BFRO Expedition And Further "No-Kill" Reasoning
Editor’s Note: Michael Higgins is 28 years old, Texas born, Oklahoman. He is an advocate and a firm believer of the Squatch. He has witnessed one of the big guys or gals near a powerline trail in Honobia, Oklahoma. Michael is a realism artist interested in doing sasquatch sketches for eyewitnesses. You can visit his blog at okiesquatchartist.blogspot.com.I've decided to persue a chance to go on a BFRO Expedition in October of this year. I do not look foward to paying, but I believe it is important to understand how to quickly identify where squatch habitats may be. I love researching the question of sasquatch. The fact that I have seen one makes it even more interesting because I know they exist. I do not need to prove the existence to satisfy my own curiosity because I have seen. I feel like if their existence is proven, then protection can be provided for the species. This brings me to the fork in the road, where the left goes down the "kill for proof and protection" road, and the right goes down the "no-kill" road.
For the record, I'm "no-kill." I do understand the thinking of some, that a specimen needs to be taken to prove the existence and provide protection for the species. What I don't understand is why verification of the species needs to happen to provide protection. In my humble opinion, the amount of evidence (conclusive or not), and the 400 years of sasquatch reports should provide the grounds for species protection.
I've seen the argument made that the logging industry may take a hit, if the government were to provide protection to sasquai. That's not an unfounded argument at all. I'm no tree hugger, but I do love the woods and I've seen first hand the devestating effect that logging can have on the landscape. While habitat destruction is a major issue, its not the biggest. Throw the logging business aside. The government should provide the species, while unproven to many, with protection from hunters. Once the species has been verified by those that need it, then the logging business and the government can go at it. Until then, keep logging.
What's the big deal anyway, if protection from only hunters was provided to the sasquai? Being protected from hunting ensures that this species prospers in what way it can while researchers and science proves their existence to those who need the proof. Yes, it may take a long time, but then again it may not. Nobody really knows exactly what means will be used to prove that sasquatch exists. One thing is for sure though, the existence of sasquatch could be proven without providing a specimen. For those that need the proof, I challenge you to get out into the woods, if you can. Search for it. I plan on hitting the woods every chance I can, once life settles down. I just want to have some sort of foundation for searching, which is why I'll be trying to get on the BFRO Expedition this fall.
How many expeditions have there where they have encountered bears?
ReplyDeleteI'll go out on a limb and say more bears in woods than Bigfoot, and rarely do they encounter bears, which makes me question any hope anyone would encounter let alone see a Bigfoot.
And with all the hollering and howling, is there a danger of attracting bears?
I'm unsure about howling, but making noise is often recommended for scaring bears away.
DeleteIF THESE CREATURES HAVE THE POWERS THAT MANY IN THIS COMMUNITY SUPPOSE, THEN SASQUATCH DOESN'T NEED OUR PROTECTION WE NEED IT FROM THEM !
ReplyDeleteGood article Okie. Its nice to hear your point of view.
ReplyDeleteI agree, their shouldn't be a hunting season for Sasquatch. I just don't think the Federal government is going to issue protection for the species, without there being a reason, such as mass killing of them. So far there is no definitive proof this is happening, so I don't think there will be a law passed against it. So bad as it would be, I think we have to have a body, to get legislation.
ReplyDeleteC.B. Milton
You can't catch them and you can't tame them, these hairy giants are probably as smart as we are and use all their cunning to survive in a hostile world they know they're hopelessly outnumbered in.
DeleteDitto, sadly our government sees the evidence as no evidence at all. They are not going to provide protection based on any number of footprints, video, pics, or even hair or other DNA. Okie, I know how you feel, like it should just be a given since you have had an encounter. That everyone should just be able to reason that they exist. But one has to take a step back when on the verge of presenting something new to the world. Put yourself in the shoes of a legislator. There you are sitting in your office and in walks one of your constituents. He is there to ask you to propose legislation to protect a species of sea serpent as yet unknown to science. He claims that he KNOWS they exist, he has seen them on several occasions as he works as a fisherman. Not only has he seen them, but every fisherman he knows has seen them as well, except most of them won't come forward for fear of ridicule. This man then pulls from his bag perfect plaster casts of what appear to be two flippers of enormous size. They look almost too perfect, almost like the flippers you saw once in a drawing of a plesiosaur.
