BFRO / What's New - America and Canada / Archives / 03-29-2007 / What would you do?

Topie: What would you do?
November 29th, 2006 05:21 PM
llarsen I have read several threads here over the past few days like: Ron Slay's railing against the system for its suppression of the truth and running roughshod over our right to know, JimB's question of what the societal impact would be if Bigfoot was proven to exist with irrefutable evidence and even simpler questions like why don't we hear more from park rangers and BLM or NFS workers. And it has me considering my plans for a trip to the northwest.

Ron, I am with you brother! It is especially infuriating when governmental authorities withhold information from us when it is supposedly their job to protect and serve us; and how better to do that than to provide accurate, timely information. It sticks in our craw when an earnest scientist like Dr. Jeff Meldrum approaches this phenomenon with an open mind to search for the truth and then is attacked by narrow minded little men that say he should loose his tenure. The two guys from the Skeptics magazine I find merely annoying as they regurgitate their same arguments over and over again on everything from UFOs to Nessie. But, hey they are just trying to make a buck on the mysteries just as lot of other people are doing (but they are still annoying as hell.)

But ridicule is hard to take when one is trying to shed the light of truth on a subject that has been clouded in mystery, especially when the light is from one's own experience! This was the likely reason given for more wilderness workers not openly sharing the contacts that they have no doubt had. But I think a bit of what JimB was trying to say may be involved as well. Can you imagine what the lives of NFS and NPS employees would be like if there were incontrovertible evidence of Bigfoot? It would not be pretty! As Ron (I believe) said in one of his posts, "people are ignorant." That is an understatement and I will relate what a young NPS worker in Yellowstone told me as proof. They have to protect the wildlife from the idiocy of people because of what the wildlife might do in reaction to the stupid things people do. For instance, they have to constantly be on watch for some nimrod trying to put his 4 year old on the back of a moose, buffalo or elk to take a picture. With my own eyes, I watched a line of people surround a moose and corner him against a river. It was only by sheer dumb luck that a whole opened in the line of people and the moose bolted out of it; for he was about to bolt over the top of it, if need be, to escape the dragnet that had spontaneously formed. Can you imagine the outcry if several people had been trampled or if a toddler and his father were killed by buffalo?

I've said all of that to say this: OK, you've just discovered the partially decomposed body of Sasquatch, or you have just taken a whole series of 35mm shots of a female Bigfoot and her young one eating blackberries over the last hour, or you have just captured 5 minutes of outstanding, clear video of a Sassy carrying a deer up the side of a ravine - now what do you do?

At last you have evidence to slap in the face of all of those naysayers. You can redeem all of those people here on the BFRO website who have been ridiculed and want to so desperately prove that the creature exists. Maybe you can even save Dr. Meldrum's job! Even with the meekest of intentions, you're bound to make a fair stack of cash out of this. BUT, do you ask yourself, "what is the best thing for me to do from the big guy's point of view?" And, if you are altruistic enough to ask yourself that question, how do you answer?

I think there is enough evidence in the reports section that many people have asked themselves this. How many of the class A reports say, "exact location withheld at the request of the reporter" ? As bad as I would want to scream at the top of my lungs, "HERE IS YOUR DAMNED PROOF!" There is another part of me that would want to bury the remains I found. Or, tuck the video or photos away and pull them out from time to time, look at them quietly, smile and think "peace be with you."

What would you do?
November 29th, 2006 05:46 PM
Jake Levi Good question Lynn.

I'd pull out my detective jake forensic bag without which I never go in the woods and get hair samples, nail clippings, some blood samples or tissue , digital photos, get the gps numbers written down,

then I'd call Jeff Meldrum and other trusted people, very few, give them the information and give them everything but the gps numbers. Maybe a cnty location. Make out the BFRO report form. Sit back and watch the brown stuff hit the fan. Amber Bock please, keep them coming.

Actually I'd like to see something in way of an informal formal scenario posted on the BFRO website. Not a report form but actions to take under your scenario.

