The word "Sasquatch" often conjures thoughts of an aggressive monster, most people, of which, do not believe is real. I'm here to tell you that they "ARE" real, and "ARE" a living model for science evasion. This animal has been historically reported and witnessed in every State and Canadian Province since the time Euro-man arrived on the North American continent, and well before by Native Americans. Most of the descriptions are very similar, as well as the reported behavior for these animals. They are not ghosts, goblins, or figments of the drunk imagination. They leave behind compelling evidence for their existence, and much of the evidence cannot be faked.

On October 20th, 1967, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were looking for these animals in the Bluff Creek Riverbed in Northern California on horseback. Although their intent was to gather footage of the Sasquatch habitat (attempting to show film producers a merited effort), they really did not expect to actually see one. Suddenly the horses reared, bucking Patterson off, and he was able to grab the 16mm camera from the saddle bag just in time. Gimlin held his Horse firm, and watched in awe as the sequence unfolded. Patterson thought that the Horse reared because of a Cougar or Bear, and wanted to film it. They were both confronted with a large, dark, hair-covered body in the riverbed. With only a little more than a minutes time left of film, Patterson grabbed the camera, and as he did, the animal stood up, and began to walk away. Patterson gained his feet and started chasing the animal, while Gimlin later reflected a major concern for Patterson's safety, although too shocked to make any comment. Patterson ran and then shot what has become the most compelling film evidence ever gathered of a live Sasquatch, walking away from him. The film is shaky in the beginning, but becomes more stable toward the end where the animal can be clearly seen and identified.

Since that day the film has been scientifically analysed by several experts, including those residing in Russia, and most have found that the film obviously shows that the animal is not a man in a suit. They have studied each frame individually and found that there is no zipper, and the "suit" would have been impossible to create in 1967. They have actually seen muscle movement in each frame ... another reason to note that the animal is real. Suits do not show muscle movement. In addition, the walk of the animal is totally unlike a human gait. Estimates based on intense study of each frame show the animal was about 7 feet and 1 inch tall. My personal estimate, based on study at Rene Dahinden's residence in 1980, indicated 6 feet and 11 inches tall. My estimates did not compensate for the bent-over stride, and it may be that this animal would measure over 7 feet and 5 inches if standing totally erect. The weight estimates from the experts indicate from 800 to 1,000 pounds.

I will add here that I was allowed to view and examine, frame by frame, the Patterson Film in September, 1980 by the late Rene Dahinden. Rene owned all rights to the film, although some were always considered "Public Domain". I stayed with Rene for three days, and he showed me most likely more than he ever showed anyone else after that day. I saw so many aspects of the Patterson Film that I believe very few people have ever seen since. I wish the world could see what I saw, including the plaster casts he made only a day after the film, and the comparison of those feet to what is shown in the film.

Dr. W. Henner Fahrenbach
on the
"Patterson-Gimlin Film Resolution"

In view of the renewed vigor that the Patterson movie frames are being examined, I will repost this discussion on resolution (with verifying recalculation and minimal changes) that went out about a year ago.

Usually such examination is done on prints that are magnified to or well beyond the limit of profitable enlargement with the result that the optical "noise" of the emulsion, usually called the grain, assumes a
life of its own and invites spurious and fanciful interpretations. In order to give would-be analysts a cautionary yardstick, I provide the following details and calculations.

The resolution of a film, as stated in Kodak handbooks, is determined under laboratory conditions, as for example on an optical bench, by photographing a black and white grating pattern, meaning 100% contrast modulation, onto the film. If one uses a grating whose spacing gets tighter and tighter, there is a point at which the adjacent lines smear into one another and can no longer be separated. That is the stated resolving power of the film. This resolving power cannot, of course, be realized under photographic field conditions, since A) the camera isn't mounted on a solid pier; B) more importantly, real life scenery does not have close to 100% contrast of closely adjacent objects, and C) transfer of the available contrast from scenery to film (modulation transfer) occurs in an imperfect fashion. However, contrast contributes in an important manner to the smallest detail that can be detected in the final print. Additionally, any part of the intervening optical system, for example the camera lens, the enlarger condenser (if any), the enlarger lens and the coherence of the enlarger light source affect the resolution of the final image and will always degrade it from the optimum stated for the film. Multiple serial reproductions exacerbate these problems substantially.

