Spork77
Mar 15 2003, 12:52 AM
Once it is proven that BF exists, how will that affect Bigfoot's survival as a species? Historically wildlife is always the loser in interaction with man, but here we have a species that could undoubtedly resist if it chose to(and so far it hasn't except in some rare reports).
SuperFans: "Ditka vs Bigfoot, who would win?"
" Is Ditka minaturized?"
"AAhh, sure."
"Ditka!!"
nightwing
Mar 15 2003, 02:19 AM
I belive that if BF is ever proven to exhist, than it would in the long run, be good for it's chances of survival. Primarily because steps could then be taken to study, and eventualy protect, their habitat.
Paul1968UK
Mar 15 2003, 04:20 AM
I would love to say that the human race would ensure their survival, but we don't seem to be doing very well at protecting orang utans
My guess is tha tsasquatch has remained hidden for so long that all we would have to do is stop the logging (or at least slow it down so that it is sustainable)
Spork77
Mar 15 2003, 04:47 AM
I guess what I'm wondering about is that once BF is proven to be real, then you are going to see everyone and their uncle out beating the woods. I keep picturing John Wayne in Hatari! or Jurassic Park III, i.e. hunters wanting to bag specimens to sell to zoos or scientists for study. Will there be a corresponding change in BF's disposition towards us, changing from reclusive observation to a more hostile "aggressive-defensive" stance. Up to now BF has been able to choose the time and place of his interaction with us for the most part, and the research efforts by us so far have been very limited in term of area and duration and probably barely noticed by the BF population. Once our intrusion into his habitat intensifies after his existence is proved, would you not expect Bigfoot to then become demonstrative as his territory is impinged on more and more. Or will he simply disappear even further into remote and inaccessible terrains?
bipto
Mar 15 2003, 06:44 AM
I think the major difference between what's happening to the orangs what would happen to the sasquatch is that orangs are in developing parts of the world. Sasquatch is in North America. We have much more advanced law regarding endangered animals and better regulations regarding the maintenance of wildlife in general.
deppup
Mar 15 2003, 01:58 PM
At first I think people would "beat the woods" looking for one. But I also think that there is still sufficient range that is still very difficult to access giving them space away. And with hunters and hunting/environmental laws, I feel that any action to "bag" one would be short lived. ...Especially after the first "city-slicker" trys outwitting one, takes a pot shot and gets his gun rearranged on his head as a bow!
Spork77
Mar 15 2003, 04:35 PM
Consider the long-term ramifications 100-200 yrs on, will BF continue as the shadowy, hulky creature of myth and conjecture, or will human technology have laid all his secrets bare?
Leeloo Dallas
Mar 15 2003, 06:26 PM
I think if it were finally proven to humanity that BF exists, that at first a lot of people would be afraid to go in the woods. I think that the Parks and Recreation would have to put the info out to convince people that sightings of BF are very rare and that the BF almost always run away so that people wouldn't be afraid to use the parks and go camping. Then people would eventually go back to their normal amount of outdoor activity but probably be wary. Sightings would probably increase due to people actually looking for BF when they were in the woods. It would at some point, amoung thrill seekers, become the thing to do, to go have a sighting. No one would even think of shooting one because all the info we have now would be reported on. People would have the low down on BF. How if you don't get a kill with the first shot your in trouble, and even if you do they might have friend that will retaliate. Not to mention they would immediately be a protected species where you would be prosecuted for shooting or harming one. And yes the environmentalist would use it as an excuse to try to stop more logging. I don't think that logging is a problem at all, it is a completely renewable resource. We actually save more forests nowadays because when forest fires happen we stop them whereas in the old days they just raged on and took whole forests. Obviously they need to roam somewhere and I think they will do fine because there are alot of areas that they like that just aren't feasable for developement. We still have tons of wide open spaces in the U.S.
jimf
Mar 15 2003, 09:45 PM
QUOTE(Leeloo Dallas @ Mar 15 2003, 07:26 PM)
It would at some point, amoung thrill seekers, become the thing to do, to go have a sighting.
I'll watch if it ever becomes an "X-games " event. what would be the prize ? a track cast in lieu of a gold medal ?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.