Comments on: BFRO Invades Wisconsin

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Tue, 23 May 2006 20:09:18 +0000

OK, now I understand, and agree to an extent. However, it depends on just what cryptid we are dealing with.
For instance do we stick to the same set of strict protocols and rules of engagement we have established for hominids if we are tracking one of the giant monkeys? What about an unknown pongid?
My suggestion would be to follow the example of other primate field researchers, such as Jane Goodall and Dian Fossey. However, when we see what Fossey’s reluctance to financially exploit mountain gorillas may have earned her, and consider the increased pressure that would be placed on anyone studying the “legendary” Bigfoot, it does give one pause, especially when considering how soon to go public with any information on studies either planned or in progress.

By: Ole Bub

Ole Bub — Sat, 20 May 2006 16:35:59 +0000

Agreed…sasquatch needs a well thought out set of Protocols…”Rules of Encounter/Engagement”…widely distributed to as many field folks as possible…JMHO

Regarding self-defense…only in protection of others and then something less than lethal….pepper spray as an example….you chose to encroach upon them….”mess with the bull….you get the horns”…JMHO

seeing is believing….

ole bub and the dawgs

By: lamarkable

lamarkable — Sat, 20 May 2006 16:18:54 +0000

We also need an advisory board of sympathetic university level experts- a conference or symposium sponsored by a learning center with multi-disciplinary
topics. Long overdue. Time to grow up as a field. Beyond safety protocals-disclosure protocols-alot of energy is spent saying-look its over here-look its over there. It takes a leader in the field to step up to the plate. We might not get there-but this topic can be brought forth in a sincere call to open minds with these concerns in mind. In this case,nothing exists if it isnt written down.

By: fuzzy

fuzzy — Sat, 20 May 2006 15:00:25 +0000

lamarkable raises an important point:

“We need protocols -in addition to ethical ones -well thought out in advance. Do we make it up as we go along as we do now?”

Unfortunately, with the random nature of cryptid encounters and the uncontrolled components of most well-intentioned expeditions, establishing sighting parameters and protocols, while ethically, morally, scientifically, intellectually and otherwise admirable, may be an exercise in frustration.

Methinx that, in the adrenalin-fueled excitement and confusion of an actual cryptid confrontation, all bets are off and the cow-chips will fall where they may!

There is danger in the field…

By: Doug

Doug — Sat, 20 May 2006 02:52:45 +0000

Everyone makes mistakes. They have been left with a blackeye recently, so I wish them well in their research. Despite their troubles, they may be the first to give substantial proof of the animal’s existence.

By: lamarkable

lamarkable — Sat, 20 May 2006 00:54:39 +0000

I tried to telegraph the general idea-there is no short response if I want to give you a respectful answer.
Look at the behavior that consists of fleeing-hiding-walking away when territoriality would likely mandate a defense, or when fear is interpreted as aggression causing a defense in other creatures-given intelligence, the behavior changes to avoidance. In species has intelligence, as we understand it in ourselves in addition to instinct, we have memory. Perhaps, for the sake of our scenario-this behavior is not an instinct-it is a learned behavior that is taught based on both observations and prior encounters. Can you predict human behavior? We have more unpredictability in our behavior than most. Perhaps this known and a path of avoidance is a social recognition. We know to avoid some categories of other species because they are unpredictable. As simple as that. Precautions-if there is intelligence-I would rather err on the side of caution-avoid some of the behaviors that could be recognized as a hunter after prey. Bad mimicking-artificial-electronic etc of vocalizations could be seen in this light as a lure-which is what it is. Chasing is more obvious for prey. I have seen some use Indian style herding techniques used to drive them to a predetermined spot. If there is a certain level of intelligence –how does this appear? Any creature when cornered will attack-one with intelligence could as well. They are not going to walk up and shake our hands and vocalize a greeting. Most of the recordings I have heard evidence the opposite. For good reason. I see nothing to view this otherwise. So-what do you do when one is corned in your quest, to defend yourself-shoot it? What do you do to protect both parties? I see a horrible event coming soon-I wish I could see it otherwise. We need protocols-in addition to ethical ones -well thought out in advance. Do we make it up as we go along as we do now?

By: JeremyWells

JeremyWells — Fri, 19 May 2006 23:38:42 +0000

OK, I hate to be the one to do this, but what in the heck does this mean:
“Already hunting postures and behavioral cues such as mimicking, baiting, chasing, herding etc have done incalculable damage, evident in response which is a preexisting determinant in encounters, which are reinforced continually..”

It reminds me of circular “management talk” where people use “power words” but aren’t clear in what they are trying to say.
I want to understand what you are saying here lamarkable, because I feel like there is SOMETHING in there about the impact of human/Bigfoot encounters, but I just ain’t following.

By: lamarkable

lamarkable — Fri, 19 May 2006 23:04:23 +0000

More than ever, there has to be a consensus moving forward, especially in rules of engagement. Already hunting postures and behavioral cues such as mimicking, baiting, chasing, herding etc have done incalculable damage, evident in response which is a preexisting determinant in encounters, which are reinforced continually.. Doesn’t one consider oneself a predatory omnivore with unpredictable behavior already
known to prompt learned instinctual behavior in it’s prey? Run. I safely predict if one is cornered, it wont be a Walt Disney encounter. Everyone needs to agree on these things, what is allowed as self protection? Now is not the time to tally scores.

By: twblack

twblack — Fri, 19 May 2006 22:43:37 +0000

hey if they find something I hope they share it with everyone. And good luck to them. I do think some things about that group can be questioned but that is not for me to take up. And to anyone out their looking: I hope the best for them and that no harm comes to them in the great outdoors.

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Fri, 19 May 2006 21:58:24 +0000

While the “I wonder if “Mark Nelson” is planning a trip to Wisconsin?” comment could be construed as more than a little ’snarky’ I think some of the commentators here are being a little thin skinned.
The crux of the article above is that, due to pre-expedition publicity, some folks are already threatening to attempt some hoaxing.
While my skeptic alarm goes off just on the fact that our “woodsman” waited six months to submit his second sighting, which doesn’t seem to jibe with the excited tone of the report, that is ultimately irrelevant. The important thing here, and what I think Craig was going for, is a warning to the BFRO to be on their toes in light of threats to hoax in the form of prints from a man with extra long feet.