I'd include Jeff and several others just for payback of all they have done. But otherwise I'd keep it to myself. I would get tremendous satisfaction out of seeing the naysayers having to try and refute this kind of evidence. Back in the days when I did stream surveys I learned a lot about how to package material for future study. It'd get done right.

Theres about four authors I'd send prints to for their next book. I might do a chapter for them, leaving out the location. Then I'd see if I could find an island surrounded by volcanoes and orcas with an unlisted phone. and internet. For a couple years. Then slip back to the find location.

Bottom line, I'd get confirmation, so the rest could be protected. With BFRO, Jeff and others that would get kick started. Then I could look at my photos and think Shalom with you.
November 29th, 2006 06:08 PM
Ace! I'd take a bite out of that decomposing body and yell at the top of my lungs, "mmm, tastes like chicken" and go on my merry way. Really though, I'd take pics and show them to family and friends and that'd probably be it. A friend and I are going out this weekend and because we don't presume anything we're taking rifles. I don't want to die thinking, d*mn, I should have brought a rifle. We'll probably see nothing, most people never do. He though immediately asked me how we'd sell the story or the pictures or the body. I don't think that way, and never have. I think I'd take a picture and move on. If an animal, any animal, attacks me or makes me feel it is going to, I'll drop it. Otherwise I shoot with a camera and look back at the pictures later and think, "man, that was a good time."
November 29th, 2006 07:13 PM
tghansen Personaly I have mixed feelings on this subject. On one hand it would be great to personaly feed the sceptics major crow!

But, on the other what would it do to our research subject? Given that not all humans are created equal, or at least not in compassion for another species, or in common sense.

I have a photo i took in Yellowstone of a person taking a picture of a bull Elk, He was about 30 feet away from the bull who was exibiting major nervous behavior (early spring- may) the horror stories of imbeciles in just that park alone can entertain for hours!

As i posted on another thread, what happens to a bf who attacks some idiots that thought they would really like to hold the baby bf? or get pics of it with their kids?

What happens when the new craze is anybody who can walk is out looking to see one? Once they are proven to exist they will be out of privacy and anyone with acsess to this site will have a pretty good idea where to start looking at least in general.

A bear is a proven biological species yet, how many get put down because people cant get it through their heads they really aren't gonna just lick your face because you want them too or if you smear your child with honey to get that perfect the way that has happened.

like the old saying goes stupidity kills but, they are breading!
November 29th, 2006 07:36 PM
Ace! err
November 29th, 2006 10:51 PM
timidyshadowhider I think if I had the chance to find absolute proof, with pictures, etc of bigfoot- Id show them to my son and grandsons. My son just to say now quit teasing me! My grandsons because they share the excitement with me, and then I would put them away for the same reasons given to protect the Yellowstone wildlife from the true dummies- those people who do want to "get up close to a bear,moose..." I wathced a guy throw rocks at a big ol male bison at our states rest area station, and literally waited hoping the bison would break through the skinny fence and knock some sense into that lunatic!! Fortunately the game warden came before anything else happened.
November 30th, 2006 12:23 AM
Jake Levi wrote:
I'd pull out my detective jake forensic bag without which I never go in the woods and get hair samples, nail clippings, some blood samples or tissue , digital photos, get the gps numbers written down,

then I'd call Jeff Meldrum and other trusted people, very few, give them the information and give them everything but the gps numbers.

Bottom line, I'd get confirmation, so the rest could be protected. With BFRO, Jeff and others that would get kick started. Then I could look at my photos and think Shalom with you.

Second this. Also, I pretty much agree w/ Dr. Krantz's idea that after a big flurry in the media and the wild, and because BF is so darned reclusive, attention would finally simmer down and let the scientists, ethicists, linguists, anthros etc do their field work.

Something like this has already been happening right under our noses: the re-discovery of viable populations of Ivorybill Woodpeckers, now thought to occupy a much larger territory than when first rediscovered several years ago.

