Brandon Fugal

Easy to say that the truth is the goal, but these days, to go into business with the History Channel is to lose credibility from the get-go. It implies publicity and entertainment is the point, not serious research into the various phenomena witnessed or suspected at the ranch.

I understand your concern, but respectfully do not see another medium that can engage the public, explore what many believe to be “controversial” topics & provide a resource to conduct investigation. Academia certainly isn’t interested, & I have yet to see a more effective path.

Ever heard of BBC or NatGeo?

But is either interested in such a weird, hard to categorize subject? The ranch is a giant mixed bag of ill-defined, marginally documented phenomena, laced with local mythology & misinformation. The collected evidence defies reason. Where does a mainstream broadcaster even start?

Where do they start? They start where I did: as an open-minded skeptic, focused on the facts and observational science.

Well, you weren't just a little open minded. You must have been fairly convinced to have bought the property. You're right to think most broadcast entities won't be that open. But do you need them?

I was convinced that there were enough reports/claims by enough people to warrant a disciplined scientific investigation/study of the property. I don’t need any broadcast entities. It would have served me much better financially & professionally to avoid this.

I read the article @mjbanias wrote where it was briefly explained how you acquired the property. But one thing missing is the reason Bigelow was interested in selling it. Surely a billionaire would be able to keep a ranch in Utah as a pet project in case the phenomenon came back?