This happened this month according to the account. A female Sass taking out a wild hog.

BFRO report #8547

Scary how F-A-S-T the animal lurched at the hog.

Reminded me of a bear's death charge...


Wow,
TQW

You're right. That is i n c r e d i b l e.

One of the few reports to remark on its ears!

No stink..no eerie silence in the forest..

I wonder if the reporter was familiar with Bigfoot before this encounter?
In his description of events he touched upon every point that an investigator of the phenomenon would want to know. More so, then in most other reports. Or maybe it was just the diligent work of the investigator which brought out these details.
Regardless, a good story. Enjoyed reading it.

wow! thats amazing and very frightening

wow
gael

Now, that's an encounter.

GC he did have a long time to watch this female through a scope. I think that is why he had so many details. Of course there was no way he was gonna take his eyes off of the thing until he felt safe again. There are so many interesting things in this report. The way it sprang from both feet which I have seen in a couple of other reports, the way it alerted the other one once the kill was complete, the way it stalked the hog from behind trees silently. This report is chock full of good stuff.

You speak the truth LeeLoo!
And I have read other reports from people who had Sassy in their sights for a very long period. But this reporter had a very good eye for detail. Even right down to thumb placement on the hand. (which he must have observed for only a moment before the Sassy leaped on its prey.)

If truthful, or accurate..then there is a wealth of information here!

Seems like the East Texas(Carthage),Southeast Oklahoma(Honobia),Southwest Arkansas(Fouke) area is indeed a hotbed of bigfoot activity.It seems to me like the creatures in that area are more aggressive than creatures in other parts of the country from the reports I have read over the years. Thanks for sharing.

I'd probably still be sitting in the tree, if I had seen this.

WOW! <<<< Can't think of a better smilie than that!!! That would be so scary to have seen!!! I wonder if his hunting partner believed him......

Wow, if this really happened then I am floored. Stalking and slaying prey ... hmmmm ... not to herbivorous at that. To all those who romanticize about the spiritualistic aspects of this animal, here's a report to ruminate on.

First blush; the account sounds like a TLC documentary on early human predatory techniques. This must have been what it was like for our kind before the spear; leaping from cover with a club in hand to bludgeon a prey to death.

Second thought; notice he states nothing about ever thinking to take a shot. He had it's head in the cross hairs for an extended period and no desire drop the critter, even in defense. Although, he may not have had the opportunity to tell this tale if he had as this female was obviously not alone ...

Yes. The violence that the creature is capable of is alarming. But to live in nature you have to be violent.
Deer liver? Deer do not have zippers to open to remove its liver! Ripped off head is faster! That was a very realistic depiction of an ape-like hunter. imho

I wish I could remember which report it was that spoke of a witness watching two BFs..a silverback..and a light brown, who were battling it out on a hillside. And the silver back tried to crush the younger hominid's head in with a large boulder?

Very cool and exciting encounter! However, there is one line in the report that has me puzzled.


Why did the reporter say "rear legs" if he could tell it was a bipedal creature? Perhaps he just meant to say "legs"? Hmm...

Any thoughts?

Uffda

I think it is just something that has been with us all of our lives. At least those of us who live in N.A and are used to seeing only four leged animals out in the countryside.Animals do not have arms, when they are on all fours. I think the mind's association goes automatically with legs, front and back. Just a slip, but an understandable one. IMHO

This is a facinating account... A perfect candidate for our Early Response Team??? Ooops... trail already cold for a month!

Myself and bf2004 were in the chat room last night when Craig posted this link for the first time. Craig went to post some more links and I was asking questions that I dont think he saw :-)

Namely I wanted to know if anyone had gone to the site and looked for any evidence of an animal being thrown against a tree. There may be hair, tissue etc. still present.

Since the story relates that the BF were stalking these hogs, its apparent to me that this would be a prime area to try to recreate another encounter. Pigs in Texas are considered nuisance animals and thus can be hunted year round. Obviously the BF knew the pigs would be in the area and the hunter had even laid out bait for hogs. Coinicidence?

Perhaps BF have begun to equate deer stands with ability to gain nearby food? Many hunters here lure in their animals throughout the year just so the hunting season for them has greater potential.

