This is the story of a 3 year old Beagle named Anne and what happened to her. At first it seemed like someone had done this to her..but as the investigation continued it made some strange turns.

We kept watching this story..why because we knew that there has been some Bigfoot activity on both sides of this area and we also knew that this type of thing has been seen before. We waited for the answers from the tests. Now you read it and see what you think.

The story starts here:http://www.cullmantimes.com/archivesearch/local_story_328165603.html
Dog Skinned Alive

edited by oregonfooter: Warning, extreme graphic photos in link above!

This is the link to the forum discussion : LINK

Mike (watch1)

Please don't post that you don't believe a Bigfoot would do something like this. I am not saying it did or didn't. But..the possibility is there.

Mike (watch1)

Okay, what is it impossible for a BF to do?

Why post something just because it's possible that BF did it? Is there ANY evidence that BF was involved...........

Come on...Bigfoot??? Assuming that BF didn't like the dog(s) barking at him and so he decided to take them out (or eat them), what purpose would skinning a dog and leaving it alive serve the big guy? Even if the dog got away in the process, why skin it in the first place? I would think the big guy would just pound it to a pulp and be done with it.

I'm sorry, but as awful as this crime is, the only creature capable of such a thing is a human.

edited for grammar and punctuation (I'm OCD like that)

WmRoy'

There was no way for you to even read any of the articles before you posted a reply.

I posted at 4:07 and you posted your reply at 4:10.

Do you work for the Government or something?

It might not hurt for you to read sometimes before you post your remarks.

Mike (watch1)

That's one of the cruelest things I have ever seen.

This is so awful!!

IMO it looks like a kid with a knife and a pre-desposition for things to come...ahhh!!

Please go and check out the links and read the report. The report from Auburn says this was not done by a human. It was not cut. What you said..is what everyone was thinking..that some kids had done this.

This is not the case.

Mike (watch1)

Regardless of what "instrument" was used to skin this poor dog, to even consider that a bigfoot would have/could have done it, is just plain ludicrous.

In 2003 there was a similar situation with cats and small dogs being killed, or mutilated in Salt Lake City. Some reports said no human could ever do this (and the UFO types were all over that). While others said the "ritualistic nature" of the killings indicated it was done by devil worshipers. Come to find out they discovered it was foxes and coyotes.

No one can know for sure whether what is going on with the animals in Cullman County is human caused or not. But just because it couldn't have been done by a human, doesn't mean Sasquatch should be the next likely suspect.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn41...18/ai_n11412283

Man don't you see? By saying it's possible that it was bigfoot, without worrying about what is or isn't probable, we can come up with all kinds of new and exciting things to associate with the big guy.

*****
Why?
You don't think a Bigfoot is strong enough to have grabbed this poor dog by the neck and reached down and grabbed a handful of skin at the base of the neck and jerked and then slung the dog on the ground?

What makes this idea ludicrous?

Mike(watch1)

This happened here in Arkansas earlier this year and it was also to a beagle. I looked into some more cases in Arkansas of the same thing happening and most of the dogs were beagles.

This kind of thing is a misdemeanor in Arkansas. Can you believe that $#it!

I couldn't bring myself to click the link but finally I did. Now I'm as pissed as I'd thought I'd be and I wish I hadn't of clicked that link.

Sometimes I'm ashamed to say that I'm part of the human race knowing that there are those out there who are capable of doing something like this. And yes, I'm saying this was done by human hands.

What makes it ludicrous is the fact that there is NOTHING that even remotely points to it being Bigfoot related in any way, but feel free to take any horrible event you want and paint it that way at your leisure.

What I'm thinking, should there be any other substansive evidence to link this to a bigfoot type critter, is that what could have gone down is...

BF is in a canine unfriendly mood, beagle gets in his way, picks it up on hand on the back of the head, one hand grasping the scruff, intending probably to just kill it, rip it apart and he yanks and the skin comes off... BF drops or throws down dog, which takes off like the proverbial bat out of hell... BF maybe doing the WTF look at the hunk of skin hanging in his hand. Maybe the fact that this has apparently happened to other beagles is an indication that something about their physiology vs other dogs, that makes this particularly likely to happen to them rather than being ripped in half and killed.