DeleteNow, as a legislator you have been spent more years than you can count now dealing with economic issues, social injustice, the environment, and a never-ending list of constantly changing focus. Now ask yourself, as a man or woman who has never seen anything like what you are describing, who has more than his share of work already, are you going to give any consideration to this subject without any further proof? No, sadly you would probably suggest that the man try and attain a specimen, you would shake his hand and remind him to vote in November, and then you would close the door to your office and press the button on your intercom asking your secretary to send in the next appointment. This is the reality.
Just because we know does not mean that they know, or even that they view any of the evidence the same way we do. I really do wish that a video so iron clad that it couldn't have been hoaxed were to surface, but we live in the year 2012 and at this point anything could be hoaxed. Sadly the definitive proof it will take to put this species even into the realm of possible protection has not been reached using the methods we have all been trying for the past 50 years or so. I know it's a tired line, but as knowers the burden of proof sits heavily on our shoulders. Okie, I respect your position and enjoy your articles. I really do hope that verification will be reached without a death, but I am also trying to understand the order of operations within our Government. People no longer believe things at face value, particularly a subject like Sasquatch which has such a long history of hoaxers, alleged or not. John
Thanks John! I am definitely on the same page. Hopefully one day there will be some form of undisputed evidence-not in the form of a specimen.
DeleteMike- let me answer some of the questôns about protection for Sasquatch. Protection will come eventually however a type specimen IS NOT needed. every year biologists discover new species on earth without a type specimen and those species are verified on the bases of DNA, some bones or very little solid proof items to classify. The pro-kill camp are the folks that say you need atype specimen, that validates their own selfish ambitions to kill a Sasquatch for fame and/or money; nothing else. Now as for protection. We need protection due to the laxity in the field and mis-identification of hunters in the case of the sierra shooting, or like stated prior BECAUSE the pro-kill camp. This species, no matter how it is ultimately classified needs to be protected on two other fronts
ReplyDeletealso 1- It could be a very close relative to homo sapiens AND the fact that they are very, very rare and endangered already. Also what about the hoaxer being shot. The protection shouldn't be rushed though at the expense of the Sasquatch and verification will come in due time. With all that said let me just add that protection will not come without verification, but not nessesarily atype specimen.
I would like to comend you on your stance of no kill and honor your heart in that view. ptangier
Incoherent. Can you please clarify?
DeleteI understood it well but trolls like you won't.
DeleteI'm a no kill person, with that said, I don't see people driving down the road with a sasquatch strapped to the roof. I think the sasquatches are doing just fine and sure as hell don't need help from us. When i listen to these arguements they make it sound like we have them on the brink of extinction. Come on! It seems like " NO KILL"or "Protection" has become the popular thing to say.BS Still have not seen a body, heard a few stories about people shooting at a sasquatch, but still no proof. Who's fooling who.
ReplyDeleteOur Cities grow on a daily basis. Their species MAY not need protection, but their homes certainly do. Doesn't do much good to be at the top of the food chain if there is nothing to eat. John
DeleteI kill, I kill, I kill you - hehehehehehe- Bevis...
DeleteOkie, please don't buy into the BFRO bullshit campathon with any hopes of having another encounter. If you are going to make contacts or something then I guess that would be worth $300 for a weekend...wait, maybe not. You might gain more insight into spotting Sasquatch environments and make some solid contacts if you just go to the Honobia conference next year. Plenty of whackos, but plenty of good down to earth people as well. I am also very near you, I live in North Texas. Texhoma area if you know where that is. I have 4 good spots, my favorite is in Arkansas. I also have two in OK and one in Texas. I am no habituator and am making no claims like this. These are areas of sighting concentration in the cases of the last three, and my own encounter in Arkansas. I have no qualms with sharing what I know with the sane, so just respond here if you're interested : 4statebf@gmail .com. John
ReplyDeleteI'm from Denison, there are at least three outstanding areas right there, you don't need to go anywhere. Accros the damn in OK, hagerman, the river by carpenters bluff. I just took two new sightings stories there in the last three days from relatives. I currently live in Cali where the Bigen's live.
DeleteAny dipshit libs wanting the government to sieze more land for the fed is a commy. Take an airplane ride you ignorant jackass ANONA @9:47, more space and woods than you can fathom. They take care of themselves just fine!
Also, I highly reccomend a BFRO expedition for the knowledge and experience.