The emulsion that was used by Patterson was, as far as is known, Kodachrome II. That film has a stated resolving power of 63 lines/ mm. In addition, Nyquists's Sampling Theorem states in its simplest fashion, that for a signal (minimal image element) to be detected, you need in effect the space of two lines, which brings the resolving power to 31.5 lines / mm. Stated differently, the smallest interval that can reliably resolved (under optimal conditions) in this film is (1 mm =1,000µm) divided by 31.5 lines = 31.7 micrometers or microns on the film. This is the physically limiting value for Kodachrome II, below which you may see assorted patterns that are part of the emulsion, but that carry NO image information and are, by definition, background noise. Advanced image manipulation techniques can modify contrast, edge sharpness and other aspect of the image, but cannot generate signal from noise and put the interpretation at risk.

It will be apparent at this point that all this calculation can be done without reference to an actual picture. One is dealing, after all, with a plain physical process that is well understood and for which the pertinent literature is voluminous.

The stated resolving power pertains to the original negative. To find what this value of 31.7 microns corresponds to in the prints in circulation, one has to know the magnification. When one does crucially important enlargements, one should print a transparent millimeter grating directly at the same settings
as the original negative, whereby one generates a reference of the magnification. Since this is not available, one has to extrapolate stepwise from the size of an original 16 mm frame (at 1x) and scale it up to the larger images, a process that accumulates errors but still provides a good "ballpark" figure.

A good starting point is provided by the images in Perez' "Bigfoot at Bluff Creek" (1992; BigfooTimes; D. Perez; private printing. 10926 Milano Ave., Norwalk, CA 90650) He shows a one-to-one contact print of a bit of 16 mm film for calibration and a slightly larger image, which includes the frame, at 11.3x. Beyond that point it becomes necessary to find crisp fiduciary marks in overlapping pictures of different magnifications to extrapolate further. Thus, the Dahinden commercial picture of the full frame No. 352 (wide format) is approximately 37.5 x, the Dahinden vertical pictures of Frames 323 and 352 are magnified about 133 times, and the Halpin and Ames pictures are about 110 X (Manlike Monsters on Trial, University of British Columbia Press, 1980).

Some pictures that have been circulated of Patty's head alone can be calibrated by the preceding pictures and have been found to exceed 1,000 fold magnification. For the Patty rear view pictures, information available from NASI indicates that the large Dahinden pictures are at exactly a third of the magnification of the sideviews, i.e., 44 times, the Halpin and Ames picture 22 X. If one multiplies the maximal possible resolution that this film allows with the magnification, one arrives at a value that constitutes the absolute smallest resolvable detail in the pertinent print. This value will inevitably be overly optimistic (too small) because one is not dealing with a stark black-and-white image nor a steady camera. For the vertical images (Frame 323 and 352) this value is (133 x 31.7 microns) = 4,216 microns, or 4.2 mm. Cut out a paper circle with this diameter and it will approximate the smallest detail (optimistically) resolvable, slightly over 2 inches on Patty's body. (Actual resolution, for the above-mentioned cautionary reasons is apt to be worse than that, possibly by half)

Upon inspection of this juxtaposition, the resolution in these large pictures picture is virtually the same as the largest blobs like the nose and the ear projection, but anything below that level of detail does not contain information. This maximal resolution is clearly discernible in the 133 x pictures, which have lots of empty magnification even though that makes it a little easier to look at them at a distance.

Thus, there can be no talk about detecting individual strands of hair, insect bites, skin blemishes, the pupil, teeth or other similar fine detail.

Actually, everything there is to be seen in the pictures is visible with the naked eye at 50-100x magnification, i.e., surprisingly, common sense prevails in "what-you-see-is-what-you-get". Thus, finger or toe detail, that should lie in the vicinity of this 2" limit, does not show up crisply at all.

Any conclusions based on supposed detail below the stated limit are largely a function of the imagination of the examiner, should be viewed with grave suspicion, and would require heroic proof to be convincing.

Analysis based on anything other than direct copies of the original film frames is also to be avoided at all cost due to the above considerations.

There are many other questions and problems to be discussed at length in future articles.

Sasquatch footprints are a lot more common than most people realize. Many go unreported because the witnesses do not think anyone will believe them, or they think someone hoaxed the prints. Above is a typical Sasquatch footprint found near Bluff Creek in Northern California ... an area where hundreds of similar prints have been discovered. Although this track is old, it is similar to those found today, on a day by day basis, in all States throughout North America.

