June 7, 2014

The Unethical and Potential Dangers of Bigfoot Baiting – Part 3

Guest blog post by Cindy Bowers

Part 1-Scent Attractants
Part 2-Children

Part 3-Food

Another unethical practice is the gifting of food, especially food placed in plastic containers or with high sugar content. Animals that live in the wild who become habituated, lose their natural fear of man, and become dependent on the food provided. Not only are these animals becoming dependent on the food sources, but they are eating unnatural foods such as cookies, donuts and peanut butter. These foods are high in sugar and will cause health problems for the animals, such as tooth decay and potentially diabetes. If that isn’t bad enough, they are chewing through the plastic lids and containers, inadvertently consuming the plastic.

Studies on wildlife have shown that plastic kills animals as it builds up in their digestive tracts. The California Coastal Commission in their article “The Problem With Marine Debris,” had this to say about the plastic debris: “Birds, fish and mammals can mistake the plastic for food. Debris may cause choking and injuries, and with plastic filling their stomachs, animals may have a false feeling of being full and may die of starvation.” Researchers may be inadvertently killing off native wildlife while in pursuit of an unknown creature. There are videos of researchers leaving these food gifts, only to later return to a littered forest floor, plastic strewn about. It is appalling. Animals, Bigfoot or otherwise, having gnawed at the plastic peanut butter jars have no doubt ingested the plastic. The high sugar content, with no dental hygiene, will cause the animals teeth to decay. No teeth, means, no eating. The animals again face starvation, and no teeth, also means, no defense from predators.

Littering is also a crime, and these researchers face potential tickets as well. The researcher must also remember that when leaving these foodstuffs he or she is attracting small animals such as mice and raccoon, which then ingest this plastic or sugar and then are consumed by predators. The plastic has now made its way up the food chain to other animals, such as owls or hawks, which now face death as well. The animals having become dependent on the food gifts will then began to wonder into areas they previously avoided, such as suburban housing in search of the food. This creates a danger to domestic animals through the spread of disease and attack from larger species. This practice can also potentially dangerous humans as well, as animals become more aggressive over things like garbage.

Food sources should be limited if not removed altogether, ensure the safety of all wild life. If a researcher feels the need to gift food sources, then limit the amount of food so the animals do not become dependent on it. By removing all plastics containers and their potential dangers, the researcher will make the environment safer for the animals. As an alternative the researcher could place non-sugar foods in cut melons, the rind will decompose and the forest will be litter free.

The Humane Society of the United States in their article titled “Four Reasons Not To Feed Wildlife” says that, “Human foods aren’t nutritious enough for animals and may cause serious health problems.” The article continues by acknowledging the fact that people may still choose to feed wild animals, and suggests a healthier alternative by saying, “healthy foods include seedless grapes cut in half, shredded kale, Swiss chard or romaine lettuce, and grains, including wheat, barley and oats.” Since feeding wildlife is not recommended and ethical researcher would refrain from the practice, or at least provide healthy alternatives in a limited fashion.

The Bigfoot phenomena certainly warrants further investigation, as there are far too many witness sightings to ignore it. However, there needs to be some ethical changes made: no end justifies the means. It is the researcher’s responsibility to look after their teammates whether they are men, women or children, while taking care of the environment as well. By making these ethical changes in research practices, the researcher will be insuring the safety of all of his or her teammates, while at the same time looking out for the native wildlife, making the forest safer for all. This will also allow for mutual respect between parties, men, women, and children. Women will feel valued as teammates. The potential dangers from predators will be reduced. Children will be happier and safer while still exploring the topic, and grow up to be potentially valuable researchers themselves. The native wildlife will be healthier by removing the plastic and sugar from their diet, and the forest will become a prettier place for all to enjoy. By making these changes and becoming more ethical, researchers will be modeling correct behavior for future generations and setting a positive example for the current generation. Be safe out there, and happy hunting.

Source

Works Cited
British Columbia. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. “Bears and Cougars.” Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, 2002. BC Parks. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
Crowser, Vivaca. “Be Prepared (for Wildlife Encounters).” Montana Outdoors. Montana Outdoors. Aug. 2009. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
“Fatal Wolf Attack Unnerves Alaska Village.” MSNBC. NBC News, 17 Mar. 2010. Web. 7 Arp. 2014.
“Four Reasons Not To Feed Wildlife.” The Humane Society. Humane Society.org, 17 May. 2013. Web. 23 Apr.2014.
Freitas, John and Montra. “Sasquatch Pheromones.” Blue North: Investigations & Expeditions into the Unknown. Blue North Productions. 29 Aug. 2009. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
Gunther, Kerry A. “Bears and Menstruating Women.” Bear Management Office, Yellowstone National Park, 2012. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
Hughes, Howard C. Sensory Exotica. Cambridge. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999. Print.
“Mountain Lion Kills Boy Hiking in Colorado Park.” The New York Times. The New York Times Company.19 Jul. 1997. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
Muris, Peter, and Andy Field. “The Role Of Verbal Threat Information In The Development Of Childhood Fear: “‘Beware The Jabberwock!’” Clinical Child & Family Psychology Review 13.2 (2010): 129-150. Academic Search Complete. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
“Pheromone Chips.” A Guide to Bigfoot Hunting. Bigfoot Hunting.com, 2001. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
“The Problem with Marine Debris.” California Coastal Commission. State of California, 2014.Web. 15 Apr. 2014
Rogers, Lynn L, Gregory A. Wilker, Sally S. Scott. “Reactions of Black Bears to Human
Menstrual Odors.” Journal of Wildlife Management. 55.4: 632-634. 27 Mar. 1991. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
“Report # 1090 (Class A).” Bigfoot Research Organization (BFRO). BFRO.net. 4 Jan. 2001. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
Tipton, Florence J. “What Are the Different Types of Female Pheromones?” Wise Geek: Clear Answers for Common Questions. Conjecture Corporation. 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 23 Apr. 2014

Filed under Bigfoot, Bigfoot Report, Cryptozoologists, Cryptozoology, Evidence, Footprint Evidence, Pop Culture, Sasquatch