Regarding a capture situation…highly unlikely but in that event….I hope science has the common sense to study, catagorize and release the subject implanted with a GPS transmitter and track it’s migration routes and patterns to help establish sanctuaries and protective legislation. The thought of a captured Sasquatch languishing away in some university laboratory “habitat” is disconcerning…JMHO

These creatures are huge, especially the girth of their torsos…..as I’ve mentioned before….only a large caliber chest wound or clean head shot is a sure kill…anything less would probably just maim or wound….a certain tragedy…IMHO

seeing is believing…

ole bub

This subject is sensitive, but a very good one to debate. That is the only way that new ideas will come forth. On that subject I believe Caroline63 has come up with a very good idea. If a very small tracking device could be made that could be implanted under the skin, this creature could then be followed until it’s death and gathered. Here is a project for the tech crowd. It has to be small, with a long life.

I have one big concern with live capture. This is a large, very powerful creature. We don’t know what it’s reaction to being cornered would be, but I would guess that like any other animal it would be violent. An amateur attempt would most likely result in somebody’s death. Discovery is not worth somebody’s life.

Once again, I am ashamed of my previous post and offer some very humble apologies.

Green, although supporting a theoretical “Kill” position, has in recent years stated that there is sufficient evidence in the Skookum cast and the inhuman arm-to-leg ratios in the PG Film to establish the reality of the creature without a body. He foresaw that possibility in his book, writing (pp. 113-14):

“A great deal could be done with it [the PGF] if anyone with the necessary skills and equipment or the money to pay for them would take an interest. In fact, it may well prove eventually that the evidence to establish the existence of the sasquatch has been available on that piece of film since 1967.”

Thanks for the response, I knew I had heard that somewhere. Too bad it was a hoax.

cryptohunter65-

You give it all away with the “overpopulation” crack. According to the books from the 70’s we shouldn’t be here – we should have eaten ourselves into starvation already. And of course Malthus’s models would have had our demise long before even the books from the 70s were written. But let me guess – you have the answer to the “overpopulation” problem and it involves you telling other people what to do.

Intentionally killing a cryptid isn’t the “ONLY” way science would accept one. DNA samples combined with better photographic evidence would probably do the trick for a lot of people. Certainly until one could be captured or one gets hit by a car and recovered.

And acting like a “kill encouraged” stance is any more objective and scientific than a “kill discouraged” stance is nonsense. Again, I’m not an expert on the genetics of rare and endangered animals, but I don’t see how killing off what could be crucial genetic material could be seen as positive. If the animal is out there in sufficient numbers it will eventually be documented, intentionally killing one just to speed the process up seems dangerously shortsighted.

My point is, simply because someone has the opinion science “gets to” kill something doesn’t make it right all the time, in all cases. With BF, this is very different than — well, anything. Heck, it’s Bigfoot.We don’t know what we’re dealing with.

As I said, for those that have seen BF, the proof is there.

I disagree that a “no kill” policy somehow hurts BF research, or that one is being “politically correct” because one does not support a kill policy.

Screaming at those who don’t support a kill policy with comments that they go join PETA, are politically correct, or need to stop attacks (when none are being made) is what hurts research.