zendog Posted March 24 Posted March 24 Are we at a point where the mainstream buys into Sasquatch enough that this question might not be a little premature?
MIB Posted March 24 Moderator Posted March 24 ^^^^ I think I said it up-thread, but maybe worth repeating ... as I understand the ESA listing process, you can't have something listed as endangered until science accepts that it exists. A person can argue "should" all they want, I think that is an unavoidable fact that has to be dealt with realistically, not wishfully. MIB 1
Backdoc Posted March 25 Posted March 25 20 hours ago, zendog said: Are we at a point where the mainstream buys into Sasquatch enough that this question might not be a little premature? Welcome Zendog. Seems there would be 3 groups out there: - Those who believe in Bigfoot - Those who DO NOT believe in Bigfoot - Those who think Bigfoot COULD exist. I have no idea what % would be in each group. Until Bigfoot is proven, higher government powers are not going to pass laws to protect it. Take Bigfoot out the equation: Substitute any animal thought to be extinct. If one was killed, I have to think there would be some level of fine or trouble for the person doing the killing be it intentional or not. If that is the case, then it seems to indicate the spirit of the law is aimed at preventing the killing of some extinct animal (real or myth) even if the letter of the law doesn't spell it out.
MIB Posted March 25 Moderator Posted March 25 6 minutes ago, Backdoc said: Substitute any animal thought to be extinct. Substitute any animal believed to be myth. I think the result changes.
Incorrigible1 Posted March 25 Posted March 25 3 hours ago, Backdoc said: If one was killed, I have to think there would be some level of fine or trouble for the person doing the killing be it intentional or not. On what grounds would you charge a motorist whose vehicle struck and killed a dodo, or passenger pigeon, or Carolina parakeet? 1
Redbone Posted March 25 Posted March 25 1 hour ago, Incorrigible1 said: On what grounds would you charge a motorist whose vehicle struck and killed a dodo, or passenger pigeon, or Carolina parakeet? unlicensed time travel?
norseman Posted March 26 Admin Posted March 26 4 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said: On what grounds would you charge a motorist whose vehicle struck and killed a dodo, or passenger pigeon, or Carolina parakeet? Can we call it the asteroid fine? I am thinking at least 5000 dollars and 50 hours of community service! 1
Backdoc Posted March 26 Posted March 26 19 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said: On what grounds would you charge a motorist whose vehicle struck and killed a dodo, or passenger pigeon, or Carolina parakeet? This scenario really sums up the big picture: Someone accidently or even intentionally kills something that is extinct. What happens to them? I use this as a basis to make a guess of what might happen to that same someone if they hit Bigfoot with a car. It's all a wild guess. One thing which is a safer bet: After the person may or may not face trouble, they would be famous and maybe cash in. Science would have an earthquake of the established thought where Bigfoot- having thought not to exist- is now proven to exist. Ripple effects of various sorts would go out from there.
Doug Posted March 26 Posted March 26 It would be impossible to kill an extinct species because the definition of extinct is no living member of a species. One can not kill something that no longer exists. If one kills a sasquatch and it is the last of them, they would only be hastening the extinction of it. If there was more than one before it was killed, they would not have caused an extinction and as long as one exists, it's not extinct.