Sasquatch footprints are probably the most compelling piece of evidence for a large bipedal hominid's existence. Although some are faked on occasion, most are not, and most are found in areas where humans do not often travel. Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum and the late Dr. Grover Krantz have been seriously involved in examining many footprints and casts of footprints in and from various areas of North America. Dr. Krantz had published several articles and books about his discoveries and conclusions, while Dr. Meldrum continues the legacy of Dr. Krantz after his death. Both have concluded that several of the footprints and casts examined represent an unknown bipedal hominid. For some odd reason the NEWS MEDIA has refused to report these findings, but I am including a link below to Dr. Meldrum's paper which will conclusively show that these tracks are not hoaxed in any way ... at least not those he mentions. Dr. Meldrum is a specialist in primate locomotion, in case the reader has any doubts. It is time Science accepts this evidence and begins serious academic study of the footprints, and possibly the creature who made them. Following the report below you will find a link to Dr. Meldrum's paper which includes many very good photographs and illustrations.

In October 1980 I too found Sasquatch prints in the Stilliguamish River near Robe, Washington. This was also investigated by the late Rene Dahinden. One of the casts I made was examined Dr. Meldrum. His findings were revealed to me in July, 2003 as listed below:

"Assembling a sizable sample has been critical to making any informed generalizations about the variable anatomy of a primate foot. In addition, you should recognize that evaluating an isolated cast with little corroborative data concerning its provenience is an uncertain proposition. I can evaluate the inferred anatomy and proportions within the context of a larger sample, but determining the credibility of the isolated artifact is not really a reasonable expectation. I can now say that your cast falls within the observed range of variation of footprints I am relatively confident are authentic. The heel is a bit weakly impressed, but given that the greatest depth is under the forefoot, that is not unexpected. The weakness of the "ball" impression is also interesting and is correlated with the abducted position of the hallux. I have other examples that are similar in the degree of abduction of the hallux and the weakness of imprint of the ball, but with less attenuation of impression at the base of the hallux. The relative length and conformation of the toes are generally consistent with the model of the sasquatch foot I have derived. As for proportions, your point of measuring the heel and "ball" are a bit off (and you have recorded the dimension of the heel line incorrectly on the back of the cast). Those measures of 3.5 inches to 6 inches give a heel/ball ratio of .58, which falls in the lower range of a human sample. By selecting a better point to measure the greatest breadth of the heel and a more accurate breadth of the ball, I get a ratio of 5.5/4, or .73 which falls within the sasquatch range."

There are similar animals reportedly captured and displayed in the past, and only "Jacko" of June 1884, captured by a Train Crew in B.C., Canada was ever thought to be an actual Sasquatch. He was 4 feet 7 inches tall and weighed 127 pounds. That would be considered skinny for a Sasquatch, but perhaps not for a juvenile. He was covered with dark hair and the train crew reportedly fed him on berries and milk (not likely). They planned to take him to London, but Jacko somehow escaped. Obviously, Jacko was not a Chimp, but what he was is still unknown!

Most of those who do not believe that Sasquatch is a real, living creature have not taken any time to study the subject. In reality, there is too much evidence that they are real, and no evidence that they aren't. Hoaxers play a very small role in Sasquatch research, and are usually quickly discovered with very little effort. To fake a "Real" Sasquatch footprint would simply take too much effort, highly sophisticated equipment, and a strict background in Podiatry in order to produce authentic looking Sasquatch tracks.

Films, on the other hand, can be easily faked with modern equipment, but that equipment did not exist in 1967 when Patterson shot his footage. Today, most photos and films are suspect of being hoaxed, but the Patterson film remains the best bit of evidence yet offered to the world.

Hair and fecal samples have been collected and analyzed, and found to be that of an unknown primate. Since primates do not exist in the areas where this evidence was collected, they must be that of the Sasquatch, or rampant apes running around North America. These "Apes" have also developed flat, human-like feet that are much larger than any ape or man foot recorded!

On a Physics standpoint, this creature must comply with certain standards relative to what is currently understood. The following was written by a Scientist who actually worked-out the math involved, based on Sasquatch stature as well as human and ape, to formulate a living animal that is obviously still eluding Science ...

