My Sasquatch Theory

The number one doubt of skeptics in my opinion is "well, where can that beasty hide?" This question can be addressed rather well.

Bigfoot--The "American" version of this creature has less room to roam undetected. In my opinion, the only logical way for a creature to survive in the US without getting hounded by us is to live in the upper elevation areas(mountains) of the western portion of the country. In order to get food, the creature must venture down to lower elevation forests for a short peiod of time. During the winter, the beasts travel by way of mountain chains and passes to secluded lower elevation regions. If Bigfoot can stay hidden in the alpine 80% of the time, the chances of a sighting in even moderately populated regions is low. Finally, I think that the creatures are solitary and claim large territories, meeting up in the winter to mate.

Sasquatch--The "Canadien" version has a much easier time hiding than its American counterpart. Think about all the unsettled land in the north country. Yea, thats a lot of land. It's probably easier to hide today than in earlier times, because there are less nomadic natives or prospectors roaming the bush. I genuinly believe that there is a Sasquatch.

Swamp Beast--Probably the creature with the toughest time hiding is the Swamp Beast. The only way I think a creature can survive in the swamps of the southeast is if it was in the Everglades or the remote Louisiana Bayous. A carcass would deteriorate fast in the swamp, so the possibility that a creature can survive here unnoticed is possible.

Yeti--It's obvious this creature has much remote and inhospitable land to roam, so my theory for this beast is about the same as the Sasquatch.

[edit on 22-1-2008 by Jaysrule5]

[edit on 22-1-2008 by Jaysrule5]

Your theory is plausible. However, why do you think no remains of a sasquatch have ever been recovered?

reply to post by William One Sac


What about the DeRidder Beast? That is one ugly mother and is a big furry SOMETHING...

reply to post by DogHead


I haven't heard of that one before. I did a quick Google and didn't find any information on it.

[edit on 1-22-2008 by William One Sac]

Originally posted by William One Sac
Your theory is plausible. However, why do you think no remains of a sasquatch have ever been recovered?

If we think of these beasties as somewhere along the primate evolutionary chain, it's very natural to think that they may have some social structure that includes reverence for their dead which might include corpse disposal of some sort

reply to post by DogHead


The "DeRidder Beast" is a first for me as well. Perhaps a link of some sort could help us fill in the blanks?

How would you explain the intercontinential similarity between the species? Im thinking Yeti here..They being the same species, or at least very related?

Edit: Did some googling on the DeRidder Beast... No luck there. Never heard of it either.

[edit on 23/1/08 by Thain Esh Kelch]

Have you ever read Chuck Palahniuk's book Haunted? In the short story Dissertation, he offers what I thought to be quite a unique theory on the topic.

reply to post by Jaysrule5


I'm just guessing here, so correct me if I'm wrong, please. You live in the Eastern US, or overseas? West of the Mississippi there are quite litterally millions of square miles of unsettled land from the Mexican border to the Canadian border. As a formerly avid backpacker, I've been places within an easy three hour drive (sit right back and hear a tale...), that may have never seen the hand of man. Oh it's very plausible that a population of large unknown, to western science, primates could live quite undesturbed in the Western US. Even easier to believe for all of Canada.

I live within a halfhour drive of one of Washington States hot spots of Bigfoot sightings, though it has calmed down in the last year or so. Only two sightings that I'm aware of, with tracks etc... last year. Southeastern Washington and Northeastern Oregon has, IMHO, a rather substantial population of the Sasquatch. I've never seen one myself, though several of my freinds and aquaintences have. By sightings, I'm actually refering to tracks, sounds commonly associated with Sasquatch (wood knocking, etc...), along with actual sightings of the bigguy.

Just thought I'd chime in. It's one of my favorite topics...

edited because I can't spell.