Anyway, not really all that nice to think about, and not an immediate conclusion to jump to without strong reasons, but since we have heard before that BF "hate dogs" and have been anecdotally reported to "rip them in half" then maybe this incident might fit that profile, if it was in fact something of an "accidental" skinning when the intent was to kill.

I'd also note that in all likelihood it was that the skin was torn off rather than cut off, that allowed this poor unfortunate dog to live as long as it did. I'd imagine clean cut wounds of that type would have meant it bled to death in seconds.

So while it's a huge leap just to assume a strange mutilation is BF, that's how I see it could have happened had a BF been involved.

Flash.

There are no strong reasons. It is a huge leap of assumption.

Assuming bf exists, of course.

Test results:
http://cfc.abc3340.com/printstory.cfm?id=480914

Results

Well if a human didn't do it and the folks there sure don't think much of the official report..then what did this.
Why wasn't promises to an investigator kept and phone calls returned?


There is a lot more here going on folks and those folks know it.

Don't get me wrong..I am very sorry for that poor dog and the dogs owners. There have been things going on since this happened that have caused many to wonder just what is going on here anyway. They don't like what they are being told.

Check out where this place is and then check the reports on the latest sightings. They are right in the middle of it all. There are researchers in the area that have on going investigations of these creatures. They KNOW they are there because they have seen them. That is why..this is a possibility.

Mike (watch1)

So I guess the good folks at Auburn University are familiar with, and tested, every device on the face of the earth with which a human could use to do this.
I conclude Auburn's conclusions are faulty.

Not a lot of details, just the term "Skinned". Where there actual markings that suggested a cutting instrument was used? Or just termed that because of a section of skin missing. Did the dog that survived, that looked as though someone had tried to skin her show cuts, or was there just a smaller section of hair and skin missing in a similar fashion?

Ok I see you posted an updated news clipping since I started this post that answered some of these questions.

I feel for this family if it happened to one of my dogs I would want justice. The wounds are so horrific like something you see in a Nightmare on Elm street movie that it would be hard to believe a simple accident caused this such as getting stuck in a machine.Its hard to take revenge on a machine or send it to jail.

Truthfully you seemed surprised that authorites wouldnt contact one of your investigators until someone captures or brings in a dead body nobody will take it serious.

Yup............ couldn't have said that any better.





Besides, I didn't need to read it........... you said it all yourself. It's possible that I'm actually Warren Buffet too..........



And Bitter Monk paints it with the perfect brush.........

*Bold mine


It seems like the dog's owners still feel it was human related despite the examiner's opposing opinion, apparently they (the dog's owners) are not suspecting something out of the ordinary such as Bigfoot.



If you feel the "skinned dog" may be Bigfoot related, how about the other dog only having a slice to the neck with no other wounds ?

I wouldn't doubt they both went tearin' ass under the same machine or something with a sharp/barbed protrusion, Buttercup only got sliced and poor Anne got the worst of it.

The article linked suggests a machine

>>VINEMONT, AL (ABC 33/40) -- Tests conducted on the body of a 3-year-old beagle presumed to have been maliciously skinned alive by a human have concluded the animal was wounded accidentally by some sort of machine, according to the dog's owner, Janet Rodgers of Vinemont.


Despite the normal media "sensationalism"- theres nothing suggested or implied that a BF was involved in any way

Am I the only one left wondering what the purpose or intention of posting this story really was?

I'm guessing machine is seen as most likely for the power required to rip a hunk of skin off like that. I was wondering though if a similar wound would be inflicted by something like the leading edge of a "K frame" under a vehicle at speed. Dippy dawgy gets run over head on, ducks down enough to avoid getting decapitated, but a blunt edge hacks into it's scruff, catches and rips the skin off it's back...