Although people often mistake known animals for Sasquatches, the legitimate reports describe a very similar animal. Usually the eyewitnesses never believed in Sasquatch until they actually see one. Sometimes footprints accompany the sighting, making the sighting more credible. I have interviewed scores of people who have witnessed a Sasquatch, and all but two were likely telling the truth. I've also seen three sets of tracks of which all were convincing, with huge strides of giant feet ... in hard packed ground. There is no way a man can walk comfortably and impact a 1 inch deep track with a stride from 4 to 6 feet apart! This man also having no arch in his foot!

Vocalizations of Sasquatch have been analyzed, and determined to be that of an un-known primate. Below is one example ...

Through my years I have come to understand, I believe, the Sasquatch biology. I feel that the following description fits the animal well. This description is based on collective evidence, including reports, but should in no way be observed as 100% actual.

Originally the Sasquatch resided in China, known at the time as Gigantopithicus. Remains of this huge ape-like creature exist only in China, mostly represented by teeth and jawbones. As the Chinese Dynasties expanded, Gigantopithicus' were driven off by man, by Chinese expansion and wandered over the Bering Strait Land Bridge into North America, at the same time AmerIndians Migrated, to adapt into the Sasquatch and the AmerIndians that exist today.

Upon arrival here they confronted Native Americans who also became their enemy. Sasquatches had no choice but to hide in the dark, as Native legends tell. It became such a war that the Sasquatches could only survive by hiding, and walking only at night. Their only means for survival was to form an existence of stealth and secrecy. They had no idea of how to create fire, or weapons. By the time the strongest Sasquatches adapted this way, their numbers were very low, and remain so today. This adaptation exploited the rugged wilderness areas throughout North America. When white-men arrived and began to develop the land, Sasquatches were pushed into even more remote areas for breeding and raising young.

The Modern Sasquatch resides primarily in the Pacific Northwest Cascade Mountain Range from Northern California north to British Columbia, Canada. These nomads wander constantly in search of food which consists primarily of vegetation, fruits, berries, nuts, some roots, saplings, and insect grubs, with fish being a primary substance. Meat is a secondary dietary supplement and will be consumed, especially if opportunistic, and that includes deer from hunters who only wound their intended subject. In some areas they prefer fish to other food items. Fish appears to be an attractive prey to Sasquatches, whether spoiling, hanging to dry, or being cooked. This may be something imprinted on the young Sasquatch by adults at an early age, apparently recognizing fish as a potential food item without regard to human occupation of the source. Several researchers have reportedly attracted Sasquatch to their area of research in remote areas by using fish as a bate.

Most reside or wander near rivers or lakes and small ponds. Water is an attractive item to the Sasquatch, and nearly all sightings and footprints are located near a water source. It appears that all legitimate Sasquatch sightings and footprint finds are located near or within a short distance of a water source.

Sasquatches can swim, and this attribute is not normally mentioned in books or other text. Since their feet are flexible, as noted by Dr. Meldrum, they serve as great flippers while in deep water. It is interesting to note that they can apparently negotiate open seas as between the B.C. coast and Vancouver Island, the southeast Alaska coast and Prince of Wales Island (and others), and even as far south and a distant swim as from the California coast to Catalina Island (22 miles). In fact, many coastal Islands along Washington, B.C. and Alaska have had Sasquatch footprint finds and sightings. California is lacking in their activity on Catalina Island, but reports do exist there. Their swimming methods can only be imagined, but I propose that they hold their feet and legs together and use a pumping method with a cuping scooping of the forearms for directional ability, similar to most other wild animals who negotiate water travel. It is possible that they can also dive deep if necessary, such as to avoid location by a passing boat. Swimming activity, most likely, occurs at night when no boats can see them except accidentally ... a very unlikely scenario for anyone familiar with nighttime boat travel.

During the breeding season, which occurs periodically later in life, they reside in remote wilderness areas where man is not often found. The males seek a mate, and they develop a family structure for raising the young newborn. They reside in this same territory until the juvenile is old enough to care for itself, then wander away from that area once the juvenile can care for him/herself. One of these suspected areas is called "Indian Heaven Back-country", on the eastern side of Mt. St. Helens in Washington State. Many reports of apparent family groups have been witnessed in that area, but it is very remote, and usually requires horseback excursions into the area. Additionally, riding into such areas on horseback, and the presence of horses or other large animals, apparently makes the Sasquatch loose his guard, so to speak. While in such areas, and on horseback, especially during the nighttime camping hours is when people have the most compelling encounters with Sasquatches.

