Forgive me if this has been brought up and discussed already, but after reading all these stories about the Endangered Species Act being gutted and generally attacked, I was wondering...If Bigfoot was proven to exist beyond a shadow of a doubt...would this animal not be considered an endangered species? And if that is so...wouldn't that meant that their habitat would have to be protected? Habitat consisting of Americas Vast wooded wilderness? Wouldn't huge tracts of forest have to be protected as well?

I had always thought that the purpose of the Endangered Species Act was written to protect species from becoming extinct. I know it has been used as a political football and misused by some. But the original purpose was to protect species and their habitat. Now it is a constant debate as to what species are worth protecting as opposed to million dollar developments...blah blah blah. Well....in my heart I believe that a creatures existence is important...but..is a species of rodent more important that a billion dollar shopping mall? A lot of people would say no...just because a lot of people don't like rodents....I like em if they stay outside !

But...when it comes to larger animals then people start wondering....is a tiger more valuable than a deer? Is an elephant more valubable that a Rhino?? And who assigns the value? it's all very convoluted isn't it? But the bottom line is this.....If Bigfoot, who's numbers are obviously few....were proven to exist...what would happen? What laws would be enacted? They are obviously intelligent.

I think our government has known of, and probably has proof of, the existence of this creature. But proving this creature exists would open up a whole can of worms politically..and you wouldn't think that would be so...but...the the habitat this creature occupies is hundreds and hundreds of acres of timberland, which is always problem between those that wish to preserve it and those that wish to use it .. ....and I am sure Bigfoot does not discriminate between public and private land. He travels where he wants. So what would this mean? Any thoughts?

You're right, protecting endangered species is a real political football. Some people feel that protecting biodiversity and unique species is more important than short term financial gains, while others see the need provide jobs and financial security to communities as more important overall. It can be argued forever. Ideally, a win-win compromise can sometimes be reached, where financial prosperity can be achieved in tandem with environmental preservation, such as where tourism takes over in areas where logging was once the main industry. This is slowly happening where i come from, in British Columbia.

As for a government cover-up, i just don't buy it. Why would the government cover it up? Unless they are being paid off massively by timber companies and the like, they have little incentive to do so. I can, however, see corporations covering this up, especially timber corporations. However, only in a certain situation would they be _able_ to cover up a discovery of a Sasquatch body.. if one of their workers immediately reported to his boss, who reported to higher ups, and a swift decision was made to destroy all evidence and hush up the matter. All it would take is somebody in the chain of command wanting early retirement in the carribean, and the story and body would be out. Conspiracy theories are just too complicated to work most of the time, IMO.


-robo

Thanks for you feedback Robo...okay no conspiracy and no cover up but how about just not revealing what they know? On Bobbi Short's site there are reports of BF being seen at Edwards Air Force base and being video taped on the base and entering and wandering through the underground tunnels of the base. I read these reports and some by some people employed there who said military have seen these animals often with their night scopes.

I have no idea about these reports...I just read them with interest...but are they baloney? Or do they have this information? Why are people saying these things?
I dunno...I know the military has special equipment and I know they must have seen things and know things we average citizens don't know.

I have read other reports made by military personnel on bases around the country stating they've seen some kind of animal they cannot explain. Or what about police officers...they have to file reports when they are called to a scene, have there been any of those?

I dunno....I know a lot of people won't say anything because they don't want to look like they're crazy....I don't really care if I sound crazy...heh.....I just want to know what the truth is. I think that is what we all want to know.

Has anyone ever written to any government agencies under the FOA to discover if there are any reports out there that haven't made there way to the public? I know from working for an animal sanctuary that most animal facilities have to be inspected by the USDA....and if a farmer or rancher loses any livestock because of depredation then they can get money from the government. I know the ranchers around Yellowstone are supposed to be compensated for any cattle they lose to a wolf. I would think there would be a record of that. I know there have been reports of BF chasing deer and cattle and goats.

Well I just put this out there to see what anyone thinks....

Thanks again Robo

This, I find interesting. I had wondered pretty much the same thing when I read those on Bobbi's site. This may or may not be relevant, but I have watched a documentary on TV before in which a pilot has had a UFO sighting. They are told NOT to report them. One fellow (identity/face hidden) said they (he and other pilots) have seen odd things in the sky many times but they may loose their job if they report it and be discredited.
I am not sure how I feel about UFOs, per se, and extremely doubtful of the UFO/Bigfoot connection theory IMO.. It makes me wonder if the military has seen these animals, has them on video, etc. if maybe they are ordered to be silent? The evidence is secret?

Just more to ponder about :rolleyes:

I'm with Robo, I don't see the government having physical evidence that conclusively proves anything with no evident profit.



Not likely you're gonna be allowed a report that states something or someone sneaked past there security systems and they didn't capture it to identify who or what it was. If you do get it it'll be blacked out for 'National Security Reasons".

Yeah, I don't think the gov't/military would release any info ...even in a FOIA doc. Probably would black it out.

I just finished Grover Krantz's book and he thinks that it would be listed as an endangered species, but isn't sure what it would entail. He certainly didn't think they would halt all activities in the forests. I think he thought it would be difficult with this creature to actually ascertain its numbers, diet, area of habitation, etc. due to its elusiveness.

He also thought that timber industries had people who actively advocated a no-shoot policy towards BF so they would never verify one. (I know how you feel, Sosha. He's on the other side of that issue. Gotta shoot one to prove it exists.)

-- Tom

ooo this is a good one. I like Robo's comments... "political football". I really like that. I wont comment like a submarine here, but I will say that some individuals
cringe at the discovery of an endangered species extended range because it might affect the land use. if that is a military zone, on a military base.... then considerations develop and that Robo term comes into play. My question is who makes the decisions and what are their personal views ? I know in my experience I have met decision makers that would opt for nondisclosure because of the complications it would cause THEIR employers. (regarding the presence of a political endangered spp.) Sometimes we get in tight spots. Sometimes not everyone is on the same page.