The initial response was one of abject ridicule from some ornithologists on the one hand, and huge excitement from other biologists, birders and the eco-tourist trade near their presumed habitats. What happened right away was some ordinances were enacted to ensure the bird's habitat protections and limit access by the public to certain areas...still an ongoing process as so new...what is really hopeful here is it seems all parties seem to agree on the importance of protection of these beings. Been watching this evolve with great interest as it has a lot of relevance I think to the BF situation.

November 30th, 2006 02:04 AM
D. Freel Ok, my 2 cents.

Even if a person came forward with 3 hours of video. The video capturing the breeding dance, copulation and subsequent birth of a baby sasquatch, then they really sealed the deal by bringing in the bodies of the family. Ultimately proving beyond a shadow of a doubt to all the world for times indefinite that sasquatch IS real and we are not so crazy. IF this ever happens or anything remotely like this it is because of ONE thing...Pure Dumb Luck

It wouldn't mean the demise of the species.

For the last...50 years or so people, either organized or unorganized have been looking for answers to the 300+ year old myth of Bigfoot.
The Result?
Bigfoot discussion forums, "Witness Reports", mp3's of unexplained sounds and last but certainly not least NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE!
That means that even though people like Myself, the BFRO, Jeff Meldrum, Grover Crantz, John Green, Autumn Williams, Roger Patterson (and on and on and on) have spent the better part of their lives out there looking for "conclusive evidence" it hasn't happened yet. <period>

They (Bigfeet) are smart. Damn Smart. They know how to hide and are good at it. That is how they have avoided being blasted so far, and how they will avoid being blasted in the future.

I am not saying that one won't screw up in the future and get bagged, or a body wont be found due to death by natural causes.
BUT this will not cause a mass extinction of the Sasquatch. They are just too smart for that, they have got to be.

November 30th, 2006 02:19 AM
Tyler H I agree - I think once they get "proven" there will be many many more hunters, and thus more "proof" will come to light more often. But I can't see it going too far. For one thing, they would become protected, and for another, not enough people would be willing to make the necessary efforts to find them - or have the luck to find them repeatedly. They will also get better and better at avoiding us - what works to 'catch' them one time would not continue to work if they get burnt by that.

For the record - If I got great footage - at the moment I believe I would donate it - either to a Meldrum or a Bindernagel or someone, or else a charity or institute. Of course, I have not thus far been faced with offers of huge cash, so maybe that's easy to say now, and I would have to eat my words in the future.
November 30th, 2006 02:47 AM
D. Freel Oh yea, if I got the footage...
limited 5 second clips would be released to capture imaginations, then I would sell to the highest bidder the right to post on their website up to 15 seconds of the film. In the meantime I would be having mass amounts of DVD's produced for me to sell to the individual consumer. Remember: Patty is still making someone money...
And with the money? Quit my job, buy an island and kick back...
November 30th, 2006 06:04 AM
riconaroc I'm sure I'm going to be shot down in flames for this one having never been on an expedition, but here goes anyway. Has anyone attempted to lure a BF into a trap like a big hole in the ground covered with branches, twigs etc. What are the practical difficulties of doing this, and what are the consequences if (by some remote chance) the trap succeeded?
November 30th, 2006 06:22 AM
Jake Levi I really dont think the average public has a clue as to the kind of country that the NW Sasquatch lives in. Once its confirmed there may well be increased armed hunter'investigators' out looking for a sample, but its more probable that they would screw up and come up missing in the boonies then bring a body back. I suspect S&R would be bringing back many of their bodies. For a number of years I got lucrative contracts to do stream surveys simply because the respective fed and state agencies didnt want to go out there themselves.

That is some of the toughest terrain in NA, also some of the most beautiful, but for comparison, count the cars that are in and out of Yellowstone and Yosemite a year, and even with them, thankfully, most never leave the road or picnic grounds, but those numbers are vast compared to the cars in and out of Mt Ranier and Glacier National and other NW parks.