The juvenile Sasquatch wanders aimlessly for several years once leaving the family structure, probably after about 12 years of age, although no one really knows how old a Sasquatch is before it "leaves the nest", so to speak. It is most likely these juveniles that are most often witnessed by man in Human inhabited areas. The curiosity of the juveniles make them more likely to be seen, and even a 12 year old can be quite large (up to 6.5 feet tall or higher) although they are nocturnal as are all ages. These young Sasquatches are often mischief makers and almost invite human observance. During their nomadic wanderings they may travel extreme distances from their natal grounds, and are reported in every U.S. State and Canadian Province. It should also be mentioned that a 6.5 foot tall individual can carry twice the weight of a man, and footprints that measure 14 inches long by 5 or 6 inches wide. Some footprints are shorter in length with a wide ball, and flat-footed.

When the juvenile becomes an adult, at probably 16 years of age, he/she returns to the natal area, or any remote wilderness found on the way. They seek a mate by vocalizing, of which much has been recorded and analyzed, form a family complex, and continue the process as their parents had for them. It is very likely, although unlikely, that this is conducted in areas near where Humans reside, or may begin in Human occupied areas and later continued in remote regions. In some of these areas the local Humans are shocked into reality, but once the mate is found all else is quiet and set aside from Humans. It is more than likely that upon locating a mate the Sasquatch moves to a remote area to raise the young, as is witnessed in other primates.

The life of a Sasquatch is probably more that 40 years, especially if they are a higher form of primate. When they die, however, they are not unlike any other wild animal. They seek a place to die where their body will not be discovered. Once they are dead, the body is quickly consumed by predators and insects, and becomes one with the soil on which it lays. It should be noted here that naturally dead bears are never found in the wild; nor are other large mammals. All large animals hide themselves in areas that will not be discovered by predators when they feel sick. This is where they die, and it is not likely humans will locate them unless by chance only a day or two after death.

During the 1970's I investigated several Sasquatch reports in the Mojave Desert and surrounding area. There are many good reports of these animals in the desert southwest, but I am not convinced that these animals are actually desert residents. Rather, I believe they simply wander through the desert from forest to forest, and probably find that food is abundant in the sandy and rocky environment. Since they are nocturnal, they are not often witnessed, especially in the desert where few people reside. I have written two articles about these Desert Sasquatches of which the links to these are provided below. From these articles I am still receiving reports from witnesses in southern California, and all of these places I mention in my articles are active to this very day. I am also providing a general link to Bobbie Short's excellent Web Site where you can find out just about anything Sasquatch related, as well as a few extra links where you can download vocalizations or research Sasquatch activity in your area of North America. If you are a Sasquatch Investigator you may want to link to the Archaeological methods area and learn what it takes, and what is needed, to collect good scientific evidence at Sasquatch activity sites.

Unfortunately the opportunities to actually see a Sasquatch are very limited. It is a matter of being in the right (or wrong) place at the right (or wrong) time. I have been close, I believe, several times. But never close enough to see one. Since they are nomadic wanderers of the night, and apparently have a small population (2000 nation-wide is the generally accepted estimate), the odds of actually seeing one are very slim. It's really too bad that the people who DO see them are not familiar with them, and often do not report the sighting for fear of ridicule. Those who DO report their sighting are often joked about by media personalities. Until the day arrives when a body is actually recovered, the general population will disregard these animals as nothing more than a myth ... after such a recovery there will be a lot of funding available to discover more about them. I am waiting for that day.

If you have any particular questions about Sasquatches, please write me through the link below.

There is evidence that another erect primate shares this globe with mankind. The evidence may not be conclusive, but it is certainly ample to establish that the matter should be further investigated. In the meantime, the person who finds himself in a position to obtain a specimen should do so, in the knowledge that it is important, and that such creatures are neither rare nor human.

"A long Native North American tradition of large hairy humanoid animals exists and cannot be dismissed easily."

One is forced to conclude that a man-like life-form of gigantic proportions is living at the present time in the wild areas of the north-western United States and British Columbia. If I have given the impression that this conclusion is-to me-profoundly disturbing, then I have made my point. That such a creature should be alive and kicking in our midst, unrecognized and unclassifiable, is a profound blow to the credibility of modern anthropology.

