An Anonymous Comment for you to Ponder

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Bruce Barraclough Eyewitness Account":

I can’t help but feel a bit frustrated by the reporters reactions in this encounter. Yeah…I know; how would I react etc. etc., BUT if we’re going to conduct meaningful field research we have to abide by a couple of imperatives. While these are opinions belonging to me and my associates, I hope that readers will trust that they are based on good information and valid experience, (All I can say at this point). The first imperative is: NO guns, or if they are taken afield they must remain totally invisible at all times(before leaving the trailhead to after the conclusion of the outing and complete exit from the habitat.), and only drawn in a true life and death scenario. But: your chances of being assaulted by sasquatch are much, much less than being attacked by a black bear. Sasquatch understand guns intimately, they look for them and are very distrustful of anyone carrying them. All high tech devices create distrust. The inclusion of a detectable firearm may escalate an encounter into a very aggressive response depending on the individual creature’s family history regarding firearms. The other absolute must is that field researchers refrain from using any night vision (starlight) night vision devices that utilize an infrared LED light source), or camera devices (camera traps) utilizing the same.

Very important is the idea that we should adopt an attitude of reverence…even sacredness for the sasquatche’s immediate environment. The same as if you were visiting a dignitary holding high office somewhere—high respect.

Leave tasty food gifts at every opportunity. Playing melodic guitar music around a campfire is a good thing, if you’re in the right place you’ll have an unseen audience. Ladies; while afield realize you are probably being admired secretly, and by all means, sing softly while hiking. (never alone though)

Be unobtrusive;
This means no, non-sense signaling, (you don’t know what it may inadvertently communicate), with wood knocking or imitation calls or even call blasting. Should you believe as many do that sasquatch is fooled by this kind of crap…think again!
I watched a few minutes of FB last night; until I started getting angry and sickened by the ignorance portrayed by the actors involved—I switched over to Spongebob reruns (makes much more sense). If they only realized how ignorant and unscientific they appear, they would all be hiding under rocks instead of stupidly throwing them in the woods. They do the creature a great disservice: what decent scientist would have anything to do with investigating the phenomenon for fear of even being associated television specials such as FB. It takes an incredibly dedicated scientist (a true scientist) to publicly acknowledge the probable existence of sasquatch.
If sasquatches have a sense of humor (and I’m pretty certain they do) they have to be laughing their big butts off! The common mistake all these yahoos make is assuming they are smarter than the creature. They consistently and severely underestimate their quarry. The sasquatch has a particular, innate, and as well, finely developed intelligence with which it perceives its environment. Again they understand our technology in an organic context and they are not fooled by camera traps (excepting a rare case involving inexperienced juveniles), fake, poorly imitated calls, whoops, or samurai chatter, woodknocking, and rock throwing, pheromone lures etc. etc. Any resident creatures within a particular territory know immediately when humans (and especially buffoons) enter. Actions by amateur field researchers have had the net effect of increasing the species knowledge and confidence of human behavior, which has possibly led to increased casual sightings. (Maybe a good thing)

Yeah…there’s a squatch in them woods—but you’ll never see him.