Bottom line I think that the NW population is fairly secure from molestation. But I still think that they need to be confirmed, so they can be protected. Interesting Derek mentioned the woodpecker, this month's NG has an article, still skeptical but hopeful. I get email notices every couple weeks on different conservation groups lists on them. Interest is there. Things have changed, for the better as far as protection of our environment are concerned.

There are still the idiots who will cover the kids with honey to get a better bear picture. Being a park ranger in those high traffic areas has to be one of the hardest jobs in the country. That said, rare and endangered species are better off national support wise then ever before.

I think Squatch( I like that ) is a giganto or 'modern' one, this question needs to be resolved, confirmation will do that, and then protected.

BTW, BFRO is the largest org researching them, and the oldest. It also has a better structure for working within then any other. If/when, I do find anything, thats who gets my first reports, and who I'd work with. I also have a lot of personal respect for Jeff Meldrum and for sure he'd be brought in.

I was tongue in cheek talking about the forensic kit, but it needs to be. Take a gallon zib bag, put in a dozen pint or quart zip bags, some Q tips in a bag, long tweezers, a couple pairs of sterile surgical gloves, a long handled comb, an exacto knife, two sealable empty and washed prescription bottles, two 4 ounce bottles of alcohol for tissue samples. A GPS on the belt. Your little kit will make a very small package that will tuck away in the bottom of a rucksack or back pack. A small print kit takes little room, fits nicely into a quart ziplock. ,Always pick up your camera when leaving along with a handful of extra batterys. You're then set along with whatever else you take. Your equipment should also include a cell phone, for your own safety, but also good to have a couple preprogrammed BRFO numbers on it.
November 30th, 2006 11:49 AM
Ron Slay Just my 2 scents, now...

All of these "mouth watering" fantasies about getting evidence is one thing...but...


Your quote,

"As Ron (I believe) said in one of his posts, 'people are ignorant.' That is an understatement..."

Of any human, I, Ron Slay, sometimes feel that I must be the biggest ignoramus!!!

To even believe - on my current level of consciousness - that I can even come close to understanding the subtle intricacies of the KNOWN species of flora and fauna on this planet - their delicate equilibrium with each other - THEIR UNREVEALED PURPOSES - the amazing interrelationships and motivations of their collective intelligences that have adapted and have become successful BEFORE MANKIND EVER EXISTED - is a subject that makes me want to crawl under the bed and stay there in a fetal position until I can REALLY see with REAL eyes.

And then,....the subject that I have been railing about...

when we look at the many tragic misinterpretations and mistakes that some of our "experts" - our authorities - have made, based upon their formal educations in an empirical system of science, and the constructs that have been established to embed these "mirages" into our ideas of reality, I start to suck my lower lip (I never sucked my thumb as an infant).

I am, at least, starting to learn that the world just doesn't work that way. There are so many "sub-systems"/"supra-systems" running parallel to what I see at face value - NOT CONCEALED - but only not apparent to the "blindness" of my senses.

Empiricism barely scratches the surface of our universe.

I was totally amazed to learn several years ago that, according to our "human" law of aerodynamics, the BUMBLEBEE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO FLY!!!

Well, what has that fuzzy guy been doing all of these millenia?


Lord, I only ask for one thing in my life. Give me understanding. Amen.

And then...

we talk about another fuzzy guy that's virtually unknown.

And, maybe, according to our "human" law of thermodynamics, he shouldn't be generating any heat in the forest.

It is totally astonishing, from square one, that he has, more often than not, evaded the "highly sophisticated" technology of this human race.

What gives him this edge?

I believe it is his "hybrid" state of consciousness. He has the mind of a human, but the body and senses of a beast.

This makes him a pretty formidable "humanimal".

He probably laughs at our crude attempts to catch him. Moreso, he is probably watching us while we try to construct these puny snares and traps, so weak, so slow, that they are the biggest punch-line to any joke he has ever known about us.

He is probably saying in his own language,

"Lord, I only ask for one thing in my life. Give me understanding. AH!, MEN!"