Just a visual observation based on 1 side of the animal and having to investigate about 50 similar accidents industrially ( usually from hair or clothing getting caught in in running nips or pinch rollers or conveyors- many of them fatal unfortunately)

Anything that gets underskin or catches hair will "scalp" whatever. Its been my experience that the faster the object is going makes for a cleaner pull. ( slower will usually pull in the limb- or try to) and anything sharp or immovable will often act as a shear.

It looks like it was ripped with great speed from the neck back to the hind quarters on the left side.

The report I read didnt elaborate but I wonder if there was any trace rust, lubrication or other media that led them to the conclusion this was an unfortunate encounter with a machine as opposed to someone/thing skinning the dog? Or did the dog have other pattern injuries fitting a machine?

OMG !!!!!!

I know some people hate that I bring up the history of posters. ( Here and elsewhere and when) But basically there you have it. Some people and I consider Mike (Watch 1) one of them, will try anything they can to bolter something as a possible Bigfoot related incident , and others , who haven't learned from the past , will enable them to no end in drawing these possibilities as legitimate research areas , no matter how ridiculous they get.

Then follow the same pattern when some " authority" does make a conclusion that is normal, by first wanting an opinion, until it does not reflect what they hope for in the end.


That old saying about not knowing history and being doomed to repeat it ,applies to Bigfoot also. To bad not everybody seems to have the ability to learn that at some point.

******
It is nice to know that you have that opinion of what I post here. I have never posted anything that was a wild assumption on my part. I never said a Bigfoot did this. I said it is a possibility that this was done by one of these creatures.
I based this on the fact that there is known Bigfoot sightings by creditable witnesses and on going research in areas that are near this area.
Also.. this type of "skinning" has been seen and noted on both wild and domestic animals in other areas around the country.

I only post here to share information with those here. I spend time over here that I can spend elsewhere.

If this is the way that I have become to be seen..then I take my leave from this forum.

I wish you all the best.

Mike (watch1)

I, for one, would like to see you continue to share information here. I don't agree with every thread I see here, but I am able to pick and choose the ones I want to read. Most of us are able to make up our own minds about information after we read it, but if people don't post things here we are not able to make decisions on it.

Long story short ... please keep posting.

That's the point. Every time anything not considered within the norm hits a news service these days. It gets brought up with the whole damn "possible" scenario again and again. And yes that is how I see you, my opinion only, I don't presume to speak for anyone else.

It's does get sickening after awhile though. Between every shadow, owl call, loud thump, or every time someone gets scared around a campfire it's suddenly "possible" it was Bigfoot.


Cat wander off? It's possible Bigfoot ate it.

Something nibble the tomatoes in your garden ? It's possible Bigfoot ate them.

Garbage can tipped over in a rural area? It's possible Bigfoot was pissed at you and knocked them over.

And then people have the gall to wonder why the media or general public laughs at you ? Say hello to Mr. Mirror, Located in gas station rest rooms all over the continent.


As far as you leaving suit yourself, I think this is what ? Second ? Third time you've said that? Not believing that one either thanks anyway though.,

that looks like a degloving"type" of incident that happens to animals and people when hit by cars and the tires actually pull of all the skin on a hand or arm.

this seems more likely. after all do you know any animal that would allow that to be done to them without taking a piece of the perpertrater with them

Well at least now I know what gets into my tomato plants............. curse you bigfoot..........

It was Bigfoot on the grassy knoll...

Do have any links detailing this?

My first thought was somesort of serial beagle sadist, but I remembered once being told that Beagles had a knack for getting into trouble. According to wikipedia, they are highly intelligent and curious, which I know can ironically lead to doing very stupid things. Maybe Beagles, as a breed, just have a tendency to stick their noses in the wrong places? Anybody know much about them?

Of course, it seems unlikely that both animals would get cut up like that with such a short time frame between the wounds simply by chance.

Getting hit by a car does seem to be an adequate explanation, and some people do (unfortunately) try to hit animals on purpose. Another possibility is that the cruelty was not direscted at the dogs but rather the owner (the old hung cat on the porch deal). I tend to think a lot about the things that disturb me...