Hogs wouldnt be any different. Just my .02

OK, I'll play the sceptical voice this time!
None of my questions by any means invalidates the account(we werent there, and in the end, only the reporter knowns for sure..).
But....
As a hunter a couple of things leapt off the page to me.
First..anyone who uses a scope to check out movement(which is what he claimed), is frightening. Growing up, I would have lost the use of any firearm for a year, instantly, had I ever been caught pointing a gun at movement BEFORE I was SURE of what it was. While it has nothing to do with the direct validity of the story, it sent a chill up my spine(what if the movement had proved to be a human...he would then be pointing a loaded rifle at a man.....think about that.)
Second...he claimed he turned the scope up to 9 power right after seeing the partial face, and LEFT it at that power. Anyone who uses scopes can verify that at close range(as this was, ending up at around 40 yards distance), such high magnification would have made it extemely difficult to follow a fast moving animal in the scope, particularly one that was making erratic and quick moves. It would have made the observation of details borderline imposible. The basic reason for this is that the field of view is so reduced that following any movement out of the sight windown is very difficult. Even following a deer in the open, running in a straight line is diffcult at high power at close range, and following a movement as jerky and unpredictable as is reported, would be even more so.
I would be less sceptical had he said the opposite, that he turned his scope DOWN as the animal approached.. Had the animal remaind stationary the whole or most of the time, then the higher magnification would have been usefull...but the description is of a fast moving target, that would have again been very difficult to even follow, let alone detail out to such an extensive degree, at such restrictively high magnification.
Now, it IS an entertaining story, and it MAY be true...again, I make no claims to know one way or another.
But...like so many "good" ones...it seems to have some red..or at least pink..flags.

I knew this sounded familiar....

I agree that the area should be thoroughly checked asap for any signs of the struggle described in the account. Also, survey the surrounding woods for any signs of current or recent BF habitation.

^Has anyone read the report about the rednecks (and I use that term lovingly) who were under assault by a whole troup of BF?

The BF learned that when rednecks jack deer from their porch, there's fresh meat available for the grabbing. Got to the point that the BF were not afraid of the noise of the rifles or the spot lights.

When the rednecks got spooked and stopped shooting deer, the BF started raiding the outside freezer for fresh cuts of meat.

When the rednecks removed that food source, the BF started coming right up on the porch. Trick or treat!

BFRO investigated and filed a report. Maybe someone can post a link to the initial report and follow up. An entertaining read.

Here's the link. I posted it, but I was skeptical of it, and the discussion that followed was also skeptical.

You refer to the "seige at Honobia"; use this link to a thread that in turn contains half a dozen links to various discussions of this.

Enkidu... you may need some aspirin afterwards

(Rednecks... lmao)

Grab some coffee....

Get comfortable....its a long thread

I'll say that you have to be careful here and not assume that just because there are a lot of details in the report that all of the details are included.

If I saw something like that from my treestand, I'd scope it too, finger off the trigger, of course. But If there's something big and hairy, I'm not going to put down my scope to be polite. Big, hairy = animal.

He gave the reason he didn't turn down the scope power, scared to even move an inch. Completely understandable, considering the circumstances.

You saying he couldn't have observed all this through a scope, let me just remind you that he probably has two eyes, only one can be used for the scope at a time...

Facinating story, if it was me the bigfoot would have smelled me when I shat my pants...

I'm going to have to jump on the NW side on this one for now. The story sounds too much like a Story. All the suspense, and stalking, pouncing, showing teeth! When I was reading it, I lost interest because it was too much detail and couldn't help but see someone typing it out thinking how much they will fool someone. This is just my opinion. I would like to see a re-enactment at the same place and viewed from the same tree stand.

I hope BFRO is conducting classes on how to interview people who have sightings.

One thing I've learned in Search and rescue is how to interview the person who saw the subject last. The number one rule is: No suggestive interviewing! Make them tell you what the subject looked like instead of asking,"was he 6 to 7 feet tall? Was he Hairy? Was the Hair Long and swaying in the wind? You will undoubtedly get an answer like, uuuh yeah, that’s what it looked like… yeah, it was 7’ tall and hairy… with long hair!! Instead you should be asking questions like,"Tell me what its height was? Describe what it looked like, if they say "Hairy" then ask them to describe the hair. What color was it? The investigator was showing him pictures and of course he will say it looked like one of them!

If this person was interviewed properly, it might have picked up some more flags? Again, like NW, I wasn't there so who knows for sure? Better to be skeptical then Gullible in this research!

Cut4sign

It's bacon! Bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon!

So a 'squatch decides to spend the day tossing the ol' pigskin around, what's the big deal?

