In addition to predator/omnivore, don't forget scavenger. I'm not talking "roadkill" (although that's surely part of it), but similar to brown bears (whose eating behaviors and food preferences differ from black bears). Among the first spring meals they seek out are winter kills, which are more numerous than most folks think. An example, beyond starved ungulates, are sheep, goats, and deer killed by avalanches. I remember a snow avalanche that killed a small herd of sheep on the Kenai Peninsula that attracted lots of brown bears the following spring.   As a hunter, I read a lot of ADFG Management Reports. They do pay attention and even conduct studies on predator effects on ungulates, and this has grown exponentially as the environmental movement has put political pressure on predator management. But the effect of so few sasquatches is more than minimal compared to humans (hunters, car drivers, trains, poachers, etc), bears, wolves, and lions, so sasquatch predation can easily be swallowed up by the rest of the predators.   https://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/research/wildlife/speciesmanagementreports/pdfs/moose_2015_2025_smrp_gmu_14a.pdf     I'm sure that the dead body/skeleton thing is primarily a thing regarding their rarity. For example, there are an estimated 30K-40K cougars and an estimated 60K-80K wolves in North America. Humans? 380 million in the US and Canada. Of those millions of people in North America, some 630K are reported as missing, although we  know many of them are alive and want to be missing, or are held by others. Compare all that to an estimated 5K sasquatches.   I've found skeletons in the woods. I Initially thought them as human (no skull) and called the Troopers. They turned out to be poached goat or sheep. I've found lots of moose and caribou skeletons or carcasses. Never bear or wolf...............or human.   If someone found a sasquatch skeleton, including the skull, what are they most likely to do? My bet is that they'd either call the local police (thinking they're "human"), or they'd walk away. I doubt they'd call fish and feathers, the FBI, or another agency. And if the local police investigate, what are they likely to do if they come to realize that these remains are...............funny? My bet is that they'd contact................somebody else? 

That is, admittedly, a puzzle.    A couple friends have stumbled over human bodies.  We generally don't leave our dead laying around but .. it does happen.   It may be just a matter of very much lower population but .. it is a thing that causes ye olde "eyebrow of concern" to raise a bit.   It is a question worthy of further consideration.   This may sound like I'm reversing course .. I'm not .. but I think that while we're following the data we have to consider not eliminating possibilities which might not be best-fit from further consideration.   Weight-of-data changes over time, sometimes only a little in ways that don't change the conclusions, other times very substantially requiring a total re-think.   Similarly we should find more signs of feeding on plants / berries than we seem to see in the report data.    Not giant gorilla-type swaths of destruction, but .. something.   Maybe it is too subtle, maybe it's mixed with bear foraging in ways such that we just don't recognize the BF contribution as a separate thing.   So .. I hope you observe that I'm as cautious about completely discarding potential conclusions as I am about prematurely embracing them .. even when the data seems to fit.   So far as calories?   The area I mostly research has a late summer berry crop which more or less coincides with the annual activity peak.   I'm leery of drawing a conclusion about that because the same activity peak occurs the full length of the Cascades yet the berry crop does not match in timing once you are further north or south.    Here, that activity seems to continue until mid October which is about the time the deer drop out of the high country and migrate .. unlike most of the Cascades where blacktails just drop in elevation to mostly stay below snowline, here they do that plus they take off and go another 30-150 miles beyond what's necessary, a more mule deer type pattern.   Anyway, things drop off mid September, about the time ODFW says the deer begin to move down and out, and continue to happen but with decreasing frequency until about mid October when the migration is essentially done.    Sounds like calories?   Seems likely.   But we have to continue to consider "maybe not" and think about what alternatives might also explain the pattern.    There are seemingly through-the-winter reports here in the deer / elk wintering areas.    There are also a few reports in the locations between summer and winter areas.   These seem to represent BF travel corridors.   Low elevation tight against the foot of the mountains.    A few lower passes have reports.   I note that there are similar reports from the foothills of the Rockies.   Hanging by deer herds?  Traveling through?   I don't know.   Probably won't ever live close enough to investigate first hand.   (Apologies for rambling.)   MIB

Very well stated and consistent will credible report data.   I would also add that the young male I witnessed in 2009 was carrying a dead fawn that had been mostly picked over, I truly doubt the situation was anything like Tom Hanks and Wilson. 

Agreed. If it’s primarily an herbivore then winter becomes a very hard sell.   Yes. The coast of the Pacific NW is typically devoid of snow. But most of the northern U.S. and Canada where many reports come from have a real winter. That’s a problem for a primate herbivore IMHO. So unless they all migrate into a tiny area along the ocean, they must eat meat.   But we don't know what we don’t know, but they don’t discover black holes by looking for them. You cannot observe a black hole. But what you can do is observe the effects of a black hole on the stars and planets around it.   If Bigfoot is primarily a predator? Then its effects on ungulate populations that we track MUST be in the data. I really liked the bone study that BTW was doing. Hope all is well with him.

Gimlin talked about how massive and muscular Party was which goes along with this point. It just makes since Bigfoot would kinda have to be. Seems like a requirement to exist in the first place in such an environment.         Makes sense to me.  I’ve seen some of these scientists on Bigfoot shows limit Bigfoot to plants. I think they do that as cover to try to put their thumb on the scale against considering Bigfoot might be possible.  Well, possible in that available food supply shouldn’t be an issue against Bigfoot.  If Bigfoot can’t eat meat they think it’s harder to make the case there would be enough food to support Bigfoot.      One fish = hours of scrounging-plants-on-the-full-belly standard. nature is supposed to favor efficiency.        the guessing is getting better now that Bigfoot has moved from the Peter Graves “Monsters and myths” type of presentation and more into the Jeff Meldrum level discussions on TV.   It’s a bit like the “ why don’t we find a body when they die” topic.   At least they address it by logic and compassion to know animals life cycle