Being a member of the Bigfoot community(and yes I do feel we are), I delve into encounter reports quite frequently and frankly as much as I enjoy reading the reports the inconsistances piss me off. The organiztions that investigate and document reports IMO vary so much in standard of what is and what constitues a report that it becomes like wading through a swamp in deciding: did this happen or not.
I think first, the problem is rooted back to the witness and investigator. I was involved in a few discussions on different boards covering witness questions, leading of witnesses by investigators(happens alot), and even some older threads of sighting classification. All these things work hand in hand. What question do you ask? How do you ask them? How do you remain impartial? How do you classify the encounter the witness just had? Was it a sight encounter? Was it a sound encounter? Was it tracks or some type of physical evidence? Was there any cooperating evidence? Alot of the things IMO that are pertinent in reporting a potential encounter. You have to do these things impartially, which means you don't want to lead the witness insaying something, because you lead them to that point. You want the witness to explain the encounter to the best of their knowledge in THEIR OWN WORDS. There are a few investigators out there who file reports so blatent in this aspect I imagine they went to the witness with bit and harness in hand.
I begin to wonder also if things are added to some reports for color and to strengthen the encounter. Lying? Well...yes. Sorry. People do that and it is sad. I don't think it is the witness all the time either. It is a sad state that you would have a researcher to do these things but it is a researcher that is bitten by the romantisicm bug and believe me they are out there. I believe this is what happened to a certain lady from Tennessee and now she see squatch behind every tree and wrapped in every shadow. The real sad part is that some folks are buying it and in turn muddying the water even further. It just ain't her either.
There are a score of romantic researchers out there who present this or that with no evidence to back what they are saying and no intention of giving any. Sorry.........the farm is only for insiders.
So what do we do good citizens? How do we change these things? First and foremost, universal standards of reporting encounters. This would also involve standardizing a classification system. It would also hold investigators accountable for what they report . You would have to do it across the board.
Why is this important? Alot of reason. Establishing Area habitation. Accumulation of solid evidence. Establishing a solid reputation to help gain scientific interest in order to catalog the animal. This is a hope and dream of course. We do owe it to ourselves and the ones who pioneered this field. We owe it to Roger Patterson, Bob Gimlin, John Green, Jeff Meldrum, and all those who have stood by they're convictions and withstood the skeptical public. It is a noble dream. I am not the first to dream it, and I fall in line with the others.
