Now, I know this subject might be uncomfortable for the anti-kill people among you, and I fully respect that.


Many of you will have encountered rats, but when you consider how many there are around us, we actually see them very rarely.

Over the past few weeks, we have had some big rats in our stables, so we laid down some poison.

I have spent the past few weeks picking up dead rats and disposing of them. You normally never see dead rats, since like other animals, they tend to find somewhere quite to die and/or get eaten.

Anyway, I started thinking about poison - the rat poison obviously makes them drop quickly and unexpectedly, so why don't we poison bigfoot ?

we could, place poison laced fruit up high, so that other forest animals can't get to them - with a bit of luck, the poison would cause one or two of them to drop dead somewhere out in the open.

Obviously, I haven't put a great deal of thought into this - I tend to write first and think later, but has this ever been tried ?

Having given the matter 5 seconds worth of thought, I too have a post-first, think-later response: IF your idea works, and I think it well might, you'll have shown that the contribution of armchair researchers can exceed that of field researchers.

In any event, you've shown there is at least one promising avenue that's been overlooked--or at least been marginalized. This suggests there may be additional opportunities for ingenuity to make a contribution, which should encourage us "theoreticians" (as I like to think of ourselves) to put on our thinking caps.

(Hmmm ... Now if, as I just suggested in another thread, we were to use a skeptic as Bigfoot bait, maybe he could be painted with this poison )

I think poisoned items should probably be labeled with "Poison", and/or a skull-and-crossbones legend. Also, I think the poison used shouldn't be selected merely for lethality, as it is in dealing with pests, but for providing a merciful kill. I.e., it should tranquilize the animal, or put it to sleep, first. (I have the impression standard pest poisons provide painful deaths.)

Hmmm ... I think it's been suggested a few times before that Bigfoot be "slipped a Mickey"--i.e., be temporarily put to sleep and then captured. Maybe that's the way to go. But that would require that the bait site be accessible by truck, to haul the BF away. And it would require constant surveillance, or at least a wireless message-sending sensor in the bait, plus a well-equipped, nearby, on-call response team. In other words, "resources would be needed."

I'm surprised some of the funded expeditions in the past didn't consider (apparently) this strategy, or didn't think more highly of it.

Hmmm …. One problem—what if the animal wanders off into the forest, as is likely? The response team would need a dog that would track it down. It would have to bring several, as most won’t track a BF scent, and they couldn't know in advance which dogs would or wouldn't turn tail.

Hospitals use some wonderful drugs that paralize the body,without knocking out the respiratory drive. It also leaves you completely alert to events happening around you. These are used for combative people.

Availability, half life,and route of administration of thses drugs would be the only majior problems.

I will look into these and report back.

Hey cool, Medic's going to steal a federally controlled substance from a hospital so we can poison a bigfoot! Excellent! I should only go to jail for 10 years or so...

That's a joke, of course.

Obviously, the biggest problem with the poison idea is that it might get ingested by another animal you don't want to kill and/or an incredibly dumb person (in which case you could just chalk it up to natural selection, but I'm not sure that argument would go far in court).

The poison/drug would have to have absolutely no smell or taste...

A few thoughts before I ponder this one at length...

Poison control of predators in the U.S. has been a VERY
hit and miss affair. Usually ends up killing a LOT of unintended
animals for every target dropped. Almost impossible to
prevent other animals from taking some bait. That puts you
in trouble with State and Fed game officials, not to mention
being a generally bad thing to do...

Poison is hardly ever painless. You name one and I'll give you
a bad side effect, unless it's an OD on a medical narcotic. The
problem there is acquisition. Again, the legal issues...

Lastly, wanna kill something dead as a stone and not have to
deal with large quantities? Ricin. However that WILL draw
immediate federal attention. Please, don't anyone consider that
one as it's EXTREMELY dangerous to handle and there is no
antidote.

Now that the word poison, kill and ricin have been used a few times, should we expect that those little "red flags' are going up somewhere in the bowels of the NSA, CIA and FBI offices where internet "traffic' is supposedly monitored.