DeleteWhy do people feel the need to determine such things for others.
You have no garauntee of a sighting, but it's for fun and a chance?????
Hunting, fishing, gold prospecting, tresure hunting, mushroom hunting(snowball), gem hunting are all done under the same (chance) of possibility, FOR FUN!
You're just plain old dumb, Leo.
DeleteWow Leon, your posts become more and more articulate. Did you quit drinking?
DeleteJust plain old crybaby ANONA PUSSES.
DeleteNothing will prove bigfoot's existence but a specimen.
ReplyDeleteNothing would provide any kind of legal protection for bigfoot or bigfoot habitat but a specimen.
Anybody who advocates no kill/no specimen will do nothing to prove bigfoot's existence and help them. Some of you think that it's okay to leave bigfoot alone. I, however, do not. By not protecting them and their habitat, we may be inadvertently killing the species. There would be no whooping cranes and no California condors left if it were not for government legal intervention. We likely would have lost the bison as well.
You're ignorant of this species like many others are too, the species is doing fine in numbers with the reported sightings in mind they must be. Killing one won't change anything but satisfy the circus freaks, the studies currently going on must be completed so we know what we're dealing with here. It's no use to keep saying gimme a specimen, those already unfortunate enough to have attempted this have all kept their mouths shut once seeing the true nature of these primal forest people.
DeleteEveryone is ignorant of this species because this species does not exist.
DeleteExcept inside your troll mind maybe, for the rest of us it exists outside.
Delete"the 400 years of sasquatch reports should provide the grounds for species protection" LMAO are you fuc*ing serious? Kill it or trank it! If you want species protection no one is going to buy 400 years of reports which btw most of those reports are made up of indian legends so those really don't count. Then factor out the bullcrap like rednecks and hoaxers and you're left with very little real reports. I believe in Bigfoot, but unless real hard evidence is provided its going to still be considered total BS!
ReplyDeleteAlso I think BFRO expeditions a bit shady. You're pretty much paying a couple of hundred bucks so that some dudes can take you camping on public land.
Most of the reports are much more recent than Native American legend.
DeleteYou believe? This really isn't about belief you know. They wouldn't get me into the dark woods at night with all sorts of critters running about no matter what Bigfoot is, ape or man dangerous or not, it's still not the most safe situation in the world to be in out there all alone with unknown beings this huge and strong. Just imagine one appears you'll mess your pants up on the spot from fright.
ReplyDeleteMan I've camped, hiked, hunted NY, Pa, Georgia-Maryland, Montana, and Washington extensively, not to mention BC and the Yukon without seeing any sign let alone a BF in person. Plus I have spent many a lonely night doing astro-photography in remote dark areas of Washington and Oregon and I'm still kicking.
DeleteMost animals that are in danger of being eradicated in North America are that way due to habitat loss, not just hunting or even hunting. Elk in the PNW fluctuate due to habitat loss and periodic extreme winter kill. Granted the hunting season has been pared back to a minimal season for modern firearm, archery and muzzle loader, and it is either/or (you pick one weapon for that season) but the real reason in most western states is habitat loss due to development. Historical game range development has lead to pretty large numbers of elk winter kill near Salt Lake City and Denver.
ReplyDeleteIf BF is seriously studied by gov't or gov't granted universities for the purpose of protection, they would have to follow the guidelines of the grizzly bear studies and protections of Montana/Idaho being done by the University of Montana at Missoula. Because of his nomadic/large home range like the grizzly, they will have to live trap and tag somehow with a GPS or like satellite transmitter in order to better understand it's preferred habitat and travel corridors. This would probably lead to some closing of timber harvest areas just like the grizzly in the border country of BC and Montana. It would probably lead to some closing in the Olympic Peninsula like the Spotted Owl closures.
Correction I should have said the Washington hunting seasons are either/or.
DeleteMike Higgins is a pretty odd name for a full blooded native American Indian.
ReplyDeleteThats funny cause I'm not full blooded nor did I ever claim to be. Higgins is actually an Irish last name. I'm 3/8 Choctaw/Chickasaw as far as the Native American blood goes.
DeleteI got two bigfoot bodies in the freezer downstairs. It's a long weekend coming up and time for some barbecue.What kind of wine do you serve with these critters?
DeleteIsn't red wine good with red meat. It is red meat isn't.
Delete