"What most convinces me of the actual existence of Bigfoot is my personal experiences in the Cascade Mountains and Coast Range of Oregon. There is no substitute for field work. However, Dr. F. Henner Farenbach's work with a database of 551 footprints (obtained from John Green) adds evidence supporting the "actuality" of what some of us call "Bigfoot". Another piece of evidence that has always intrigued me is personally interviewing many people who claim to have had a bigfoot encounter soon thereafterwards, and noticing how really shook up, upset, and frightened they are. I don't think they're "faking" it. Old Native American tales about Bigfoot like beings, written down from 50-125 years ago, have many similar characteristics to modern Bigfoot reports from people of other cultures, which lends support to the idea that this phenomenon is not another case of mass hysteria or wishful thinking. My personal experience suggests Bigfoot is much stronger than human beings, and faster, bigger, with better eyesight, better hearing, and a better sense of smell. Who's to say they aren't more intelligent as well? The summit ridges and mountain peaks of the Cascade Mountains and the Coast Range are their domain. You don't find Bigfoot, Bigfoot finds you."

"Despite an overflow of public hype and hysteria, caused mainly by hoaxers, Hollywood, and over-zealous (and sometimes eccentric) 'bigfoot hunters and experts' (to name a few), there seems to be a good amount of credible evidence pointing towards the possible existence of a large bipedal primate, commonly known as sasquatch or bigfoot (and which may be a species of primitive humanoid thought extinct), in the Pacific Northwest, and possibly in other parts of North America. However, the creature, cannot be conclusively proven until a specimen is collected - whether by killing or capture. Until then, we should remain skeptical, but open-minded, of all alleged evidence of sasquatch. If we do not, the search for sasquatch will loose credibility among scientists, the media and thus the general public."

"There is no question in my mind that Unknown Bipeds, globally situated, do exist".

"There is more evidence to support the existance of Bigfoot than that supporting the existence of the world's most notable people. Let's face it, history, prior to the invention of the camera, is basically just a collection of recorded "sightings." We believe strictly on the strength of written evidence. With Bigfoot, we not only have sightings but also footprints and photographs. There appears to be a double standard in the scientific world.."

The question regarding the physical evidence for the existance of Sasquatch is often debated. I am not sure some of these debates are based on common sense, since it is evident that all large animals known to exist on this planet were either captured or killed before they were accepted by science. I will deal with each opinion in the order listed in this title ...

The act of killing a Sasquatch is a matter of the heart for some, yet a matter of certainty for many others. It often appears to be a debate on whether or not these animals may be related to humans, or human-like in some way. Several reports exist where a sightee had a gun, but refused to shoot the Sasquatch because it looked "too Human". However, research by the most noted investigators indicate that this animal is human-like only because it is bipedal (walks on two legs, primarily). Some dinosaurs were bipedal, but were not related to mankind. It is not likely that Sasquatches are human relatives any more than the Great Apes, and they are very likely related to Gigantopithicus as mentioned above within this page. Shooting and killing a Mountain Gorilla was necessary, at the time, before the species could be recognized scientifically. In our modern world, killing a specimen may not be necessary to prove its existance. If Gorilla were not killed, it would have been at least another 100 years before they were scientifically recognized. It is true that a dead specimen is not necessary in our modern world, yet we must understand that science is demanding a Sasquatch specimen from us. It is possible, as mentioned elsewhere on this page, that bones may be located, examined, catagorized, and conclusively added to the list of known primate species. However, such a discovery would almost require an "Act of God" because we know that large mammal bones or carcasses from natural deaths are never found ... never! There are no records of naturally dead bear, moose, elk (except Alaska in herding areas) or deer bones (other than antlers) and carcasses discovered in North America in recorded history. Since there are probably at least 100 Black Bear for ever 1 Sasquatch (re:the late Dr. Grover T. Krantz), it is very unlikely we will locate a carcass or bones of a Sasquatch, unless by pure luck. We have a much better opportunity to shoot and kill one. Recently, the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization was successful in luring a Sasquatch to a mud puddle through the use of a combination of human and ape pheremones, with fruit set in the middle of the puddle. This resulted in the Skookum Cast of a Sasquatch body as it laid in the puddle retreiving the fruit. Additionally, they used vocal recordings of Sasquatch calls that had been previously analysed by several experts and indicating they were the sounds of an unknown primate. The combined use of these tools could be used to lure a Sasquatch to an area where one could be shot with a high powered rifle. I have had discussions about this with several researchers, and our collective conclusion is that the person with the gun, and those involved for the body extraction, may be in danger of attack by other Sasquatches lurking in the background. To eleviate this problem, a specialized robotic and remotely controlled device could be used. We know the military has such equipment, but it is not normally available for public use. Such a device could be instrumental in both the killing and recovery of a Sasquatch body in remote areas, additionally making such a project safe for humans. I am not personally advocating such a project, but I feel that we have very few alternatives if we wish to protect the Sasquatch as a species, and promote Sasquatch field study funds to discover more.