Catmandoo Posted March 27 Posted March 27 (edited) Here you go Backdoc: Article: Skamania Ordinance2 Date Posted: Nov-18-2006 ORDINANCE NO. 1984-2 PARTIALLY REPEALING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1969-01 WHEREAS, evidence continues to accumulate indicating the Possible existence within Skamania County a nocturnal primate mammal Variously described as an ape-like creature or sub-species of Homo Sapiens; and WHEREAS, legend, purported recent findings, and spoor support This possibility; and WHEREAS, this creature is generally and commonly known as “Sasquatch”, “Yeti”, “Bigfoot”, or “Giant Hairy Ape”, all of which terms may be hereinafter be used interchangeably; and WHEREAS, publicity attendant upon such real or imagined findings And other evidence have resulted in an influx of scientific investigators as well as casual hunters, most of which are armed with lethal weapons; and WHEREAS, the absence of specific national and state laws restricting the taking of specimens has created a dangerous state of affairs within this county in regard to firearms and other deadly devices used to hunt the Yeti and poses a clear and present danger to the safty of the well-being persons living or traveling within the boundries of this county as well as to the Giant Hairy Apes themselves; and WHEREAS, previous County Ordinance No. 1969-01 deemed the slaying of such creature to be a felony (punishable by 5 years in prison) and may have exceeded the jurisdictional authority of that Board of County Commissioners; now, therefore BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SKAMANIA COUNTY that a portion of Ordinance No. 1969-1, deeming the slaying of Bigfoot to be a felony punishable by 5 years in prison, is hereby repealed and in its stead the following sections are enacted: SECTION 1. Sasquatch Refuge. The Sasquatch, Yeti, Bigfoot, or Giant Hairy Ape are declared to be endangered species of Skamania County and there is hereby created a Sasquatch Refuge, the boundaries of which shall be co-extensive with the boundaries of Skamania County. SECTION 2. Crime-Penalty. From and after the passage of this ordinance the premeditated, willful, or wanton slaying of Sasquatch shall be unlawful and shall be punishable as follows: (a) If the actor is found to be guilty of such a crime with malice aforethought, such act shall be deemed a Gross Misdemeanor. (b) If the act is found to be premeditated and willful or wanton but without malice aforethought, such act shall be deemed a Misdemeanor. (c) A gross misdemeanor slaying of Sasquatch shall be punishable by 1 year in the county jail and a $1,000.00 fine, or both. (d) The slaying of Sasquatch which is deemed a misdemeanor shall be punishable by a $500.00 fine and up to 6 months in the county jail, or both. SECTION 3. Defense. In the prosecution and trail of any accused Sasquatch killer the fact that the actor is suffering from insane delusions, diminished capacity, or that the act was the product of a diseased mind, shall not be a defense. SECTION 4. Humaniod/Anthropoid. Should the Skamania County Coroner determine any victim/creature to have been humanoid the Prosecuting Attorney shall persue the case under existing laws pertaining to homicide. Should the coroner determine the victim to be an anthropoid (ape-like creature) the Prosecuting Attorney shall proceed under the terms of this ordinance. BE IT FUTHER ORDAINED that the situation existing constitutes an emergency and such this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its’ passage. REVIEWED this 2nd day of April, 1984, and set for a public hearing on the 16th day of April, 1984, at 10:30 o’clock A.M. Note: Became law on April 16th 1984. Note that this was reviewed on April 2nd. Maybe an April Fool's joke. The first DNA sample that was sent to the FBI for analysis was submitted on April 1st. Be alert. Section 1 is fluffy foo-foo. And then there is Section 3: SECTION 3. Defense. In the prosecution and trail of any accused Sasquatch killer the fact that the actor is suffering from insane delusions, diminished capacity, or that the act was the product of a diseased mind, shall not be a defense. ( where is the fun in that? ) I would have thought that 'insane delusions', 'diminished capacity' and 'diseased mind' would cover all the bases. And section 4 deals with homicide. Don't even think of dragging the body across county lines. Back in the 90's, a warm and fuzzy attempt was made to make Sasquatch the Washington State animal / mammal. Did not fly. Edited March 27 by Catmandoo text 1