That is one freaky story, though. It seems odd that a bipedal animal would get down on all fours to pounce on it's prey. It just doesn't seem like a natural movement. The only way I can picture it effectively is if I imagine the BF in more of a sprinter's stance in the starting blocks. Still doesn't seem like an ideal way to pounce. Using the Patterson film subject as a guide, I just can't picture it getting on all fours to attack a pig. I'm not saying the story is bogus, just that I am having a difficult time picturing it.

From the time I first read this I thought ..if God is in the details....then perhaps the Devil is in these details. There were so many. It must have taken days and many notes to self to clearly recollect and commit them to paper.
Either he was familiar with Bigfoot before this...or he is a professional used to supplying expert witness testimony. For someone who was so scared, his recollection must have been allowed to surface over time, or he was led by the questioner, to a large degree. IMHO
I think NW's point is facintaing..all of these details about various body parts seen through a small 9X scope...blurr city...unless the creature was much further away then first thought.
It will require a re-enactment to be certain.??

The reporter in this story must have one steady hand when it comes to holding a gun and looking thru that scope. As NW pointed out, trying to hold a 9x zoom on something moving is very difficult...even if you have one eye free to look down the side of the scope. I know I have one heckuva time trying to zoom my Sony camcorder on a moving object, and that's a lot smaller than a rifle w/scope. Perhaps he only used the scope after the BF came to a complete stop...who knows.

Check this out....



Thumbs set back further on the hand..
Yellowish fingernails...
Female, had breasts..
Feet had five toes...
Toes set wide apart..yellowish toenails

..now this is a moving creature being scoped at 9X as it travels through woods..darting from tree to tree...was this witness good, or what? The more you think about it..the more your jaw droops a little.
Remember, he was so scoped out that the creatures face entirely filled his range of view, and more! And he was able to capture clear views of these body parts in his scope. I submit that he would have to bee cooler then the coolest Green Beret to pull this off....not scared sh--less in his blind!

Nightwing brought up a very valid point about the scope magnafacation at close range. I've hunted over thirty five years, try looking at something moving fast at that range on 9 power, pretty tough. But very interesting story.

This is a fantastic story....could he have made out the details of hands, hair, breasts and such while it was still looking around a tree each time it moved behind one to peer out at the hogs as he stated in the report? It would move quickly between trees but pause behind each one to look around. The description of the teeth was when it stopped again after walking away some, dropped the hog, and looked in his direction.

Read it twice, the hogs were 40 yards away and the BF was 30 yards beyond that making it a total of 70 upon initial sighting and the 9x magnification (but it was moving closer)? And the observations about the creature might have been made during it's stationary moments in between going tree to tree and the moment it dropped the hog and looked back at him? I don't think I saw anywhere on the report the total length (time) of the encounter start to finish.

The down on all fours part sounded similar to Planet of the Apes movie (the recent one) where they would be on two legs most of the time, but sometimes on four. Maybe it was trying to get down low before the intial attack/final approach....too many questions.

Good thread. I read the report this moring and almost instantly became sick with fright. As a hunter I can relate to his fear of moving an inch, you are soooo vunerable in a tree stand. As for the argument about using 9x to observe this event I think it is possible to do at 9x, I too leave my scope at 3x to hunt but have used 9x to observe doe, turkey etc. at about the same distance he describes but obvoiusly at a slower pace.
I am curious how high up the tree he was because of his scent obviously gave him away. Call me silly but if I can't get at least 20 feet up a tree I won't climb it.

Very interesting story indeed. See if this person will reply to all the questions. I am not a hunter but a photographer. When looking thru a scope, at what point does a target become blurred? Can't you focus scopes somewhat? If so, how much movement would it take to focus one? I'm assuming it would have to be done with the trigger hand.

the scope is the flag for me too - 9x at 50 yds - it's tricky - you can open both eyes though ya know - i used to use my left and right eye when i was a great northeaster squirrell hunter - i would take shots with the right eye and track movement with both eyes open and relying on the left eye to be dominant for a short time- it can even get you a little seasick- Now that's some big game hunting!

But I could never track a squirrell through a scope as it leaped thorough the air with a scope -- granted i was at closer range but - i was at 25yds max ususally using 3x magnification- it's just too hard - for those of you who have not done it - it's like watching the world thorugh a cardboard tube.

Possible yes -- plausible maybe - probaility? - well he can always use the left eye.

