting Bigfoot" was clearly stated and with no other considerations. …….

………it would appear to be game on……..

The legal game works both ways. If that document had the image of a signature, and until somebody reading these words sends a warning to the agency and they publish a retraction, it’s the get-out-if-jail-free card I’ve been needing.

 

Quote

…….I hope this Forum as a whole understands how important this whole thing is……..

They don’t, and if as individuals they do understand the significance, many might deny it. 

 

Quote

…….No one has ever, to my knowledge, succeeded in getting such a revealing statement regarding Bigfoot from any government agency……..

Agreed. Your persistence has paid off, and paid off ‘bigly’. Congratulations.

 

Even if the government learns of this faux pas and publishes a retraction, this is huge.

 

Quote

……..Question is, is it of high-value to the BF community-at-large? Personally, I think it i………

 

Agreed. It’s a huge development to me. I’ll be printing a copy and carrying it with my hunting licenses and permits. 

 

 

32 minutes ago, norseman said:

I already have a hunting permit….

 

(No government agency is going to issue a permit to hunt a mythological creature)

Unofficial and unsigned. A meme.

Worthless.

[hiflier]

20 minutes ago, Huntster said:

If that document had the image of a signature, and until somebody reading these words sends a warning to the agency and they publish a retraction,

 

Not gonna happen. It would only get worse if they did.

 

I mean, what are they going to say? "Oh, you know that Bigfoot being a recreational activity thing? Well, it was a mistake. Hunting Bigfoot is actually NOT a recreational activity."

 

[Huntster]

14 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Not gonna happen. It would only get worse if they did.

 

I mean, what are they going to say? "Oh, you know that Bigfoot being a recreational activity thing? Well, it was a mistake. Hunting Bigfoot is actually NOT a recreational activity."

 

 

Correct. The Bigfoot is out of the bag. 

 

It's open season, and wide open, at that. On federal lands, no limit, and no closed season.

[hiflier]

54 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Your persistence has paid off, and paid off ‘bigly’. Congratulations.

 

Even if the government learns of this faux pas and publishes a retraction, this is huge.

 

Thank you, Huntster, and thank you for your input. I really don't have anything more to add to all of this other than I don't think the believing community as a whole would take kindly to the creature not existing should a continued pursuit of the truth shows that to be the final outcome. Lots of money could be at stake. Lots of red faces, and maybe even some angry public torches and pitchforks.

 

If it goes the other way, though, then a lot of things would get corrected and clarified, with possibly even more red faces, public torches, and pitchforks. Like I said, I'm fine either way. Always have been. Truth.

 

At the very least, on the side of existence, it would obliterate the stigma and years of ridicule which one would hope could vindicate the knowers and lift the mostly self-imposed restrictions on study by the science community.

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

1 minute ago, hiflier said:

........I don't think the believing community as a whole would take kindly to the creature not existing should a continued pursuit of the truth shows that to be the final outcome. Lots of money could be at stake. Lots of red faces, and maybe even some angry public torches and pitchforks.

 

If it goes the other way, though, then a lot of things would get corrected and clarified, with possibly even more red faces, public torches, and pitchforks. Like I said, I'm fine either way. Always have been. Truth.

 

Let them have their tantrums, even if sasquatches exist and government continues to successfully discourage discovery. For personal reasons, I'm quite confident they exist. And if I get a copy of that email, I've got a federal hunting permit.

 

I always get giddy when I get a coveted hunting permit! The application period for Alaska state hunt drawing permits opens on Tuesday, and I already have my list of permits I'm applying for! It's like Christmas!

 

Hey, I just ran a search and can't find a copy of that federal email. I see the letter from the NY biologist, but not the federal email. How do I find that?

[hiflier]

1 minute ago, Huntster said:

I see the letter from the NY biologist, but not the federal email. How do I find that?

 

It only exists on my computer and a few back up copies on thumb and external drives. Some people I know personally also have copies. I had it on the "Sasquatch vs. Government" thread for a while until the discussion went south.

[georgerm]

Seeing respected members getting too hot under the collar and not focusing 

on getting the federal biologist out in the field to collect bigfoot evidence is dismal. Meanwhile Bigfoot's territory is diminishing and disrespected. I was hoping we could work together to move the endangered species process to move forward if the administrators approve. 

 

My opinion is bigfoot needs the federal endangered species classification so it can't be shot and probably wounded. If the federal Fish and Wildlife Division department would  push to gather bigfoot evidence then it has a chance to be listed or at least protected from being harmed. 

 

What is the procedure for getting a species listed as endangered?

 

 

The ESA requires that we make and publish specific findings on a petition. We or the NMFS (for most marine species) are required to make a finding within 90 days of receiving a petition (to the extent practicable) as to whether there is “substantial information” indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.

 

How do species get listed?

 

 

The Process of Listing

When an application, or “petition”, for a species to be listed is received, the relevant government agency (FWS or NOAA Fisheries depending on the species) has 90 days to review the submission and decide whether or not listing might be called for.Mar 20, 2023

 

How long does it take to put an animal on the endangered species list?

 

 

“While the law lays out a process time of two years for a species to be listed, what we found is that, in practice, it takes, on average, 12.1 years,” says Emily Puckett, who recently received her doctorate in the Division of Biological Sciences at the University of Missouri.

 

What are the 5 criteria for listing an endangered species?

 

 

Five factors are considered when determining if a species needs ESA protection:

• the decline of a species' habitat.
• over-utilization of the species.
• disease impacting the species.
• impact of inadequate existing regulatory mechanisms.
• other factors, manmade or natural, that could impact its existence.

[norseman]

33 minutes ago, georgerm said:

Seeing respected members getting too hot under the collar and not focusing 

on getting the federal biologist out in the field to collect bigfoot evidence is dismal. Meanwhile Bigfoot's territory is diminishing and disrespected. I was hoping we could work together to move the endangered species process to move forward if the administrators approve. 

 

My opinion is bigfoot needs the federal endangered species classification so it can't be shot and probably wounded. If the federal Fish and Wildlife Division department would  push to gather bigfoot evidence then it has a chance to be listed or at least protected from being harmed. 

 

What is the procedure for getting a species listed as endangered?

 

 

The ESA requires that we make and publish specific findings on a petition. We or the NMFS (for most marine species) are required to make a finding within 90 days of receiving a petition (to the extent practicable) as to whether there is “substantial information” indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.

 

How do species get listed?

 

 

The Process of Listing

When an application, or “petition”, for a species to be listed is received, the relevant government agency (FWS or NOAA Fisheries depending on the species) has 90 days to review the submission and decide whether or not listing might be called for.Mar 20, 2023

 

How long does it take to put an animal on the endangered species list?

 

 

“While the law lays out a process time of two years for a species to be listed, what we found is that, in practice, it takes, on average, 12.1 years,” says Emily Puckett, who recently received her doctorate in the Division of Biological Sciences at the University of Missouri.

 

What are the 5 criteria for listing an endangered species?

 

 

Five factors are considered when determining if a species needs ESA protection:

• the decline of a species' habitat.
• over-utilization of the species.
• disease impacting the species.
• impact of inadequate existing regulatory mechanisms.
• other factors, manmade or natural, that could impact its existence.

There is a six factor of course. It has to be recognized as a species in the first place.