Saturday, September 18, 2010

Interview: A man who would kill Bigfoot

J Anderson is free-lance writer for Associated Content who plans on going on a BFRO Expedition soon. Recently he has been in contact with individuals who would favor killing Bigfoot in the name of science.

He writes an interview with one of the individuals with the pseudonym "Dave".

We have a short teaser of the interview below.

Bigfoot: Would You Shoot One?

Published September 10, 2010 by:J. Andersen

I'm excited about an upcoming Bigfoot expedition I will be attending soon with the BFRO in the northern region of the U.S. I always enjoy doing actual field research in addition to blogging about Bigfoot. What I'm also curious about is an invitation I recently received from a Bigfoot researcher who wants to shoot a Bigfoot in the name of science. And he's invited me to tag along. Is this guy crazy?

You might be surprised to know that a small minority of Bigfoot researchers carry out the same fantasy as this man (let's call him "Dave") and they believe the only way to prove Bigfoots exists is to shoot one. I personally don't believe that killing something is the best way to prove it's living, and most fans from and other Bigfoot sites would probably agree.

I've also been contacted in the last few months by a man from New York who is willing to hire retired military commandos to go into the field to capture or kill a Bigfoot. It beginning to feel like a techno-thriller Vince Flynn novel or maybe something from the late Michael Crichton (think Jurassic Park)...

It begins by asking the field research habits of Dave field research methods, but then gets into the ethics of killing Bigfoot:

....J. Andersen: Why do you hunt Bigfoot?

Dave: To prove that he/she exists I'm gonna try my hardest not to kill it if I can capture or immobilize it alive I would rather do it that way, but if I have to kill it then so be it. I will do it that way, Ican't say until that day comes.

J. Andersen: How do you plan on doing it?

Dave: The same way any other animal is hunted with a gun, proper camouflage and LUCK.

J. Andersen: Are you concerned with the Ethics of shooting a bigfoot?

Dave: Yes and No, there's no law against hunting Bigfoot where I'm from. Most people hate me for what I'm doing and that's fine but the only way to prove 100% that it exists is by capturing one dead or alive.

J. Andersen: What motivates you to shoot/capture a Bigfoot?

The thrill of being in its element, the thrill of being in his territory, the thrill of the hunt and to prove to the world that Bigfoot exists...

What Dave describes here is a real, growing frustration among Bigfoot researchers. Why can't we capture this thing on good video? With all of our modern technology and the hundreds of thousands of dollars of gear that the Bigfoot community owns, how do Bigfoots continue to avoid camera and thermal imaging? I can't answer that question...

Ho do long-term field researchers feel about the kill no kill debate?

Some serious researchers have been in the camp of killing a Sasquatch. Dr. Grover Krantz and John Green have been known advocates for killing one. On the other hand, more recent voices like Dr Jeff Meldrum, a protege of sorts of Krantz have distanced themselves from the idea of killing. Included in this alternate camp is Loren Coleman, in an 2006 article for Cryptomundo he gave a rational case for the captivity:

The first large unknown hairy hominoid captured will live its life in captivity, no doubt, and there it may be examined internally. MRIs, CAT scans, EKGs, and a whole battery of medical and other procedures may be used to examine it.

It is doubtful the first one will be returned to the wild, so, of course, it will die someday within the reach of future scientific examinations. Then it will be dissected, just as newly discovered animals, including various kinds of humans, have been for further study. But in the meantime, why not study the living animal’s captive and adaptive behaviors?

The days of Queen Victoria, when only killing an animal would establish it was real and not folklore, are, indeed, long gone. --Loren Coleman 2/6/2006

In case you were wondering, we do not think killing Bigfoot is necessary, and we aren't that frustrated that we don't have proof yet. There's enough unsorted data out there, that is still being dissected, to build a better physical and behavioral model of Bigfoot. As we build a better model and share information with each other, we will all eventually have the proof we pursue.

The full Interview with Dave
Bigfoot Civil Rights
Cryptomundo: To Kill or Not to Kill Bigfoot
Bigfoot Encounters: To Kill or Film


  1. The obsession with killing Bigfoot to prove its existence, under the arrogant self-important guise of "in the name of science" is tragic.

    Not much better is Coleman's belief that having one in captivity is somehow better than murdering one. Neither option is a good one.

    For those that have seen a Bigfoot, they know it exists. Witnesses are believed, or, not. I understand the enormous frustration some witnesses experience in not being believed, having their experience questioned, having their sanity questioned, and so proving BF exist by showing a body, dead or captured alive, to the world will end the torment. But frankly, so what? Is your need to be believed more important than Bigfoot's life? Not in my worldview.

    For others, who've never seen a BF but want to prove its existence for whatever reasons: ego or what have you, I have no sympathy. Laws for or against killing (or even capturing) have nothing to do with anything. A law doesn't make something right, or, wrong, simply because it's a law. You can't have a "yes and no" moral attitude towards killing a BF; you either are for it, or you aren't.

