10k Reward for Bigfoot--So Passé

Harry is yawning because we've seen this before

"I will pay anyone $10,000 who brings me any scientifically certifiable remains of a previously unknown contemporary ape or human species" -- Norman P. Carlson

Norman P. Carlson has written a letter at Post Journal offering $10,000 for proof of Bigfoot. Mr. Carlson that is small potatoes! We respectfully decline your offer when the Fayetteville Freethinkers are offering a house. The Kemerovo government is offering $1M rubles (30k US dollars). Even Todd Standing is offering 2 Million for Bigfoot body parts. 

People who offer rewards for Bigfoot fall into two categories; skeptics trying to prove a point and promoters trying to make a name. Mr. Carlson falls into the former category. Either way, most of us in the Bigfoot community consider rewards for proof passé. It is not novel and not an incentive that drives us. You can read Norman's full proposal below.

Where Is The Evidence Of Bigfoot’s Existence?

May 14, 2012

The Post-Journal

To the Readers' Forum:

The Big Foot conference was a huge success, I'm told. Hundreds of people came from all over. People had a good time. People spent money. People made money. People got to tell each other, "We know something those haughty scientists and rationality freaks don't."

My guess is that, like the ghost hunting craze, it was a harmless but useless do-it-yourself Disneylike fantasy fest. No bones. No DNA. No scats. No convincing pictures despite all the automatic game cameras inexpensively available today. No real tracks. Not even a hair. Just eye witness accounts, the worst possible kind of evidence but to the people there, extremely convincing. Ask a psychologist, a cognitive scientist, a lawyer, an artist, or a cop about eye witness evidence.

I'll bet there was little or no talk of what the big apes find to eat, where they find shelter, and even less of minimum sustainable breeding populations, necessary contiguous range, habitat destruction, and genetic bottlenecks.

I will pay anyone $10,000 who brings me any scientifically certifiable remains of a previously unknown contemporary ape or human species - you don't even have to prove it is local, much though I would prefer - if you will agree to pay me $10 each year you don't. And to sweeten the deal, I will even name a star after your mother for an additional $25, less than half what that vendor on the radio who does the same thing charges. I have just as much authority and legitimacy to do that as he does.

A Big Foot who resembles a man so strikingly would have to have a skeleton, including a skull, which resembles human examples. Police and hunters have a fairly good record of finding human murder victims' skeletons and skulls that are left in the woods. If there are Big Foots locally, certainly a breeding population would suffer a considerably larger number of deaths per unit time than the number of murder victims disposed of locally in the woods. So why doesn't anybody find their skulls? Maybe they bury their dead, one woman suggested to me. Oh, come to think of it, I maybe saw one at a farm auction last year bidding on a shovel. And maybe that guy I thought was a Neanderthal in my junior high study hall.

Norman P. Carlson

SRC: The Post Journal

Did The Chief Texas Game Warden Say it was OK to Kill Bigfoot on Private Property?

Another thread to the Bigfoot kill/no-kill debate in texas

In a recent report by Fox News titled "Killing Bigfoot OK in Texas – if he's Texan" indicated that L. David Sinclair, the Chief of Staff of the Law Enforcement Division of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, responded to an email by John Lloyd Scharf regarding the legality of killing Bigfoot. 

The email in question was originally sent to Peter Flores, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Law Enforcement Division Director. Peter forwarded it Sinclair and asked him to respond. In the end Sinclair basically said it was legal to kill a  non-protected nongame animal (Bigfoot?) in Texas as long as it is on private property. Although Sinclair never used the word Bigfoot, it was in response to Scharf, it is clear that Scharf was asking about Bigfoot in particular. 

If you read the Fox News article it seems that L. David Sinclair was walking his response back a bit. Sinclair claimed  his response has been taken wildly out of context.

“This guy never really alluded to Bigfoot, though it seems maybe he said something about Sasquatch,” Sinclair told FoxNews.com. “He took my statement and said that it was safe to hunt an ‘indigenous cryptid,’ whatever that is. He misquoted me.”

John Lloyd Scharf sent is a copy of the email exchange and we will let you judge whether or not L. David Sinclair knew whether or not John Lloyd Scharf was talking about Bigfoot.

From: John Scharf
To: Peter Flores
Cc: GREG GREG DAVIDSON Office of the Governor
Sent: Thu May 03 17:51:06 2012
Subject: TAKING WILDLIFE RESOURCES PROHIBITED

If a species is unlisted and an unknown new species, is there an open season and blank permit to take that species? Several groups of individuals claim they have talked to game officials in Texas about this issue. They have framed it within the supposed existence of the "Bigfoot." I have said no wildlife may be taken without the permission of the people of Texas. 

So, my question, generally, is whether they are allowed to kill and take wildlife that may be native to Texas without a season or a permit? 

Texas Law: PARKS AND WILDLIFE CODE - TITLE 5. WILDLIFE AND PLANT CONSERVATION - SUBTITLE B. HUNTING AND FISHING - CHAPTER 61. UNIFORM WILDLIFE REGULATORY ACT:SUBCHAPTER B. PROHIBITED ACTS Sec. 61.021. TAKING WILDLIFE RESOURCES PROHIBITED. Except as permitted under a proclamation issued by the commission under this chapter, no person may hunt, catch, or possess a game bird or game animal, fish, marine animal, or other aquatic life at any time or in any place covered by this chapter.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PW/htm/PW.61.htm#61.021

And here is the response from  L. David Sinclair after it was forwarded to him from Peter Flores.