I guess my point I am fairly certain that this is no act of sasquatchian pissiness, obviously there are a hundreds of other, more conservative, explanations for this event.

You are not going to like this website, FSD. It is very disturbing, but it's where I read about those cases.
http://www.pet-abuse.com/pages/cruelty_dat...e=&state=AR

And this is the link to the story about Missy, the beagle in Benton AR. It also has a petition for people to sign to make this kind of torture a felony here.
http://dogblog.dogster.com/2007/06/21/arka...rder-as-felony/

Pot meet kettle

Could you point out exactly when I said that?

*edited to add* Where it hasn't been that I've said I'm gone for awhile and be back later that is?

.chill out dude this is just speculation as everthing else on this forum.

In this case, I agree with jimf.......... it's not just idle speculation. It's a pattern of behaviour where everything is attributed to BF or at least the possiblity of being BF.

If there is no evidence that BF was involved, such as tracks, an actual sighting, or a trail cam photo.......... it's just WRONG to go around throwing up BF as a possiblity.

It's kinda like saying it's the seriousness of the charge.......... well we have no information or evidence, much less proof, but it's a pretty serious charge.............. society is getting dumber by the day.

I agree - this 'bigfoot is everywhere' mentality is what provides us with so many blobsquatches.

But how many 'serious' researchers walk around pointing out tree-breaks, X formations, teepees and vaugue flattenned grass 'nests'? I know of several, and in my opinion, unless they can prove that bigfoot causes these things, they are no better as evidence to the skinned dog.

I think we can all agree that some ideas are better than others.

Begin Rant: From what I've read of Mike's posts, he actually gets out in the field and tries to find bigfoot. If he sees, hears, or finds anything interesting, his natural tendency is to share with other bigfoot enthusiasts where hopefully he won't be ridiculed and laughed at and most importantly down right disrespected.

I enjoy his topics, and he hasn't claimed this is bigfoot related, and he hasn't fed us full of lies and tall tales. IMO, he just wanted to mention it because it was interesting. He doesn't deserve to be treated like a small time hoaxter such as Creekfreak.

In my opinion, he should not be classified as nor given the treatment that is reserved for the common jnugler. End Rant.

It's funny how all those little red guys rant in unison.

Hopeful,

This is the statement that Mike (watch1) made in his first post, that IMO, got him in trouble.





And then there's this:





Comparing what happened to this poor dog and the assumption of what bigfoot is capable doing is pretty far fetched.

Agreed. I would like to see at least a plausible hypothesis on how and why a bigfoot slinging a dog to the ground could cause that pattern of injury. And then come up with alternatives (as others have done, such as accidents with cars and machines) to see which one is more plausible.

I agree with both of you, Pywacket and FNW and with Jim to a lesser degree. All I'm saying is that he deserves to be treated with respect.

The only dog killing methods I've heard of are the (most commonly) 'swung against a tree' (I assume usually breaking the dog's backbone and killing it instantly) or the less common 'crushing to a pulp', probably involving stomping on the dog and then rolling on it (common in great ape killing).

It is well known that dogs are one of the most hated animals and most targetted for aggression, from a sasquatch point of view.

A sasquatch attempting to grab this dog by the scruff and chuck it against a tree could end up tearing off all the skin along the dog's back.

That being said, I think the most likely culprit was a pack of other dogs, or perhaps the dog got caught under some barbed wire and ended up having to tear itself loose?

There is no reason to think a sasquatch could not do this, but immediately jumping to one of the least likely explanations is not good reasoning.

I didn't feel that Watch1 was being treated disrespectfully. I just think his assumption was.

When you post on an open forum, you are going to get all kind of responses. Some are sympathetic to you, some aren't. Some are nice, some are rude. Questions are going to be slung at you and you have to shed your pride somewhat and put on a little armor. Until something is proven you have to realize that ideas are going to be scrutinized, scoffed at and outright rejected. If it is never proven then all you have is speculation and speculation isn't evidence.