And may I suggest that anyone who has any questions about ricin look eslewhere for the answers (Google) so this forum can't be accused of providing "irresponsible" information regarding the manufacturing of probably the most deadly poison out there.

Don't mind me. That's just my conspiracy theorist, liability conscious side coming out.

Yep..someone be fireing up "Carnivore" even as we type....
**waving** hi mr. federal officer
Seriously..the liability factor is a good point..I would think putting out poison baits would break a bookfull of laws, even before general liability is taken into consideration.

The problem that I have with this idea is that if poison would work then you would have had alot of dead sasquatch during the wolf eridication programs. The wolf and bigfoot inhabit the same area in terms of altitude and they also eat the same game, ie large ungulates. Of course the poison might not have been strong enough to kill a sasquatch. Or perhaps it did kill off a significant portion of them as I suspect. The poison may have made them sick enough to wander off and die somewhere else. Even to become cannabalized and thus sickening even more of their family. This may account for the decrease in numbers of sasquatch that seem to be now increasing, only in my opinion.

The risk of poisoning someones dog, or even another human is too great a risk in my opinion and cruel to the bigfoot. When you think about it the odds of a bigfoot taking the bait versus another animal are probably extremely high. They are not stupid animals. Plus if you did do something of this nature it would be highly illegal as Nightwing and Bipto have pointed out. The only thing "captured" would be your bootie behind bars. Studing these relic hominids in their environment without unnecessarily traumatizing them is the only thing that is humane, in my opinion. goldie

CARNIVORE- That's it. Couldn't remember the name.

Thanks for verifying my suspicions NW.

I think Paul's idea of hanging bait from trees, if done in the right manner, would prevent other animals from getting hold of it. E.g., with an arrow, shoot a line over a high branch--15 feet or more off the ground. Pull up a greased rope or cable, so a racoon couldn't climb down it, and attach the bait to it, setting it say 10 feet off the ground.

Humans would be protected by the words "poison" and the skull-and-crossbones on the bait, as I suggested.

Cruelty could be avoided if the poison were masked by a tranquilizing or sleep-producing agent, such as is administered to prisoners who are executed by injection.

I wouldn't be so favorable to this idea if there weren't such an urgent need for an almas-protection program (which only a Bigfoot discovery could trigger), and if we hadn't had such bad luck for so long with other methods.

Having said this, naturally a BF body will be found next week.

Maybe in a barn in TN !

Why yes, if we were members of AL QAEDA, we would be saying DEATH TO PRESIDENT BUSH, let us KILL PRESIDENT BUSH with lots and lots of RICIN and ANTHRAX! But we aren't, so we are not saying it

Is it against the law to play tricks on a CIA search engine?



Anyway, back to the topic at hand, i was thinking of Paul's idea of using poison to bring down a sasquatch specimen, and it led me to a different, and perhaps more humane idea: induced drug dependence.

Might it be possible to leave bait laced with a sufficient quantity of an orally ingestible narcotic, perhaps Codine (for the Canadian researchers anyway) or Hydromorphone?
It wouldn't do much harm to the animal, but it would cause a pleasant high for some hours. The experience would hopefully be pleasureable enough that the Sasquatch would come back again, and take more bait. After a number of experiences, the Squatch would have a physical addiction, and might become extremely bold in taking the bait, bold enough to perhaps take bait in daylight and with human presence.

Now, turning a wild animal into a twitching junkie might sound a trifle unethical, but it sure beats poisoning them (which might not even produce a body if the Squatch crawls off to die in some remote place), and might even allow a live capture.

Interesting idea, no? Especially since Squatch physiology is probably similar to our own, so we should have a pretty good idea what effects to expect from various drugs.


-robo

I can hear the jack-booted thugs busting down my door from here...

OK, now that I've read the rest of your post, robo, I think that's a really interesting idea...

Regarding this “interesting idea” (it's certainly ingenious), here’s something relevant MonkeyMan posted a few months back, regarding Bigfeet consuming the buds of hippie-growers’ pot-patches in the No. CA wilderness, at http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...1200&hl=growers

Well, if the plant was left to go to seed:

How is an "armchair" anything gonna poison and haul away a dead Sasquatch body?