Ah, zip-lock bags, flypaper, tripwires, duct tape, QTips, tweezers, cameras, magnifiying glasses, surgical gloves, honey-flavored coatings, med. bottles, videos, ammunition, Xacto knives, night-vision goggles, rubber bands, Howitzers, tissues, R.P.G.s...on and on...

...the flotsam and jetsam of our frail existence...


November 30th, 2006 12:36 PM
shadobuck Beautifully said, Ron. Like the three blind men describing an elephant, there are physicists and mathematicians right now searching for "proof" of a "Creator" particle, or impetus, in the rarified place in our universe where physics, theoretical math, philosophy and spirituality meet. Personally, I still think the scientific method, while flawed, is one useful structure for understanding phenomena. For me, the most useful aspect is its first law: keep an open mind.

This seems like a simple dictum, but as others have said here, on the subject of BF, many scientists are breaking their discipline's first rule. BF researchers themselves need to remember this rule; otherwise the conclusions made about interactions and observations may be skewed. The discussions on eye shine colors are a good example of this. If there is a sytstematic collection of field research going on during expeditions, one would hope the BFRO is tabulating it without jumping to conclusions. The hypotheses can come later. It is tempting to try to reach a "conclusion" after an experience which is off the map. It's the brain trying to rectify the dissonance set up when your past experience of reality doesa head-on with the new, so your brain automatically attempts to integrate and interpret.

This is where the next rule of scientific observation comes in: impartial observation. I know most of you are now laughing going "Yeah right, try to be impartial when a 600 lb BF is lobbing boulders at your head." Trailrider and Captain's experiences are incredible...they both have tried to maintain this under extreme situations, although most scientists would say trankin' yourself so you don't exit stage right might be hazardous to your health!

It's all good, even the ugly stuff, and it all motto has always been a quote from Plotinus: "Ignotum per ignotius" --To the unknowable through the MORE unknowable. Why the heck do you think I'm on this board? LOL

November 30th, 2006 12:56 PM
shadobuck [quote]Jake Levi wrote:

Interesting Derek mentioned the woodpecker, this month's NG has an article, still skeptical but hopeful. I get email notices every couple weeks on different conservation groups lists on them. Interest is there. Things have changed, for the better as far as protection of our environment are concerned.

I think National Geographic is an example of what Ron Slay is railing against in the national media. Like the Smithsonian, they have a vested interest in protecting....themselves! Big Surprise. The latest news on the Ivorybills indicates a substantial population in Florida. This WAS a big surprise. There are several higher quality videos made by biologists and field recordings and detailed observations, moreso than in the earlier sightings in other states. One good resource is:

Cornell has been instrumental in this reserach from the start, unlike some other universities who won't even support discussion of the subject.
November 30th, 2006 12:59 PM
Ron Slay My motto has always been a quote from Occam:

"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatum."

But, for some reason I can never live up to it on this foruum.



November 30th, 2006 01:18 PM
Ron Slay wrote:
My motto has always been a quote from Occam:

"Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatum."

But, for some reason I can never live up to it on this foruum.


:D Me neither. Open mouth, insert foot would be a better one for me! :p


November 30th, 2006 03:25 PM
Jake Levi Ron, much of that "flotsam and jetsam" you mention , plus about 50 lbs more are waht I used in the Cascades to make my living, albeit searching for a whole different family of invertebrates. They work.

Some of that establishment railing is misplaced. Pioneers such as John Green and Grover Krant jeopardized their careers by their stance of pursuing investigation of Sasquatch. Jeff Meldrum joined them. All isnot bad on the academic side. There are many out there now.

I am wondering, why are you so melancholy ?
November 30th, 2006 03:40 PM

De gustibus non est disputandum
November 30th, 2006 04:19 PM
Ron Slay Jake,

In knowledge, there is much sorrow.


In limited knowledge, there is much melancholy.


Ron :(
November 30th, 2006 04:33 PM
Ron Slay Better, still...

Limited knowledge = frustration = melancholy.