I really want to belive this story but my gut says no -

I also heard a story about pecos bill and slue foot sue riding a giant catfish on the rio grande

I agree that it sounds plauseable..until..he kicks the scope up to 9X. He was too afraid ..so afraid as a matter of fact, that he was petrified with fright...once he had kicked the scope up to 9X! Yet he had the presence of mind to get a good look at all of those body parts in his scope. (That is high magnification to pick out someone's toenails!)How did he manage to see the creature's toenails..even right down to their coloration , on the forest floor, unless the feet pretty well filled the screen...and to have the presence of mind and skill to move the scope up the creature's body cataloging all of those features. Shape of teeth, eye coloration.
Can it be done? Sure it can. With consentration and a lot of attention to what you are doing. I don't think that someone who is scared sh--less, and in shock at the sight, would have the presence of mind to carry it off.
(One would expect that gun barrel and scope to be jerking like a Mexican jumping bean. Or the gun to be held so tight in terror..that it could not track a moving target with much success, at all.
Go get the old family camcorder and get one of your kids to do what the Bf did...now kick up the magnification until you can clearly see your kids toenails. (That will bring you about 6 ft. from your kid.)Keep it at that magnification...and tell your kid to move across the yard. Now...you tell me what you were able to see....if you could even find your child in the lens to start with! You can even cheat and use both eyes looking through the LCD screen.
He must have been able to view the creature when it was on the move to have seen all that he did. Or those trees Sassy hid behind must have been bamboo shoots.
If anyone can reconstruct this..go for it.
Take your scope off your gun and send your kid, or wife, into the backyard.
If worse comes to worse..you will have proving me wrong, and spent some quality time with your family!
Does this prove it could not happen? No! But it sure makes you question the circumstances under which it is supposed to happen.

I like the idea of the squatch batting the pig into a tree with one hand. This seems like a cross between football (pigskin) and handball. Maybe this could be a new olympic sport. Each country could field their own squatch team.

I just read the report this morning and I don't know if it was my coffee or the story, but my heart really started pounding. Great encounter, hopefully it's true or this guy should be writing stories for Hollywood.

I think I'm going to change my perception that BF is a shy and quiet giant ape that eats berries and wild roots. Breaking bones with its fists? Wow! :willies:

I thank you for that report link Roger!

If nothing else..it proves that Bigfoot is indeed..Master of their own Domain..as the fact that no hair was sighted on the palms of their hands was commented on!

At the risk of inciting the forum or offending anyone, I will post my reply regarding
comments posted in this thread.

Lately, there have been many valued members that have left permanently or temporarily because of the "recent tone" of the board.

This regards the line of questioning and/or disbelief of this incredible report. In my opinion, any reported sighting or encounter of a Bigfoot creature is incredible, in as much as these creatures have not been proven to exist. This report also contains an incredible amount of detail regarding the description of the creature.

My first thoughts when I read this report as it was submitted to our website were regarding the detailed description. Before the Long book debacle, one of the more serious points of contention with the Patterson film was the fact that the creature appeared to be a female with obvious breasts that were hair-covered. This is not a trait found in primates. Yet here in this report, was a description of the same trait as depicted in the Patterson film.

The biggest point of contention with the report from our website as discussed here was not with the description of the creature, but the actions of the hunter who reported it. The matter of whether he could have watched the creature through a 9x scope seems to be the biggest point.

The amount of nitpicking and negativity amazes me. People demanding information and answers. Well, guess what? Neither I, nor my group (TBRC), the BFRO, the GCBRO or any other group or individual owes you anything. I do not do this (form a research group and go to great trouble, expense, effort and time) for you. I do this for myself and the other members of my group. Five years ago when I co-founded my group, I was in the same position as many of you, wanting information on the subject of Bigfoot. Granted, there was far less info out on the internet then than there is now, but there were websites such as the BFRO and the GCBRO. The difference is I did not demand information or answers, I read everything I could find on the subject and I found an individual with some experience as far as knowledge and personal encounters with these creatures to form a group with. Now before you say, I live in the city, I don't have anywhere to do field research, Let me say that there have been reported encounters of these creatures in every state except Hawaii. I live in the city, Dallas, TX to be exact. There aren't any Bigfoot roaming in my neighborhood either. But I had the desire to do this and often drive hundreds of miles to investigate reports.

My suggestion for those who desire more info or answers than you find on the websites that are out there, is to join an existing group or form your own group. Put up your own website with a report submission form and then you can haggle over your own reports and question your own witnesses. The key is desire. If you want to do this bad enough, you will find a way. My group was me and the person I co-founded it with for over a year. Now we have over 50 members.

