Sasquatch Chronicles Blog

Jul 3

Killing Sasquatch In Washington State

Even those of us who are pro-kill, deep down no one really wants to kill a living animal for science but most of us feel it needs to be done. I came across this article from modernnotion.com and while most of us are aware of this I think it is important to post from time to time because we have new members everyday. The article goes as follows:

The story of Bigfoot, the mysterious alleged ape-like creature who stalks forests remaining mostly unseen, has been widely debated since his first “sighting” in 1811 in Alberta, Canada. Some cryptozoologists, a pseudoscientific branch studying animals that may or may not exist, believe Bigfoot sightings date back to Native American accounts of “Sasquatch,” the Halkomelem word to describe the large hairy man-monster.

Even though there have been numerous sightings, videos and pictures, there is still no scientific evidence that supports the existence of Bigfoot. But that didn’t stop Washington state from creating a Bigfoot sanctuary that protects the mythical creature from gun-toting hunters.

It all started in 1969 when the Board of County Commissioners of Skamania County, Washington realized there were more and more hunters and paranormal investigators flocking to their state in hopes of finding the elusive creature.

Most of these cryptozoologists came packing rifles and other deadly weapons that posed a risk to citizens who called Bigfoot territory home. In order to combat the sudden influx of weaponry, the commissioners signed into law a Bigfoot ordinance decreeing that the “willful, wanton slaying of such a creature shall be deemed a felony” punishable by a $10,000 fine or a five year prison sentence.

The law was amended in 1984 changing the crime from a felony to a gross misdemeanor punishable by a $1,000 fine and/or a one year jail sentence. The amendment also stated that if a coroner concludes Bigfoot to be a humanoid the killer would be charged with homicide.

Finally in 1991, Whatcom County, Washington, a neighboring community to Skamania County, declared the entire area, about a million acres of land, a Sasquatch Protection and Refuge Area, creating the first ever Bigfoot sanctuary.

Washington isn’t the only state that has laws protecting Bigfoot. Every state in the US has legislation meant to protect endangered species, and Bigfoot probably falls under that category. Unless, of course, you’re in Texas where a legal loophole allows the killing of any “unprotected, non-game wildlife” on private property as long as you have permission from the landowner. Bigfoot doesn’t fall under the endangered species list there because he technically doesn’t exist, even if he were to exist…if you can follow that logic, high five!

So if you want to see Bigfoot in his natural habitat you should make your way over to Washington state. If you feel more inclined to shoot Bigfoot, you should head to Texas.

30 Responses to “Killing Sasquatch In Washington State”

    • Robert W

      On a somewhat tangential note- I go to Salt Fork SP (Ohio) frequently…

      Next time I may be armed…that’s what CCW lets you do????

      Read some creepy stuff about it – in fact the primitive camping area is called Bigfoot Ridge right?

      • Joni

        My son-in-laws parents have a home in Salt fork s p , My daughter & her hubby& kid’s go there a lot ! Makes me Worry about them ! =/

  2. Gabriel H

    Agreed. Great idea Wes. And welcome to all new-comers. Climb on in, make sure all five points of your harness are solid, and keep your arms inside the vehicle at all times. You’re gonna need those arms for texting/emailing family & friends regarding the ride you’re about to undertake. StAyLoOsE & you’ll be fine. And remember… ALWAYS make a back up copy. Alright. Let’s do this. See you inside 😉

  4. Steven B

    I believe Wes & Woody’s encounter as well as Tracy’s, Pam’s and many more…

    However, we have the statement above that says: ” there is still no scientific evidence that supports the existence of Bigfoot.”

    Question: IF this is the case, how the “H E double hockey sticks” can ANY goobermintal authority make any law protecting, providing sanctuary, and penalties for the harassment and/or deliberate death of a creature that “does not exist”? Logic, which seems to be somewhere in the figures of the Federal Deficit and Debt, would dictate that this is *defacto* ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of a REAL creature.

    FINE!…if laws can be made regarding “non-existent” creatures, then we can file law suits against the goobermint, when injured or family are killed by such “mythical” creatures, for not warning nor educating the public in the dangers that they may present. The same such warnings as they make for people venturing into “bear country” with all the do’s and don’ts and how to handle potentially aggressive animals.

    Same old, same old, government double-speak! It is like the episode of “Monster Quest” regarding cougar sized (or larger) black cats. A witness being interviewed said that Fish & Game told him that these cats do not exist. The witness replied. “OK then. Next time I see one, then I’ll kill it”. Fish and Game person says,”Oh no! That would be illegal!” Riiiight!!! Illegal to kill something that does not exist…I guess if I threaten to live trap all leprechauns hiding under my bed, THAT would be illegal too? Give me a freakin’ break! I wish this Independence day, we could hit the “reset” button and get rid of all this stupidity.

    Is it a requirement to be lobotomized to be in management in these departments? Just wondering.

    Happy Independence Day!
    Cheers
    Steve, Samquanch and Curmudgeon 1st Class in the RGV, TX

    • Rachel P

      I like your logic Steven B….. As for the article, as written, i don’t care for the underlying anti-gun, anti-hunting rhetoric ie. “gun-toting hunters”, “influx of weaponry”, “legal loophole” and its nanny state overtones.

