Sierra Shooting...

I'm new here and as an elk hunter in Washington State, I've seen some strange things hunting remote areas. Tracks, nests... So I tend to believe Bigfoot is real. Regarding the Sierra shooting, I just heard of that a few days ago on the Destination America TV show. If this story is true, it's bitter-sweet... Bigfoot finally proven to exist by death!

As a hunter I've sort of expected to eventually run into a Sasquatch and wondered would I shoot? I'm certain the powerful caliber rifle I use would do the job, just like it does on large elk and moose. Were I in danger, there would be no hesitation. Otherwise I just can not answer my own question. On one hand I'm a hunter and in the heat of the moment with thoughts of fame and glory...Bang! On the other, I do not kill just to kill and why kill Bigfoot? Besides many would hate me for doing so and I might even get in trouble with the law? Not to mention how I would feel for the rest of my life. Then too, it might turn out to be a person in a monkey suit!

But if I did shoot at Bigfoot there would be some fear that I might make a mistake and be squashed like a pancake! Or that, there may be some of his/her buddies around, and they would break my legs, then squash me like a pancake! But if I got 1 down, my buddies and I would be able to get him to the truck in 1 piece- we've done it with elk and miles from our truck. So Bigfoot would fill up the 8 foot pick-up bed with ease. We would have to cover the rest with a tarp so that others would not see. If word got out, surely the authorities would take the body from us, while handing out a fine/cuffs! So now what? Do we spend the night in camp, or race home with all the ice we can buy along the way? Whom would we contact- a scientist or researcher... what a mess!

The Destination show implied DNA shows a cross between a human woman and some primate, and that results would have to be confirmed? I also read the shooter is writing a book? Obviously I do not know much about this story and perhaps if there is more to know, someone here could bring me in the loop... because it sounds like this is the real deal... unless the TV show was making up the DNA results???

For me there is 1 red flag and 1 green flag. This story could be true because the shooter shot a young one. Now I would not have done that, but had I, I would tend not to talk about such a terrible deed. The shooter is talking, so this story could be true. Heck, he claims to have gone nearly on a killing rampage shooting 2! What else did he shoot that was not a bear? I'm not here to judge the shooter and hope if this story is true, the killing was not for nothing. I just feel if one made up such a story, the killing of a young Bigfoot would be left out, because it just might anger too many people! It would be like killing a kid or teen! Since it is openly included in the story, perhaps the story is true? My big problem here is that it seems the shooter and friend had no idea what a Bigfoot was. The driver declared... that's not a bear! Well that's what was on the TV show! I have never met a hunter who has not heard of Bigfoot or knows what it might look like. So if this is the case, I doubt this story is true. Come on...just about every American has heard of Bigfoot- Right? Heck, if I went bear hunting I would know what I was aiming at was a Bigfoot- why the scope on the rifle would make that clear! And if I decided to pull the trigger, it would only happen if I knew exactly what I was shooting at, or I would not shoot. Why take such a risk- one might shoot a person or a dog... believe me bright setting sunlight can fool you in the woods! It simply would be very irresponsible to shoot at an unknown! But this shooter seems to have done so? Correct me if I'm wrong because I certainly may not have all the facts, and I hope this story is true and ends the Bigfoot debate. There are a few faces I would like to rub the proof into!

Hey Chris, not exactly a flurry of responses around here. This place feels abandoned lately. When there's no big news it's like a ghost town. I left for a month or so, came back and there was nobody here and nothing happening. Since I checked in, I voted yes in your poll. I do not think it's an unequivocal yes, I just think it's possible Smeja is telling the truth based on the number of high profile people he has been involved with since the story broke. Who would keep going under all the scrutiny after two years?

He also seems to have passed a polygraph which is only ever 70% accurate but has some weight behind it.

I don't know the guy but anyone who could shoot a young 'person' or something that seems very human is very questionable in character. Not a guy I would befriend or think highly of. This doesn't make me think he's lying however. Either one is true.

