There are First Nations legends that seem to indicate that there was some type of large unknown hairy hominid. There are certainly many Native American names for what most people today call Bigfoot or Sasquatch.
Now when it comes to our understanding of when people actually migrated into the Americas—and also where they came from—well, our knowledge is expanding dramatically. New archaeological finds have small but major in what we are learning from them. The emerging picture suggests that humans may have arrived in North America at least 20,000 years ago—some 5,000 years earlier than has been commonly believed. Were there other human inhabitants on the continent that we have yet to find the remains of?
A village or villages would not take long to disappear once abandoned and the forest takes back over. I've seen any number of buildings in the UK and Europe abandoned and until you make your way through the overgrowth and trees you do not see them.
How long it took family groups, moving overland together for protection from predators not afraid of man and form territories we do not know. When they first adopted a name for their particular tribe is also a moment lost in history but there are points to consider.
There may well have been forest dwelling fauna -canids and/or felids- that we know nothing about. Die in the forest and the scavengers will move in and as has been shown a deer carcass does not last a few weeks. A skeleton or bones need to be found first and then analysed to see whether the animal in question is known or unknown. There may be future discoveries that will really change the image of North American wildlife history.
But you have to find the bones first -as with human remains- and those could be hidden under the continents forestry and a great deal of that has never been seen by explorers or natives.
Above:
A replica of Gigantopithecus at the Museum of Man in San Diego. Photo (c)2022 Zuma https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/160106-science-evolution-apes-giant
There are a lot of possibilities. However, until bones are found it is pure speculation and fantasy. I mention this as many have shouted out at lectures and in print (and TV of course) that the Sasquatch may be a species of Gigantopithecus.
If you check out Wikipedia you will learn that Gigantopithecus is an extinct genus of ape from roughly 2 million to 350,000 years ago during the Early to Middle Pleistocene of southern China, represented by one species, Gigantopithecus blacki. Potential identifications have also been made in Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia. There is no evidence for it having existed in North America. That is not to say that there may not have been a related species but, again, the evidence needs to be found and gigantopithecus evidence is not exactly in abundance outside of North America.
After almost 60 y6ears the "best" evidence is still considered to be the Patterson-Gimlin footage taken in 1967. Sceptics, debunkers and pro-Sasquatch researchers and lay people have written about, study and even 'analysed' the footage as well as the way "Patty" walks. Despite fake claims of being "the man in the Bigfoot suit" it has never been proven a fake or genuine.
The enlarge cell from the footage (above) and other cells have raised claim and counter-claim. Unless new footage of irreproachable authenticity emerges showing a similar hominid is presented, and I have stated this for over a decade, the Patterson-Gimlin footage should no longer be waved as evidence as it takes the debate around in circles for even more decades.
A more sensible approach to the Sasquatch question is taken by the Small Town Monsters documentary company which is talking to and recording eye witness accounts as well as the history of these reports from around the United States. They are also attempting to gather evidence. https://www.youtube.com/c/SmallTownMonsters
The above and below art seems to be far more in keeping with observer descriptions of Sasquatch. I have no idea who created these but in decades I have seen many "Sasquatch paintings" and these take it to a whole new level. My first words (out loud) when I saw the image below was "Wow". (above and below) (c)2022 respective copyright owner
If we only accept that 2% of the observer accounts from the last 40 years (so hundreds) are true encounters or observations and that the circumstances in which they took place are accurately stated then we have to pay attention.
I am afraid to say that the involvement of so called "cryptozoologists" in the subject does not help. They have not contributed a great deal other than self publicity and making money. What they have given us are theories and stories, some concocted to push a theory, of "dimensional portholes" that Sasquatch move out of and into. Bullet proof Sasquatch -giving us the theory that it is supernatural. Then we have the theory that Sasquatch is...of alien origin.
These people also seem to have no idea how to take evidence for DNA testing; a long dark hair found in the forest where a Sasquatch was seen months ago -send it in for analysis. Analysis that costs thousands £/$ as well as time for...Bear DNA or Elk DNA or even deer DNA. When the analyst states "No unknown DNA" that is seen as a cover up or, somehow, the sample was tampered with. Faking Sasquatch prints and 'finding' them for a TV show just smacks down any real interest from science.
The late wildlife biologist John Bindernagel had his work largely ignored by the Bigfoot 'community' as they did not need evidence because they knew Bigfoot was out there. It was disheartening for him as he had done the field work and gathered the data that the "We want to prove Sasquatch is out there" crowd should have read, praised and used to take field work further.
In 1982 I was -in the main- a naturalist specialising in wild canids and felids. One day I received a letter from a friend telling me that the Kentucky UFO Investigators League (see footnote) was looking into reports of the "Fouke Monster"/ "The Boggy Creek Monster" (aka a local Bigfoot). The lead investigator Gary L. Webster contacted in April, 1982 -replying to a letter I had sent John Daly a good while before. Gary asked about gathering evidence and what was required.
