Why has bigfoot not been listed as an endangered species?

[hiflier]

30 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.

 

georgerm, with all due respect that's all I've been trying to do for at least the last four years here. Beginning with my DNA threads pushing for physical proof.. And that's what this whole legal discussion is all about as well. If the existence status of the Sasquatch cannot be officially admitted to then chances of getting it on the ESL is ZERO. Gotta get the feds to the courtroom and get them in the hot seat being grilled by a damn good lawyer who knows the program.

[hiflier]

2 minutes ago, norseman said:

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

 

BINGO! And that's what discussing this legal/court stuff is meant to accomplish. To gain a consensus that would like to see that happen....and why.

[georgerm]

5 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

BINGO! And that's what discussing this legal/court stuff is meant to accomplish. To gain a consensus that would like to see that happen....and why.

The process has already gone way past mythological creatures that don't leave tracks, poop, leak DNA in creeks, the Patterson-Gimlin film, and other physical evidence. 

 

Do we know any recognized biologist that would write up a scientific paper and lay out the evidence required by fish and wildlife dept.? Do we know other bigfoot biologist that would probably agree and sign the paper? The more the merrier. 

 

Has any American biologist followed the formal application process that the federal Fish and Wildlife department requires?

 

 

[hiflier]

You could ask Derek Randles and the Olympic Project. They had biologists at the nest site. back in 2015-16? Meldrum is, or was a member of that group so maybe he could be of some help? In a way, though, I doubt they would be a good source because they had ample opportunity to go that route (ESA) and didn't. Nor was there any legal pursuit of the USFWS. WADNR agents were there as well but they didn't respond after four or five email inquiries. And at the time no Forum members living in WA State wanted to contact them. My own pressure here for some kind of action only resulted in a bad experience and a stigma to this day. I think that road has been smoothed out some since though. At least I hope so.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by hiflier

[norseman]

1 hour ago, georgerm said:

The process has already gone way past mythological creatures that don't leave tracks, poop, leak DNA in creeks, the Patterson-Gimlin film, and other physical evidence. 

 

Do we know any recognized biologist that would write up a scientific paper and lay out the evidence required by fish and wildlife dept.? Do we know other bigfoot biologist that would probably agree and sign the paper? The more the merrier. 

 

Has any American biologist followed the formal application process that the federal Fish and Wildlife department requires?

 

 

Dig in. Tons of scientific papers written by Biologists.

 

https://www.isu.edu/rhi/research-papers/

 

It hasn’t moved science one inch.

 

[Huntster]

34 minutes ago, hiflier said:

You could ask Derek Randles and the Olympic Project.........

 

A 100% private venture on private land. Ideally, one would not bring in any government agencies whatsoever, but publish pics and descriptions of nest and any other finds and make the G-men squirm. Come to think about it, if one caught a sasquatch, keeping it away from government would be fully justified since they exercise all manner of denial gymnastics to keep themselves away from the phenomenon. If you had one on your estate like Edgi Genaba, why would you have to report it? They're a myth.

[hiflier]

11 hours ago, norseman said:

Dig in. Tons of scientific papers written by Biologists.

 

https://www.isu.edu/rhi/research-papers/

 

It hasn’t moved science one inch.

 

 

Right as rain, Bill Munns' book, when Roger Met Patty, may have but no one's talking. But what about Dr. Mayor, the primatologist on "Expedition: Bigfoot"? Is she really out for proof? I think so in spite of the TV atmosphere and melodrama. Maybe she's trying to generate enough money for some kind of push? Or am I just being naive? Maybe other primatologists are keeping an eye on her because TV is one thing but what goes on outside of the EB episodes could be another.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Been thinking about a court case. One would probably need to first have permission to sue a federal agency. Then, more than likely, some hind of hearing. It also, perhaps, wouldn't have to be a jury trial. Simply a judge, defense council and witnesses, prosecution council and witnesses, and then, of course, the media. Unless it's a closed door affair. Would be cool if it was a state level case where it could be televised

 

Sorry, you're right, can't get ahead of this. Baby steps. Don't need the defendant acquitted for any reason.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

13 minutes ago, hiflier said:

Been thinking about a court case.........