Backdoc Posted March 27 Posted March 27 (edited) 14 hours ago, Catmandoo said: SECTION 2. Crime-Penalty. From and after the passage of this ordinance the premeditated, willful, or wanton slaying of Sasquatch shall be unlawful and shall be punishable as follows: (a) If the actor is found to be guilty of such a crime with malice aforethought, such act shall be deemed a Gross Misdemeanor. (b) If the act is found to be premeditated and willful or wanton but without malice aforethought, such act shall be deemed a Misdemeanor. (c) A gross misdemeanor slaying of Sasquatch shall be punishable by 1 year in the county jail and a $1,000.00 fine, or both. (d) The slaying of Sasquatch which is deemed a misdemeanor shall be punishable by a $500.00 fine and up to 6 months in the county jail, or both. First off, Thanks Catmandoo. That is what I like about the BFF. Generally, if you have a Q or a thought there is usually a pretty good army of people with the info or the insight and are glad to share it. That is interesting. This Crime Pentalty thing is interesting. Consider if someoen really did shoot a bigfoot to my mind they would be killing something of which there are likely not too many out there. The fines or punishment might seem a bit small when we consider: 1) VCR tapes days we where told "copy them could be stiff in fines or jail time". This looks more severe as a crime than killing Bigfoot 2) Having such a law with some punishment serves a purpose if for no other reason than to make sure hunters are not shooing each other. Less fear of punishment might make someone take a shot a Bigfoot only to find out it is their buddy trying to hoax them. The law might at least keep a few trigger-happy people from shooting at each other. Thanks for the post. Interesting. Edited March 27 by Backdoc
norseman Posted March 27 Admin Posted March 27 1 hour ago, Backdoc said: First off, Thanks Catmandoo. That is what I like about the BFF. Generally, if you have a Q or a thought there is usually a pretty good army of people with the info or the insight and are glad to share it. That is interesting. This Crime Pentalty thing is interesting. Consider if someoen really did shoot a bigfoot to my mind they would be killing something of which there are likely not too many out there. The fines or punishment might seem a bit small when we consider: 1) VCR tapes days we where told "copy them could be stiff in fines or jail time". This looks more severe as a crime than killing Bigfoot 2) Having such a law with some punishment serves a purpose if for no other reason than to make sure hunters are not shooing each other. Less fear of punishment might make someone take a shot a Bigfoot only to find out it is their buddy trying to hoax them. The law might at least keep a few trigger-happy people from shooting at each other. Thanks for the post. Interesting. 1) Exactly. This Skamania county law has no teeth. It’s a misdemeanor. And as MIB said….its a law about a mythical animal. Not an extinct one. 2) How is that any different than deer season? I don't think a county law about Bigfoot makes anyone safer in the woods. Hunters get shot every year in the woods and it’s just apart of the risk. Along with any hobby. What the law really does is fly in the face of the scientific process in which we discover and classify extant species based on type specimens. 🤷♂️ Might as well pass laws on not shooting Pixies and Gnomes while they are at it….
Catmandoo Posted March 28 Posted March 28 23 hours ago, Catmandoo said: Back in the 90's, a warm and fuzzy attempt was made to make Sasquatch the Washington State animal / mammal. Did not fly. I am back to kick the hornet's nest. I was way off about the State animal procedure happening in the 90's. It was during 1970. I had to dig deep in the Catmandoo files to retrieve a few gems. I posted a comment about the date that the Skamania County Ordinance was reviewed. In 1984, April 1st was on a Sunday. Clever Commissioners had to wait until Monday, the 2nd. Besides the Skamania County Ordinance, I am aware of action in Whatcom County and Grays Harbor County. Whatcom and Grays Harbor County paperwork are aligned to a refuge-protection area, not an ESA zone. Washington's official proclamation to make Sasquatch the state monster is a good read. There is a link at the bottom of the Archives Spotlight page that will hook you up with 19 pages of proclamation notes, memos and some poems and lyrics. On page 7, they present information on the Sasquatch--Modoc Treaty. Whatcom County: https://documents.whatcomcounty.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?dbid=0&id=3276411&page=1&cr=1 Grays Harbor County, action in this century 2022: https://www.kxro.com/grays-harbor-designated-as-a-sasquatch-protection-and-refuge-area/ Washington State Monster with a good image of Patty: https://blogs.sos.wa.gov/fromourcorner/index.php/2018/01/history-friday-washingtons-official-state-monster/ The work in the previous century was humorous, serious and they avoided the ESA arena with safety zones / refuges. Those fifth grade students in Hoquiam will probably work the forest with disposable , one-time use cameras. 1
Grubfingers Posted April 11 Posted April 11 Joshua Stevens, Pennsylvania State University, used data compiled by the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO), which tries to document Bigfoot population based on sightings. It’s not looking endangered.
Recommended Posts