For me that was a chance to learn more -not about any Bigfoot type creature but the habitat itself. No internet back then so I had to resort to technical books written by biologists, botanists and wildlife experts. After two months I had found that there was sufficient water, flora and fauna and enough habitat for a large animal to survive. But, you may ask, wouldn't the locals know these things were out there? Well, yes -the reports exist as did the tracks.
I can give another example(s); there have been a number of cases in the United States where an "unknown creature" was taking or killing local dogs. Now, as soon as I heard that I did not think "Bigfoot" or some paranormal creature. I immediately thought puma/cougar. Cryptozoologists and others talked of a silent, stealthy creature able to get over high fences -there was no such creature existing in the areas. Where i did interrupt the fantasy and suggested a puma the backlash could get nasty.
Oh. Eventually game camera took images of the "mystery killers"...pumas. Not supposed to be in the area but as populations grow they do instinctively pass through old territories now built on. Why do I mention dogs being killed or even for that matter small livestock? Simply because if there is a Sasquatch-like creature then you have to consider its diet and body size. This is no lowland gorilla that sits around eating fruit or other vegetation all day or else by now we would know their locations and been able to study them.
The anecdotal descriptions of Sasquatch gives an estimated height of roughly 1.8–2.7 metres (6–9 ft), with some descriptions having the creatures standing as tall as 3.0–4.6 metres (10–15 ft) although I suspect that the extreme heights are down to the animal standing on something not seen by the observer or exaggeration. Estimates of body weight vary from 300-500+ lbs (136-226 kgs). The muscle mass would require a very good source of nutrition and that will not just come from being a "gentle vegetarian". Meat would provide the protein needed or supplement the hominids vegetable diet.
There are reports of Sasquatch hunting, killing or seen carrying off dead deer -a dead deer may have died due to any number of causes but a free food source is nothing to turn a nose up to. The description or theory that Sasquatch may hunt in a group to catch deer and even use dogs is stretching things. Primates will act together to get a food source but speculating wildly that dogs are used -coyotes and wolves also- to aid the hunt does not help credibility. We know wolves became companions of early man and this led to domestication. Sasquatch is using dogs as food or to hunt with them -confusing and conflicting speculation.
That Sasquatch would require a good mixed diet seems obvious. Arnold Schwarzenegger did not get his build through eating blueberries and other fruit. If there is sufficient fruit and root resources then that is a positive. Rodents and other small mammals not to mention frogs, toads and lizards and insects, wild honey -all able to support a small local population. Plenty of cover for resting in while travelling a territory and with few humans around then perfect. Humans building on old wildlife tracks and territory should expect wild visitors.
Everything is there that would be needed to support a small number of local Sasquatch so what is needed is the evidence. As with UFOs and the paranormal the Sasquatch/Bigfoot field is full of fake photos and footage from the well done down to the absolutely ridiculous looking.
There are areas where there is said to be a lot of Sasquatch activity and humans scouring the area and going out "tree knocking" and calling (with no idea what the calls might mean to a real creature that uses them). The few recordings of calls from alleged Sasquatch that have not turned out to be wildlife such as coyote, etc., sound very much like primate calls. Escaped or released primates as I believe can be found in the Florida Everglades is a possibility. The constant smell of humans would drive a fairly reclusive animal well away especially if they have experienced human hunters.
The answer to gathering visual evidence are game cams. If an area experiences constant Sasquatch activity then the solution is to place cameras well out of the reach of, say, a 10ft (3m) tall creature. If these could be place and left as solar powered and with a link to a base computer that can check feed all the better. The alternative is the same thing: as many cameras in and around an area with a power source that can last up to a week after which SD cards can be collected and new batteries installed along with new SD cards.
It is a long process and it may make some people sick of seeing bears, deer, raccoons and cougars (valuable information for zoologists though) but just that one small clip or 2-3 quality photographs with a good chain of evidence to rule out anyone faking something and they would kick in scientific interest.
All the cryptozoology books, all the You Tube fakery and TV series present no evidence. Evidence is and must be what leads the way and with so much inter-personality/group fighting going on the work needs to be carried out by competent naturalists or zoologists.
__________________________________________________________
Founded by Gary Webster and Rick Ziegler in 1981. It was based out of Covington, Kentucky. This chapter collected monthly membership dues which mostly went to the high costs of reproductions of their field manual, which was based on the UFOIL Manual and MARCEN Manual. The group also investigated ghost hauntings and Bigfoot sightings in addition to UFO's. A drop in reports and dwindling membership numbers resulted in the groups breakup in late 1982.
Big Bone Lick State Park Trailer Park case in 1981. The trailer park no longer exists today, but residents there in the early 1980s reported Bigfoot sightings.Fouke Monster (Arkansas) case in April 1982.
.jpg)
.jpg)