To capture a Sasquatch would be a monumental task, unless the individual equated to the adult height and weight measurements of a man. If you read the data included earlier on this page, you will see that even a 4 foot 7 inch Sasquatch is heavier than a man (child) of that same size. There have been many proposals suggested through the years of how to capture a Sasquatch. None of those proposals were realistic when dealing with size, strength, and weight of a Sasquatch. View the data included above and you will see that this would not be an easy capture. Pitfall traps, leghold traps, snares, and tranquilizer darts have been suggested throughout the years. If one falls in a pit, how do you retreive the live specimen? Would a Sasquatch sacrifice a leg to free from a leghold trap? Could not a Sasquatch understand how to lossen a snare? That leaves the tranquilizer dart. As in the situations explained above for shooting a Sasquatch, the same elements will apply for such use. The problem is that any individual Sasquatch that walks into the area may be of less or greater weight than predicted, so several darts of different strenght would be necessary, and a very quick decision based on a quick observation. Even with pheremones present, it is not likely that a Sasquatch will simply stand and wait for the shot. A remotely controlled robot, even in this case, would likely be necessary. The problem is that too much tranquilizer, or too little, is a big concern. Too much might kill the Sasquatch of a lower predicted weight, and too little will allow it to travel a long way from the darting area and become unrecoverable. We are not dealing with slow-moving animals here, and the Sasquatch can motivate quickly through thick forest, scale cliffs, and be totally out of human negotiated range in little time. Therefore, the use of tranquilizer darts are not a legitimate option. The darted subject will either die, after running off several miles, or will sleep in a area several miles from the darting activity. The only other option is the use of GPS darts which have a small amount of pain killer on the tip so the subject does not feel it. Again, it probably wont be long before the dart is removed by the subject. If we could use a specially designed dart that will implant a GPS device, that would be best. I am not sure we currently have technology that offers such an item.

To leave them alone would admit the Sasquatch is a real living animal. That is not a likely scenario since science will not accept that on a good day. There are many animal rights activists who think the Sasquatch should be protected now, based on the current evidence. I agree, to a point, but I also understand that science needs a recently dead body or recent bones to study ... dead or alive. Once this is done, funding will develop for field research. I am not sure I will be alive that day, but if so I will be part of it ... If not, I will be watching from above.

The two most likely areas where Sasquatch activity will be observed are as follows. These areas are very remote, although the maps indicate otherwise. In North America there are no other places where these animals can be observered without hoping that one will come across your residence.

North Cascades Wilderness Area

Indian Heaven Back Country, Skamania County, Washington

It appears there is a trend to discount all Sasquatch sightings and footprint finds by both the General Public and the News Media. Obviously, anyone skeptical of Sasquatch related evidence is not willing to dig deep enough into the subject to find the truth. Sure, there are hoaxes, but dermal ridges in plaster casts, the Patterson Film, and several hair samples have conclusively indicated that we are not dealing with hoaxers in every case. It is sometimes overwhelming to some of us the details of certain encounters that were held back for scores of years, mainly because the reportee was afraid he/she would be laughed upon. The Media inspires this "laughter" by refusing to look at the evidence. How many times have you heard a media report, talking about Sasquatch, and referring to the animal as a "Him"? "He's back again", or " The big guy is spooking us". The general public is no less guilty, as I can quote from a co-worker. I told him that I knew of a person in Willow, Alaska who found Sasquatch tracks, and later found others of different sizes in the same are, indicating more than one individual. His response ... "I didn't know he could reproduce himself". After some discussion, I was able to change his attitude, and show him that "Sasquatch" was not "One" animal. That is not what the media will ever do unless we actually find a body, or capture a live Sasquatch. In fact, once a body is found they will all claim that the search has ended. As researchers, we battle public opinion and News Media thoughts, day by day.