RB's FBI warning for the day: Speaking of the use of any biological agents considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction", especially the one beginning with an "A"... should be avoided in all conversations,IMHO, joking or otherwise... a mandatory 10 year sentence accompanies the use of the "A" word in the wrong context... I have been told by FBI agents personally there is more than one person sitting in prison right now because they thought it would be funny to use the word in what they considered to be only a joke.

Robo you are soooooo screwed

One thought about getting ol' hairy but stoned, haven't
you EVER watched Cops? You want one of these things
hopped up when you go to collect him? I'm thinking that's
a baaaaad proposition

I have thought about the use of poison as a tool to bring down a sasquatch, but it's just too risky. There are alot of other animals out there who could munch on the laced bait, and take the fall instead.

But if I were to use any form of poison it would be Copper Sulfate, or an overdose of codine ( as robo said).

Well I think it's silly......I poison things everyday and the thought of retiring a perfectly good squatch never crossed my mind.

Now getting him habituated to Bud........ It may already be happening.

Isn't this the same basic concept of the alcohol thread? I think it would be a lot easier to induce Bigfoot to drink a sweet alcoholic beverage...we can all buy alcohol at the local bottle barn, whereas keeping a Sasquatch supplied with sufficient quantities of an illegal drug might be a bit more involved. Trying to reason with a large primate in need of a hit could prove dangerous.
Poison would certainly solve the mystery, though. I think the big problem with this and all of the lure ideas is figuring out how to get Sas to overcome its suspicions and consume the bait, or alcohol, in the first place.

What's your poison bigfoot? (alcoholic beverage, I mean).

So what about if we design a bigfoot feeding station -- I mean they steal food from us all the time, so why not make it to look like a cache of food us humans have left behind?

We could make it at a height for and accessible only by 'nimble fingered' sasquates. A see-through plastic box would make it visible but should prevent smaller critters getting the food. Also keep some vent holes to waft the scent.

Then we leave a nice drink and some tasty bigfoot food.

The trap part is that opening the box would trigger -- via a simple switch and some wires -- a hidden film camera using 35mm film and an optical zoom, this would be focused on the box to take perfect images, and would immediately take a series of shots. The camera would be simple, non-digital, without any sensors or transmitters that could scare the sas. The only batteries would be to power the motor-drive which should be muffled to be as silent as possible.

Perhaps instead of wires, the trap would trigger the camera via an radio frequency (RF) link, but we still do not know the sensory abilities of sas.

I sure wish I had known all this back in high school. I could have told my Mom, "See, this stuff is really GOOD for me"!

Gosh !

never expected this thread to make two pages in less than a day !


We should get 'Kid' to get his chemistry kit out !

Bigfoot and booze sounds scary. Look what a herd of elephants will do when they get liquored up. Heck, when you go to a ball game and two clowns start fighting, are they drunk, stoned, or sober? That's right.....they're drunk! I'd leave booze out of the Sasquatch equation......at least until he proves capable of handing his beer in a socially responsible manner

i really like this idea irish....

are you gonna try it?

gael

I am in a mood today so look out! I say who cares if a couple of little furry guys die in the process. Lets poison a Sas and get this whole thing over with already!! If you put the poison in a gross looking cow liver or something no human is gonna touch the thing. Putting it up high enough in a tree will also rule out alot of the little furry guys. I say lets do it. I wanna see a corpse now! I am in a really macabre mood today. I am sure it will go away soon and I will be back to loving fluffy little animals and not out for Sas blood.

Dang Leeloo. Tell us how you really feel!

I'm with you though. Let's just do SOMETHING. We need a body!

Dear God. You guys are having fun but there are so many weirdo's out there that these ideas are frightening.
Remember a lot of people who are interested in BF are seeing him all the time. Next door, across the street, in every public park. AND a lot of them are highly suggestable - do we need to name names?
I can see the results now. Dead and dying animals and people, stoned critters, campers and neighbors roaming the streets. What havoc!
Take a pill and calm down Leeloo
This thread never happened.
At least I hope it didn't .
Jan
p.s Anyone knocking at the door yet, Bipto?