      • Steven B

        Thanks Rachel and all for your kind comments – I am pleasantly surprised with the number of women here that own or don’t have a problem with firearms as well as hunt or don’t have a problem with hunting – a very refreshing surprise. Not many would immediately see the “anti-gun/hunting” slant.

        The kicker this kind of stuff is that the tax payer gets to foot the bill for these shenanigans.

        Knobby, be careful about taking “body parts”. I’ve heard it indicated that if it happens on public lands, you could be charged with removing public property (like arrowheads, rocks or plants found in a state park) and they may also find a way to charging “indignities” to a body. Where ever I heard this the person suggested copious blood samples, a tooth extraction, and a good hair sample.

  7. Tyler D

    Washington state made it illegal to kill an animal that doesn’t technically exist. But for the people who’ve been listening to Sasquatch Chronicles since the beginning or even since “The Insider” episodes or the “Down The Rabbit Hole” episodes. The question shouldn’t be Pro Kill or No Kill. The question should be WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE SPECIMEN ONCE WE HAVE IT? And for the people who have listened to those episodes and after what happened with the whole Bob Garrett situation people would be a little bit paranoid about who to approach with this kind of almost unbelievable scenario and rightfully so. I know I would be very much paranoid. That is a question that would deserve an entire episode on Sasquatch Chronicles. It’s really a question of HOW FAR ARE YOU WILLING TO GO FOR THIS?

    • Knobby

      Tyler D, You’re right. People need to know what to do if they find a body. Number 1 is don’t notify authorities or it will get kicked up the government chain and agents will cover it up. A major problem with Bob Garrett is he had video of the campsite before and after they destroyed evidence. Here’s what you need to do.

      1. Don’t call authorities.
      2. Don’t leave the body unattended. There is evidence sasquatches take charge of the remains and carry it away.
      3. If you can’t remove the body because it’s too heavy, remove body parts.
      4. Hide body parts in different locations (like people’s freezers or put it on ice).
      5. Document it with photos/video.
      6. Take it to a T.V. station. Get it in the public eye before authorities can thwart that.
      7. Send samples to prominent figures in the BF community.

    • Tyler D

      You know I had often thought that Robert. I honestly think that would be the best way to go about it just to be safe. A news station would have more of an objective stance that most anybody you could bring it to and once it airs on television you can’t just take it back. Either way you look at it no matter who you bring it to you are more than likely gonna get a visit from some sort of government official. I know this sounds a little gruesome or a little paranoid but if I had a specimen I would most likely cut a finger off or some sort of small body part and get some sort of blood sample and put it in a secure location just in case they ever came for the body. Which I sincerely believe that they would do. Once you try and take the body out of the forest that person needs to make sure they are in it for the long haul

      • Patricia R

        Tyler–I have a list I found at bigfootforums.com—with about 95 reported cases of people shooting at, shooting and wounding, or killing bigfoot creatures, with varying results, from the early 1800’s to present times. Many of these on the list reference websites for further reading.
        And many reports are very short, without any further references.
        I think your idea of taking it to the media might be the best chance of not having it covered up.
        P

    • Tyler D

      Believe me guys, I have very thoroughly thought this through and all scenarios that could possibly be played out. This is definitely something that should be handled with the utmost delicacy. That question I have WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THE SPECIMEN ONCE YOU HAVE IT? I believe it is definitely something that should have an episode on Sasquatch Chronicles to be discussed openly

  10. Jan W

    Steven, totally agree with everything you said. For those talking about going to the media with REAL BF evidence, I would research who owns the media outlet, as all of the big networks are owned by entities that disseminate only what they want the public to see and hear.

  11. Andrew L

    Pretty interesting that the amended law stated if a “Coroner” concludes Bigfoot to be a humanoid the charge becomes a homicide. It’s kind of perfect- anybody who’s witnessed a Sasquatch knows what it take to obtain a specimen and the most plausible way is now illegal, ergo- they’re almost guaranteed not to be proven in an area where there’s likely to be a healthy population.

  12. mark s

    Good info for hunters/researchers to know, I know they exist and I think they are living blood creatures, intelligent and amazingly elusive, unless your attacked by them then leave them alone.

  13. Kim L

    My heart goes out to you friends who have had the traumatic experience of a BF encounter, been brave enough to tell about it, and then been subjected to, not just scoffing, but actual ridicule. I wish there were some way to right that wrong. Sadly, if the day ever comes when someone is able to deposit a carcass in the Fox News parking lot, I don’t see those small minded nay sayers lining up to apologize to you. This is the scenario I think will develop, and why I think we should carve out a way to study a specimen privately. First, I see the person providing the proof, persecuted and demonized, by the govt controlled media. I see all private research stopped and prohibited under the guise of “protection” The professional scientific community will be so caught up in jealousy and competition for any money forthcoming, that little actual research will be completed, and any information already possessed will be tightly withheld from the undeserving public (you and I). And without a doubt, if officially recognized, there will immediately be a black market demand for hairy giant monster trophies, meaning more serious poachers intent on cashing in. These are my opinions, as much as I would like to see you victims vindicated, I see any good intentions derailed by the authorities

  14. Ryan o

    I think that switching a current deer rifle to a 460, or 416 might be a better idea.

    You can pull teeth and bones to satisfy science.

    You can also put down apex predators at the same time. They don’t eat the teeth.

Leave a Reply