"After more than 30 years digging through reports, investigating footprint finds and sightings, talking to eyewitnesses, and studying the Patterson/Gimlin Film of 1967, my conclusions for the existence of Sasquatch are as follows:

Sasquatch is a real, living bipedal hominid that is higher in intelligence than most animals, yet still has many animal behaviors and instincts. What exactly they are is not conclusive. They are most likely related to Gigantopithicus. Some eyewitness accounts describe them as ape-like, while others describe man-like animals. They have no sophistication like man, and less than Neanderthal man, i.e., they do not use fire or tools. Although there are hoaxers, and there have been many Sasquatch hoaxes, I feel that there are probably more than 100 sightings and footprint finds that go unreported yearly, primarily due to the "tongue in cheek" approach the News Media offers. No one wants to be laughed at, and it is only those who either don't care, or are naive that report such things to the media. I also believe that there may be Sasquatch bones already collected and available for examination which have been otherwise misidentified and mislabeled at museums. These may appear as bear femurs or even teeth. The teeth of Gigantopithicus went undiscovered for centuries in China, and were labeled as Dragons' teeth. One of the most often asked questions I've received over the years has been, "How can such a large animal allude us?" Actually, Sasquatches are probably one of the last great animals to allude mankind, but certainly not the first. Do some research and read about recent (last 100 years) animals discovered and you will find it pretty amazing what it sometimes takes to locate a unknown yet reportedly real animal, size being no exception. Sasquatches are very aware, and do not wish to make human contact. Some are curious, and most are nocturnal. As a wildlife biologist specializing in Tytonidae (Barn Owl) Owls, people often tell me they have never seen a Barn Owl. Where I live (Dallas) there is a extremely large Barn Owl population. The fact of the matter is that most people are diurnal, and really are not looking for owls when they are out at night. The same must be said about Sasquatches. Imagine how many Sasquatches have been within sighting distance, yet unnoticed. Perhaps crouched down by a highway, looking like a stump in the darkness, etc. Furthermore, there simply is no evidence that Sasquatches are supernatural or extraterrestrial. Anything that can lay giant footprints imbedded in hard-packed dirt is simply a very heavy animal. Because it walks on two legs does not make it abnormal, for in the case for the Sasquatch, bipedal locomotion is natural. This can be easily seen in the Patterson film. By the way, there is nothing in this film that would even remotely support a hoax; it is obviously genuine. For me, the Sasquatch was here long before we were. There are other forms or races that exist all over the world. There is plenty of evidence to support their existence, and little to support a world-wide organized hoax conducted by some secret society for no reason at all. Anatomically the Sasquatch is built to support large weight, and allow for great speed for either escape or attack. My conclusion is that they are real, they are not "Endangered", and that we need more serious researchers to help gather the evidence. After all, we all know that Atoms exist, but have you ever actually seen one?"

In addition to the comments above, I must tell the readers that we have recently (2001,2002,2003) been privileged with some amazing Archaeological findings that indicate Sasquatches were known by humans up to 10,000 years ago, well before Euro-man was here. These findings are still secret and held between an elite group of researchers for Scientific Publication. The basis of these findings were on carvings (Monoliths) made by ancient peoples in North America. They not only carved ancient animals such as Mammoth and Bison, but also carved giant images of ape-like forms ... additionally carving giant human-like footprints with no arch in localized caves. These carvings are not like those of baskets or hand-held heads ... they are giant Monoliths (over 40 feet tall) created to show respect for creatures of their time, 10,000 years ago! They did not carve Giant Squirrel or Rat Monoliths, which futher indicates their respect for these huge respectable animals. There are currently more than ten sites of interest that show these "Monoliths" throughout North America. This discovery is "Monumental" and will help to prove to Science that Sasquatches were at least a once well-known animal, at least 10,000 years ago. If these animals were known 10,000 years ago, and still fit the same general modern description, there will be little doubt that they may still be present. Currently the Archaeologists are collecting data from these sites. This is possibly the most significant discovery relative to Sasquatch ever.

If you are an experienced Sasquatch investigator or a Scientist who has accepted the concept that these animals are real and deserve classification, use the link below to join the Crypto Bipedal Primatology Group in Yahoo. You will need a Yahoo Profile that expalins your current status as either an Investigator/Researcher or a relative Scientist dealing with relic bipedal hominids or hominoids.

Click to subscribe to the Crypto Bipedal Primatology Group in Yahoo Groups