No knowledge at all? Well, maybe that's Hog Heaven to some. :p

Knowledge withheld by others? :angry:


November 30th, 2006 04:38 PM
Jake Levi Cheer up, long journeys first steps etc,

if you havnet yet get Jeff Meldrums book, much knowledge and reads like a suspense novel.
November 30th, 2006 07:38 PM
twcorwin wrote:
De gustibus non est disputandum

Well said TW :D
November 30th, 2006 09:34 PM
John_P If I was out with the camera and met up with the big fella I would take a hit off my flask, offer it to him, have the missus squatch take our photo together and then sit under a tree (he'll bend one over for us) and figure out some way to talk together without all those annoying sub-sonic frequencies.

Actually if I was fortunate enough to get clear photos or vid I would immediately share it with the BFRO group. You all deserve it for believing and hoping. I may even give the actual location. Why? Look at the recent expeditions; planned events at areas of known activity where squatch was around but not available for useful imaging. Look at the Cap' and his experiences. Bigfoot can be found or become "invisible" as he wants to. A hoard of idiots will not be able to find bigfoot. The only thing I would hold back is a nest location if, by some random chance, I would find one.

As I have said before, this BFRO forum is full of great ideas and comments like this thread, and it is fun to read. Keep the faith.

December 1st, 2006 01:28 AM
D. Freel Where did I mention the woodpecker?
December 1st, 2006 05:24 AM
Jake Levi That was Shadowbuck. My bad.

You should have though.
December 1st, 2006 09:14 AM
Ron Slay In retrospect, I feel the need to explain something.

I neither meant to imply any belittlement or ridicule of anyone's methods or processes in gathering evidence, nor was there any deliberate intent on my part to make any disparaging comments about anyone's profession when I wrote what I did, above.

It's a funny thing about me and writing, in that it can sometimes be a form of "meditation" for me.

When I am in to a subject, I will enter what I call the "Siddhartha" frame of mind. If anyone has read Herman Hesse, you may know what I am referring to.

This may sound crazy but it is almost like leaving my body and getting into the body of that someone or something else that I am writing about. I want to see things from the other's perspective so that I can grasp the collective whole, and be able to express a thought about it in a more thorough way.

When I "RAILED" (Is this going to be my other handle from now on?) about the Zip-Loc bags and Duct Tape, above, I was in the body of a passing Sasquatch at the time.

Of course, these are the tools and materials that we, as humans, use to get things done. That is why we are considered the "most intelligent" species: we use our heads and the world around us to solve problems. It is the most effective way to get results.

But, we all can agree that in exchange for using more of our brains, we logically gave up a lot of braun. During my "Astral Projection", I (the Sasquatch) saw all of this as the "Flotsam and Jetsam of our frail existence". I don't believe that the Sasquatch needs any of this to get the things done that he has to do, and he is doing his thing very well. At the time, he (I) was looking, comfortably from his vantage point behind a rock, at our "scurrying about", giggling at all of our efforts to catch him.

Sometimes it is healthy to laugh at ourselves and the things we do even though these things may be very valid and logical.

Whenever I get up in the morning and look in the mirror, I fall down on the floor in stitches. :D :D :D

Jake, Shalom.


December 1st, 2006 09:19 AM
Ron Slay Further clarification on the Woodpecker...

It was Shadobuck who said that Derek mentioned the Woodpecker.

She said that he said.....
December 3rd, 2006 07:05 AM
Jake Levi One other point,re: the establishment in Idaho, the universities there have been in the lead in supporting research and publishing. Yes there are grumps among the ranks there too who badmouth Jeff and others but that said and done the establishment in Idaho has been supportive. Others will come around as more information is brought out.

Frankly if I had a tenured chair and making a couple hundred thousand a year I'd be ignoring BF as long as the star trekkies keep pouring out their tales about BF.

But with George Schaller and Jane Goodall speaking out for sound research there will be more coming around.

I've said it before, and will again, if you havent gotten Jeff Meldrums new book "Saquatch: Legend meets Science, then get it.