I say forget the poison, forget the drugs...let's find a female and give her chocolate. Every woman loves chocolate, it's harmless and it's addictive too! LOL

wow. thats smooooooth talkin there. Macabre ? Leeloo ? is that you ??

Harmless to most, but poison to diabetics !

Well true dat!

So don't give it to any diabetic bigfoot!

Well, i think some kind of narcotic would work a lot better than alcohol, for a number of reasons..
First, opiates are much more addictive than alcohol, and far smaller quantities are required. And it's probably easier to get a wild animal to eat something containing a tasteless drug than to drink large quantities a strange burning-tasting liquid from a bottle (remember that a Sasquatch has probably never imbibed anything other than water from a stream or pond.. Jack Daniels probably isn't going to be a big hit, if the Squatch can even figure out the bottle or cup...)

And finally, while an opiate should act as a strong depressant in most cases, a liquored up Squatch might be a handful.

-robo

probably the best drug would be liquid morophine, although it is easy to accidently od on. a small amount would make you sedated, but a larger amount relaxes the muscles in your chest, stopping your breathing.

it's fairly easy to get if you know anyone who has cancer. pretty standard drug for severe pain of a terminal desease.

when i was in high school we used insulin needles to load oranges full of vodka, then take to school and eat them. a similar method could be used with the morophine and fruit but the dose needed to sedate a bigfoot would be lethal to any smaller animal that found the bait first.

uhoh, thinking again
gael

Just make a bunch of "hash brownies" and leave them in the area for a squatch to take. After two pans of that stuff, he would be feeling the strong need to sit down and watch the trees spin.

A practicle use for Twinkies perhaps ?

two of those would knock out a bigfoot - no problem !

Paul, you have a serious problem with Twinkies, man. S'all I'm saying...

The sugar rush makes my eyes hurt !

http://www.adn.com/24hour/nation/story/102...p-7213131c.html

The Associated Press



NAGS HEAD, N.C. (October 14, 12:54 p.m. ADT) - Hunters who bait bears with
large blocks of candy are creating addicts with health problems ranging from
tooth decay to lethargy, wildlife officials say.
Now the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission says wildlife officers
will cite hunters who use salt, sugar, grain or other products to attract
and shoot black bears. Especially under scrutiny are those who use large
candy blocks.
The commission says bears become addicted to the blocks, returning to the
area even after the sugar is gone.
Biologists found that addicted bears suffer from tooth decay, hair loss,
weight loss and lethargy, said David Cobb, chief of the Wildlife Management
Division of the Wildlife Resources Commission.
Cobb said wildlife officers first heard of the candy block practice three
years ago.
"It's the most intense in Hyde County, but it's being done all over coastal
North Carolina," he said.
The remote and heavily wooded Hyde County is known for some of the biggest
black bears in the nation, drawing hundreds of out-of-state hunters. But
because of an increasing bear population, hunting seasons have started in
several other counties.
Though the North Carolina Bear Hunters Association opposes the use of candy
blocks, the bait remains popular because of its low-cost effectiveness. The
association's secretary, Richard Martin, said a $15 block can be up to four
feet square and five feet deep and made of bubble gum, chocolate, licorice
and hard candy. Some weigh more than 2,000 pounds.
Martin said many recent blocks have come from Hershey Foods in Pennsylvania.
Cobb added that state officials have asked Hershey not to sell to bear
hunters.
"Should we find out it's being used for that, we'll put a stop to it," said
Hershey spokeswoman Christine Dugan. She added that the company has
traditionally sold recycled chocolate in bulk to supplement animal feed.
Martin said some unscrupulous hunters use the blocks to guarantee shots at
bears and then guide other hunters to the areas for a price.
"We don't need all the people in it for the money," Martin said. "It's
supposed to be a sport."
It's not a sport if the blocks are used, Cobb said, because addicted bears
have lost their fear of humans. Adult bears hang around the blocks, which he
said is unusual behavior.
Violating the state's bear-baiting law is punishable by a two-year
revocation of the hunting license, a fine of $2,000 or more and a $2,232
bear-replacement fee if the animal is killed.
Cobb once found a bear lying down in the middle of the road, moaning and
unwilling to move out of the vehicle's way. He compared the image to that of
humans addicted to cocaine.
A legal and accepted alternative is baiting with corn or peanut butter
before the season, Martin said.
"It's good for them, and it works," he said.