A. He's a jerk and telling the truth.
B. He's just a lying jerk.

Both can't be true. Either way he's an A-hole. That's all I can say about the guy. So who in their right mind, like you said, would willingly make themselves into possibly the greatest A-hole alive? Not many. That also makes me think it could be true as well.

I left for awhile also, due to being uncomfortable around the bickering. But back to the topic. I can't say either way whether it is true or not. As much as I would like to have an actual Bigfoot body be discovered, I wouldn't want one shot, or killed in another fashion. But the opportunity to study a body would be a great leap for science.

NO

I would think the truth about this has to come out soon, one way or the other. Quite possibly Bigfoot will soon be proven to exist. But the more I dwell on this, the less I'm believing the story. The bear hunters in the story seem like average guys. The problem I'm having is why is this taking so long? 2 possible reasons- 1, the story is a flat out lie and 2, there is money to be had? I would think if one had evidence of Bigfoot, then one would release it asap. I would want to share it with the world and bet I could not sleep at night until I had! If it was all about money, surely one could strike a deal within a few weeks. If there are DNA findings, then why not release them? That's how it's done in court!

I'm thinking the delay is because they have nothing and here's why. OK, if I had proof of Bigfoot, 1 million Dollars would sound about right for the hunk of skin, flesh and hair. Then there would be the story rights. There is no way I would be greedy and if all I could get was $500,000 I'd take it! If it were not about money then I would hold a press conference and say... whatever... and, the results/findings will be released on such and such a date/time.

There is a reason for not being too greedy. Every Bigfoot researcher knows all the glory will go to the first to prove Bigfoot. There is no second place and only 1 person or group will go down in history. Today it seems like there are many people looking for Bigfoot and spending time in the outdoors. So many that when Bigfoot proof is released, I think it will come out of Left Field like a big surprise... BIGFOOT IS REAL!!!... Fisherman finds body- pictures and all! Read all about it! Everyone will remember what they were doing on that day of breaking news. So for all we know, such could be anounced tomorrow, and the Sierra shooter would lose out on everything because he waited too long to release his evidence. That's why I would want to release my proof as soon as I could. This story seems to be on the back burner, with some riding the tailcoats for a bit of the action? The last thing I would be doing is writing a book. I would do that later and after the release of my confirmed proof. The shooter must have been compensated for the Destination America show story- but that must have been peanuts, compared to what the hunk of flesh would be worth! So why do it? Rake in the story $ after the proof/dealings... seems like the way to go with a true story?

I would think that after the release if the Destination America show, this story would break in weeks. So, I'll give them another 4 weeks to prove Bigfoot. After that, I'll chuck this one in the recycling bin!

I voted No and it is nice to see others have voted that too.

Just another story where the evidence was "SO CLOSE" but somehow the evidence managed to escape with no trace:)

As with all evidence submitted to date there is no substance to prove that these people have encountered Bigfoot. The "sierra" hair was found to be black bear, and the fellow's boots were found to have no traces of blood. All other hair samples submitted from all over the U.S. have revealed positive results identifying bears, wolves, deer, cows, porcupine, et al.
All of the people who claim to have seen Bigfoot have not taken photographic images - it is amusing because most people carry mobile phones with cameras .
Everyone who claims that certain locations are regular passages for Bigfoot' never have the sense to arrange for cameras to be set up to record as such (if the locations were so reliable) such setups would stand a good chance of positive sightings, right?
The mystique and danger of the woods coupled with the deep spiritual imagination of people, provides a compelling atmosphere to the possibility Bigfoot might exist.
Even if Bigfoot was such an intelligent creature and could avoid detection so masterfully as has been described by many, the tangible signs of existence would be discernible (bones, hair, excrement, details in the bush). The fact is there is nothing out there that substantiates any basis of existence.
It is well that science is taking a closer look at this phenomenon, but so far the bright lights of science reveal that there is no Bigfoot, that there are only hoaxes or misinterpretations.