From your link:
Now, again, consider the almost undeniable fact that, if sasquatches exist in North America, government knows about it.
Then consider what that means.
First, it means that government knows all about them. They've most certainly attempted the Jane Goodall approach with the species. Wouldn't you like to read that report.
Secondly, they've decided, or more accurately, reconfirmed, that secrecy and the suppression of discovery is the best course of action. There is likely a long list of reasons for that, but the key question here is; to what extent will they suppress discovery? Is it actually dangerous to your health to press the issue, or is it just a waste of your time, effort, and investment?
Thirdly, it almost confirms that efforts to openly and legally search for and interact with this species is best conducted on private lands if possible, or if it must be public lands (because the best habitat areas in western North America are likely public lands), pursuing a permit from a state or federal agency at least puts administrative and scientific pressure on government to relent, especially if secrecy clauses are expressed in permit applications.
Fourthly, if the no-kill eDNA approach is taken, and private lands are the preferred search areas, indigenous lands are the largest plots of remote lands in the west. Indigenous management councils might be open to allowing access, or they might even be open to collecting samples themselves. Then again, maybe not. Like me and government, they might see the wisdom of secrecy, too.
Fifthly, there might currently be active studies or co-habitation operations going on in this secrecy arena by either or both government and private organizations. The NAWAC and Olympic Project models are examples of such private operations on private lands. Imagine a government operation supported in an extremely remote location with the benefit of helicopter support and the legal power of enacting flight and access restrictions.