    While I have respect for many BF researchers, it's difficult to have full respect for those, no matter who they are, support a kill policy.

    And by the way, why doesn't "Dave" use his real name? It strikes me as being cowardly. Yes, there are avid anti-No Kill Bigfoot folks out there, but, tough. He choose this path, deal with it.

  2. Thanks for the comment Regan! Fans, if you haven't visited Regan's or her contributions at you have been missing a significant voice in the community.

  3. the only reason he wants to kill a bigfoot is for himself and the "thrill" as he put it, is disrespectful, were talking about an endangered animal!!, a species that hasnt been captured, because its so elusive and does not want to be seen, what do u think is gunna happen wen one gets shot and cries out, if there is another in the area wen this happens it will see humans are a threat and instead of avioding us wen weere out hiking or camping they will probably attack us considering a chimp can rip humans to shreds imagine what an 8ft 600lb sasquatch could to , there are stories of them picking up small deer and just ripping them limb from limb with bare hands.... back to the point , this man is arrogent and the people that have the same opinion about killing an animal that might be the most endangered animal on the planet and killing one would be catastrophic to there species , if it had a group or family , it could have a dramtic effect on there behavior wen envountered in the future, i love squatching and to imagine someone pointing a gun at one if you come that close and shooting it would be criminal .

  4. I was attacked by one in '81 and if I had had a gun I would have killed it. The only reason I believe that I was able to survive this atack was that a park ranger just happen to come driving down the road when I ran onto it and the creature ran off. He was coming at me very fast and there was no way that I could have gotten much further. It was a long way away from me when it saw me and I was just walking looking at nature. Don't tell me that these things belong here cause they don't. They are not natural and the indians know how dangerous they are. Not one indian tribe believes that they are peaceful. They all say not to be around them. So I understand peop;e who have not encountered one thinking that they are like the movie "Harry and the Hendersons" , but they aren't. They are neither human nor animal, They are creatures/monsters that somehow survived by not being civilized and willing to interact peacefully. I know the stories of people quote " feeding" them and all that crap but the big one that chased me in northwest Arkansas was anything but. These things even scare our own predators and feed on them as well. Whemn bear and cougers and other animals are that afraid of something, then it don't belong. I will tell you the difference in this creature than other animals that are predators. These creatures are intelligent and are probably smarter than humans because they obviously stay hidden from us and they DON'T WANT to interact with us socially. At least the other natural prdators are only acting from instinct and are to some degree very predictable as for as habits, and their actions as a rule. These bigfoot creatures are anything but predictable. They may even have largert brains than we do. It's what they do with it that scares me. Too many stories like mine thru the centuries. I'm a live and let live person, but not with these things. I wish they were Harry and the Hendersons but they ARE NOT. By the way, I belong to just about every wildlife conservation clug, grpoup or association there is and wouldn't hurt a fly, but I would these MONSTERS. That's all they are. Half hunman and half something else(?). Half human is not human or they could be socialized.

    1. Anything that can walk on all fours isn't human. Kill 'em all.

    2. This isn't about conservation,it's about preservation. These things are documented killers and attack people even when unprovoked. I say kill all of them. We shouldn't haved to worry aboout something like this when we go to a national park or in the local woods hiking. I don't want to worry about my chidren,or my spouse much less me. Kill them and be done with it. I can handle bears and cougers. With them I know what to expect, but with a bigfoot and their ability to reason and think, who knows.

  5. You have no clue what your are talking about! Big foot are peaceful creatures, and will not hurt another human being, because they know there us. I am married to a Native America. Her, and her tribal members adore and respect these creatures.

    They often come right into our village and go to the "Offering stump". We give them trinkets, and food, they give us "items" (That i will not elaborate on, you will never believe me anyway) There has been no doucemented attack by a Big foot or any killing of humans by them. there has been stories, but no proof! Yes, if cornered, they will attack to get away just like any animal,. other then that, they leave humans alone. And they don't eat meat!.

    Almost all the "facts" about these creatures are all made up and the repeated again, and again, like the saying: "It's not the heat, but the humidity". With your limited and mistaken knowledge about them, is the reason so many so-called "Big foot Researchers" fail to find any proof! Just keep "Wood knocking' and you will never see them! As Matt Moneymaker says; "I've been tracking squatches for 25 years"! Well, with this asshole and others like him, it will be another 25 years he/they will be tracking these beautiful, peacefull creatures!

    My name is John W.Jones, my Email is:
    "Forgive them Lord, for they don't know what they do"


Let's keep the language clean, keep in mind we have younger fans and we want to make this the best bigfoot website for bigfoot news and bigfoot research.

Please read our terms of use policy.