 

That is not the case in an ESA petition/suit. It happens every year. An environmental group petitions to have an animal or plant listed, the agency disapproves, and the lawsuit begins as expected.

 

Quote

.......It also, perhaps, wouldn't have to be a jury trial. Simply a judge, defense council and witnesses, prosecution council and witnesses, and then, of course, the media. Unless it's a closed door affair........

 

Federal administrative cases almost never include a jury, and they always begin with closed door introductory meetings with the judge and both parties with counsel. Been there, done that.

 

You'd need to go i to this with a solid knowledge of the judge, his/her history, experiences, etc, then focus on selling your case to him/her. Finding a federal judge who is pissed off with the USFWS and/or USFS could be a winner. Remember, all you're seeking is study and data collection.

 

 

[hiflier]

19 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Remember, all you're seeking is study and data collection.

 

One would be initially seeking how the USFWS determined it recreational status for Sasquatch. Namely, was it on the basis of non-existence.

[Huntster]

10 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

One would be initially seeking how the USFWS determined it recreational status for Sasquatch. Namely, was it on the basis of non-existence.

That would certainly be an excellent “gotcha” question, but if suing under the ESA, it has to be toward the goal of forcing the agency to study population densities, since that is the purpose of the ESA, and because the agency has not (or will not admit) ever conducting any study of the species, thereby damning their only defense; “But they don’t exist! “  The evidence of existence will be the plaintiffs strength, especially the PG film and associated footprint casts, Munns analysis, and Laverty photos.

[hiflier]

46 minutes ago, Huntster said:

That would certainly be an excellent “gotcha” question, but if suing under the ESA, it has to be toward the goal of forcing the agency to study population densities, since that is the purpose of the ESA, and because the agency has not (or will not admit) ever conducting any study of the species, thereby damning their only defense; “But they don’t exist! “  The evidence of existence will be the plaintiffs strength, especially the PG film and associated footprint casts, Munns analysis, and Laverty photos.

 

I agree but I also think it's stronger to aim at the recreational categorization and let the ESA follow that argument. So It would seem two ways would be available for examining the existence question under oath but my true sense is that the recreational approach would be much, much, quicker. THEN the ESA door can be opened. Just something to think about in an imagined court setting that may end up not being at all imaginary.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

The ESA petition and denial gets you a date with the federal judge IAW (in accordance with) the black letter of the law. If a petition is denied, the denial can be challenged, and that occurs regularly. The recreational status recognition proves that the agency allows citizens unfettered access to "hunt" the species. Again, if the agency cries "But they don't exist!", the recreational recognition puts them at a disadvantage, forcing them to recognize recreational access to any mythical pursuit on federal lands that can be imagined.

[hiflier]

16 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Again, if the agency cries "But they don't exist!"

 

Perfect, let them claim it. And claim it publicly. It's a house o' cards after that as far as I'm concerned.

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by hiflier

[Huntster]

41 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Perfect, let them claim it. And claim it publicly. It's a house o' cards after that as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

Yup. And the meeting with the federal judge could put them between a rock and a hard place. The department has had plenty of stimuli begging investigation:

 

1) The PG film event, on federal lands, in the midst of a timber lease program, with multiple road building contractors reporting problems with these creatures for a full nine years before the filming which was broadcast around the world in the media, and which a USFS crew visited the site days after the filming

 

2) Years of reports of these creatures on Ft. Lewis lands which the Army likely has documented MP or DPW reports 

 

3) Countless citizen reports to USFS and NPS rangers, some of which can be presented to the judge

 

4) Police reports on or near federal lands, some of which included sightings by the LEO themselves

 

5) The Freeman Video, also with accompanying footprint casts like the PG film, and who had been a Forest Service employee

 

The ESA suit, along with the rabid denials of the department (including admissions of not even keeping records of reports even from their own employees and contractors) makes a ruling instructing them to begin simple data collection of reports appear to be a gimme.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Huntster