[edit on 23-1-2008 by seagull]

reply to post by Gemwolf


I think he is referring to this creature that was suppossedly found in Deridder, Louisiana. Deridder Roadkill

Was anyone able to navigate the link to the other pictures of this Deridder thing?

reply to post by Xanfalcon


If that's the 'monster' the poster is referring to, I believe it was already debunked (satisfiably to most) as a dog with mange.


*** Been so many of them in the past, its hard to keep track***

As to the OP and the theory.

If this were to apply to any densely populated areas, would there not be more sightings in say.... the Congo, Australian Outback, etc.
(not sure of the actual area's names so they may appear vague, just came to mind as large places with lots of hiding places)

As for the "where's the body" theory, on monster quest they did a test to see how long a deer carcass would rot away and I believe it was pretty unrecognisable after 2 weeks.
So what's to say that when a bigfoot dies, he simply rots away without anyone finding a body.

reply to post by Thain Esh Kelch


Do you know how early man started out in The Great Rift Valley, then spread outward onto the various continents? I believe that this is similar to the early Gigantopithocene creatures. They started out in one area, then spread outward and eventually settled down and adapted to their own unique climates.

So yes, in a sense, the Yeti and Sasquatch are close relatives.

reply to post by seagull


I completely agree with that theory, I was just stating that it's more likely that a larger population could go without notice in Northern Canada due to the desolate and VAST, unbroken wilderness. I'm not saying the US couldn't sustain a large population, but it would be harder for them to go unnoticed, due to the increasing amount of foot traffic in wilderness areas down here.

And by the way, I'm from Jackson, Wyoming. Nice try though

reply to post by Grailkeeper


Thats a good question.

But that just further proves my point that a beast could live unnoticed by humans in an area with vast amounts of wilderness. There could be a monumental population in those places, but due to their isolation and large tracts of pure, untamed wilderness, they can live out their lives without getting a single whiff of humans.

[edit on 23-1-2008 by Jaysrule5]

I like your theory for the most part although I don't believe they live in solitary and only meet up to mate in the winter. What would lead you to that conclusion? Many witnesses have reported seeing many of these creatures together.


Also, has anyone ever seen a Bigfoot?

reply to post by William One Sac


Well, let's take a few things into consideration. First, they are a large primate. Omnivorous most likely, given the seasonal climate. They could reasonably live up to, possibly past sixty years of age. Chances are they have no natural predators after a certain age. The primary causes of death would be disease or starvation. Their habitat is apparently rather dense, acidic-soiled woodland that tends to be in very inconvenient places.

So we have a critter that due to size and diet probably has rather small populations, that isn't dying very often, who lives in inaccessible places full of critters that will obliterate the carcass in a matter of weeks, while the soil will result in bones, hair, and teeth rotting away within a year or two.

The only sign of a dead Sasquatch likely to be found is a somewhat dark spot on the ground with a few old and weathered hairs, no different from what a dead elk, bear, or moose would leave behind, for the same reasons.

Okay - Just happened to see this thread. I have never seen a Bigfoot myself however my grandfather did when he was a boy. It happened somewhere near Ritzville, WA and close to a canyon area when he was riding his horse to school. He was only about eleven years old and on the road that led to his school when his horse started acting funny and he began to smell a very bad odor. So, as he told me he turned to look around and could see a very large hairy man (about 7-8 ft tall) walking directly behind him. Now you would have to have known my grandfather to realize that he was a very sincere person. In fact I never once even heard him tell a joke. Thus, I believed him and asked well weren't you really frightened of that creature - He said he did not have time to be frightened because it all happened so quickly. And he corrected me about referring to the Bigfoot as a creature - He said it was a man not a creature. I asked my grandfather why he thought that and he said he could see his body through the hair (reddish brown) because it was kind of wispy not like fur and his face had features like a man. He kept pace with the horse for a couple of minutes and then stepped over a barbed wire fence, into the tree-line and was gone. All together it was only about three minutes for this encounter however my grandfather never forgot what happened. I agree with the author of this thread that Canada is probably well populated with these big primitive people.