Mr. Scharf:
The statute that you cite (Section 61.021) refers only to game birds, game animals, fish, marine animals or other aquatic life. Generally speaking, other nongame wildlife is listed in Chapter 67 (nongame and threatened species) and Chapter 68 (nongame endangered species). "Nongame" means those species of vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife indigenous to Texas that are not classified as game animals, game birds, game fish, fur-bearing animals, endangered species, alligators, marine penaeid shrimp, or oysters. The Parks and Wildlife Commission may adopt regulations to allow a person to take, possess, buy, sell, transport, import, export or propagate nongame wildlife. If the Commission does not specifically list an indigenous, nongame species, then the species is considered non-protected nongame wildlife, e.g., coyote, bobcat, mountain lion, cotton-tailed rabbit, etc. A non-protected nongame animal may be hunted on private property with landowner consent by any means, at any time and there is no bag limit or possession limit.

An exotic animal is an animal that is non-indigenous to Texas. Unless the exotic is an endangered species then exotics may be hunted on private property with landowner consent. A hunting license is required. This does not include the dangerous wild animals that have been held in captivity and released for the purpose of hunting, which is commonly referred to as a “canned hunt”.

If you have any questions, please contact Assistant Chief Scott Vaca. I have included his e-mail address. I will be out of the office and in Houston on Friday.

Best,
L. David Sinclair
Chief of Staff - Division Director I
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Law Enforcement Division
4200 Smith School Road
Austin, TX 78744

Fox News: Killing Bigfoot OK in Texas – if he's Texan

John Lloyd Sharf (middle) elevates the kill/no-kill controversy to Fax News

Killing Bigfoot OK in Texas – if he's Texan

By Jeremy A. Kaplan
Published May 08, 2012
FoxNews.com

Texas has no position on the existence of Bigfoot -- but go on, hunt it anyway.
John Lloyd Scharf, a Bigfoot fan from Oregon, emailed the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department last week about hunting unknown creatures.

Chief of staff Lt. David. Sinclair told FoxNews.com he responded with a straight description of the law -- which hinges not on whether the mythical beast exists, but on precisely how the government would label it.
“The statute that you cite (Section 61.021) refers only to game birds, game animals, fish, marine animals or other aquatic life. Generally speaking, other nongame wildlife is listed in Chapter 67 (nongame and threatened species) and Chapter 68 (nongame endangered species),” Sinclair wrote back to Scharf.
“An exotic animal is an animal that is non-indigenous to Texas. Unless the exotic is an endangered species, then exotics may be hunted on private property with landowner consent.”

The law boils down to provenance, Scharf decided. If Bigfoot is indigenous to Texas, it can be killed.
'We’ve got hundreds of sightings going back decades. I don’t think we’d have any problem proving it’s indigenous.' - Brian Brown, the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy

But Sinclair told FoxNews.com his response has been taken wildly out of context.

“This guy never really alluded to Bigfoot, though it seems maybe he said something about Sasquatch,” Sinclair told FoxNews.com. “He took my statement and said that it was safe to hunt an ‘indigenous cryptid,’ whatever that is. He misquoted me.”

Scharf did not respond to several FoxNews.com requests for more information. But the rules Sinclair cites are clear: It would be legal to shoot Sasquatch.

“Nongame” means wildlife indigenous to Texas that aren’t deer, sheep, geese, alligators, or any other animal hunted for food. If the Commission doesn’t specifically list a beast -- and needless to say, Bigfoot doesn’t make the list -- it isn’t protected.

So Bigfoot a Longhorn? Absolutely, said Brian Brown, media coordinator for the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy.

“We’ve got hundreds of sightings going back decades. I don’t think we’d have any problem proving it’s indigenous. We think they’re all over the region,” Brown told FoxNews.com.

Oregon resident Scharf worried that the policy could be interpreted as “kill it first, ID it after.” He thinks it could even lead to premature extinction of the Bigfoot species.

“Individuals of an unknown species, and therefore not be listed as ‘endangered’ under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, could be exterminated without criminal or civil repercussions – essentially causing extinction?” he asked on an enthusiast bulletin board.

Brown argued that killing a Bigfoot is a necessary way to prove its existence.

 “Our primary mission is to conserve these animals. They cannot be conserved until they are accepted as fact. They will not be accepted as fact until a type specimen is produced. It's as simple as that,” he wrote on the group’s website, texasbigfoot.com.

Laws prevent hunters from killing people, of course. Such regulations wouldn’t govern Bigfoot, Brown told FoxNews.com.

“It’s not murder, it’s an animal,” he said. “They don’t do anything that makes you think that they’re humans or some lost tribe. They don’t really have attributes or do anything that one typically associates with humans.”

Open-minded Sasquatch seekers in the Lone Star State all seem positive that the numerous regional sightings mean something is out there.

"I have been immersed in Sasquatch research for a number of years, and I can tell you in my mind a mountain of evidence supports the existence of these creatures," Ken Gerhard, a San Antonio cryptozoologist who co-wrote "Monsters of Texas," recently told the Houston Chronicle.

Gerhard, who also heads up the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization, said Texas has one of the nation’s highest incidents of Bigfoot reports, outranked only by Washington, California, Oregon, Ohio and Florida.

That doesn’t mean the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is tracking them, of course.
“Here at Parks and Wildlife, we don’t have any evidence that Bigfoot exists,” Sinclair told FoxNews.com.
“We don’t want to get drawn into the debate about it.”
SRC: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/08/killing-bigfoot-ok-in-texas-if-hes-texan/#ixzz1uJgN4R76