Can you imagine a black/brown bear all wacked out on a sugar high. I wouldn't want to be in the area.

That article ran in one of the local papers here. Pictures of the
candy piles were pretty unappetizing

S'pose ol' hairy butt has a sweet tooth? might be interesting
to sit over one of those, but then again L&E might take a dim
view of that, regardless of whether you had a gun.

To quote one of my favorite movies... Ghostbusters! -

Spengler: "...a Twinkie 35 feet long weighing approximately six hundred pounds."

What about building a trap with primate pheromones?

I don´t believe much in a cameratrap. Some photos of a Sasquatchback won´t change the world.

What about a pheromebait attached so hard to a tree that no human would be able to pull it of and the bait attached to a hidden gun powerfull enough to kill a bear with one shot.

I know that it sounds drastic but I am afraid that the Bigfoot mystery may go on forever if a specimen isn´t shot.

I seriously hope it never comes to the point that one would have to poison, shoot, or kill a bigfoot to prove its existence. In all seriousness, to even drug one properly, you would have to know the weight of the animal and is a person going to be able to find it when it falls?

But lets say someone eventually does kill one of these magnificent creatures. When they are staring down at its lifeless body, how are they going to feel then? Knowing that they are responsible for the death of one of the greatest mysteries of our planet? Not to mention the madness that will ensue afterwards from media, scientists, animal rights activists, generally the whole world. Will the kill be considered "homicide?"
So many questions.
I want to know about Bigfoot just like the rest of you. It fascinates me to no end. I know that science needs a body for complete proof that they exist. But at the same time because of this, I almost hope he is never found, never put in a zoo, never placed in the hands of man... Man (and woman) has destroyed so much of what we touch. How can a person, in all good consciousness, kill one of them purposefully?

There are so many reports of people that had one in their "sights" and couldn't pull the trigger. Just my opinion.

pegleg

MountainLady,
A very excellent post. Poison is a nasty death. But how badly do you and the rest of us REALLY want to prove BF is out there??? As my grandpa said -"You gotta break some eggs to make an omlet"
I tend to go with the pro kill crowd(I'm never in the bush without my Desert Eagle, just in case) but I would love nothing more than to see a radio tag and release. In Churchill, Manitoba they bring down 800-1000 lbs polar bears that get tagged and released after all measurements, weights etc are done. So can someone judge the dose of tranq? I think so. Time will tell if we can solve this.
The only thing I would worry about on a tag and release hunt is BF's buddies watching their pal go down. THAT would be a problem I think. One sleeping and 10 pissed off at you. Might not be a good thing. Flying rocks and logs could really hamper somebody holding a tape measure.
- edit=I forgot to add something!

I respect your opinion Dave and understand where you and others are coming from that are "pro-kill." However, I also think that to shoot one is easiest said when you aren't face to face with a creature that resembles a human in so many ways. When you or someone else runs into a Bigfoot, and you have him in your sights, finger on that trigger, let me know what runs through your head.

If you were being threatened, I understand one would have to defend themselves. But, how often do we hear a believable report of attack?

I just think it's easier said than done. There are many a ferocious hunter out there with gun in hand, but the reality is, if/when that time came, could a conscientious person really pull the trigger in a non-threatening situation?

Makes me think of the "Ape Canyon" story. I don't know if it was true or not, but...Freaky.

I have personally seen what a very pissed off gorilla and chimp can do when provoked. I would hate to think what this type creature could be capable of if cornered. They seem to avoid those situations though from reports of close encounters in general.

I am interested in tornadic activity too. It doesn't mean I want to be around when a tornado is near though..

What about that Chocolated Ex Lax??? Then we could have at least a good trail!

Aww, dude. That's......., not a bad idea.