Regarding the reports that are found on our website. The following disclaimer is posted there as well:
The reports that have been submitted to us have been investigated to the best of our ability. We try to interview the witness in person when possible and to inspect the area of the sighting. This can be beneficial even in cases that occurred some time ago. We can see if there is sufficient habitat and food source to support these animals in the area. We would like to impress upon the public that the reports here are anecdotal evidence, not testimonial evidence. These witnesses did not swear the truth of their accounts before a justice of the peace or commissioner for oaths. We get many reports that we can not follow up on. If we are not able to contact the person submitting the report to interview them, we do not post the report. Because of this, many reports that we receive are not listed on the website. Witnesses are not subjected to a polygraph test, we try to judge their credibility by talking to them over the phone, or better, in person.

The primary reason that these reports are available on the website is that almost without fail, the first time someone comes to our site, or any of the other online sighting databases, the first thing that they will do is check to see if there are any reports from their county and how close to their location they are. This is beneficial as it will help them to see that they are not alone in having an encounter (if they have had one) and may prompt them to submit a report whereas they might not have normally.

Regarding this specific report, there has been additional info that has been added to the website. One of the first questions was whether his hunting partner believed him. The answer is no, he was ridiculed unmercifully by his hunting buddies and friends that he told the story to. That was why he was so wary of reporting it to us. He wants no publicity and was not even going to submit a report initially. He told the story to one of our members over the phone who has become somewhat of a "local celebrity" because of his appearance in the Caddo Lake Mysterious Encounters episode. Then he agreed to submit a report for our group only, not to appear on the website. He then agreed to have it listed on the website, with no identifying details other than the county, no town or city listed.

As far as the interview of the witness, we have a rather extensive, multi-page form that we use to question a witness. It covers many things not included in the posted report on the website.

As far as the amount of detail witnessed, the witness estimates that he was able to have a visual of the creature for approximately 20 minutes. That is an incredible amount of time to make mental notes. He was stationed in the tree at a height of approximately 25 feet. He was wearing camo and a mosquito head net.

Hi ecwoll !
I do not know what the point is that you are trying to make?

Is it;

Do not ask for details?

Is it;

Do not criticize reports?

Is it;

Stop posting and go organize your own group?

Or is it all of the above, and more!

Not to be disrespectful to wards you or your organization..or anyone else, or their oragnization....but, you seem to have lost sight that BFF is not an investigatory group! It is a message board!
On a message board you are going to find all types of people with all kinds of opinion....opinions which they are entitled to post.

Are you trying to say that people who do not believe a report, should not open their mouths? Skeptics should be registered but not hard from?

Sorry! But again You seem to be missing the mark here!

I for one applaud all of your efforts to get to the bottom of this mystery..as I do all groups involved in the same endeavor.
But if your message here today is to tell me that if I want to discuss the pros and cons of viewing an object, bigfoot or otherwise.through a 9X scope.then I should keep my mouth shut and not upset anyone,... then again ...you are in the wrong place.

IMHO

It doesn't really matter how extensive an interview or follow-up research is for a sighting, the evidence is always debatable. Everything is debatable! If the investigator wasn't there, then they really don't know exactly what the subject saw, heard, or whatever. It is our right to discuss whatever we want here, as long as we obey the forum guidelines. Just relax and enjoy the read.

This is just like the "Siege at Honobia" fiasco. An incredible sighting, a possible chance to procure a body for recognition, an angry, defensive witness and others who feel they're also being besmirched by association. Ecwool, it's okay if people disagree, or don't believe, or are somewhat skeptical of any particular sighting. If your witness report is that refined all well and good. Also any discussion pro or con will help others hone their's. To the witness I say, you knew that not everyone would believe you so what's the big deal? There are as many believers here as skeptics. And last but not least, theONE thing this situation highlights in stark clarity is the NEED FOR A BODY!

You, Sir Witness, have the hot stand. Help us all. Get abig enough rifle, .35 Whelen at least, and bring one in. You won't make a gazillion dollars, but a good sum, and the rest of us can move on. I'm saying this to ridicule, rarher simply to point out step next.

I find it interesting that this report was discussed on Timberghost's Kiamichi Giants forum and that the comments there show acceptance of this report as being legitimate.
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Kiamichi_Giants...hp?showtopic=27

Their comments have not immediately jumped to the negative position that seems to prevail on BFF.

WITHOUT FORUM BASHING why do you think this is?

Jan

Hi Jan,

In order to access that link, you need to log in and become a member.


RW

Can someone log on to that site and post the contents of that link? I'd love to read what it says.

Ummm, not without losing the trust of everyone there, as well as probably posting privileges!

It only takes a second to register though.

I just registered there...Hey, I already recognize some names from this site!