What do you think of the US Forest Service's view on bigfoot?

[georgerm]

This is what Google says: "The US Forest Service's official stance on Bigfoot is that it's a creature of folklore and urban legend, though they have engaged in some playful acknowledgements of the creature. While they don't formally confirm Bigfoot's existence, they maintain open spaces and wildlife habitat on their lands, which could potentially include habitat for such a creature. In fact, the US Forest Service even has a "Mythical Wildlife Division" and has issued tongue-in-cheek "confirmations" of Bigfoot's existence on April Fool's Day." 

[norseman]

They make fun of the subject. Which I find irksome. I do like to deal with the forest service better than the park service. Other than electric bicycles.

[bipedalist]

Don't really care about USFS view (but do care abt USFS because I teamed to do trail maintenance/rehab/bldg with some of their interagency groups), but US Fish and Wildlife Service gave the late Larry Batson a pulpit and interview as well as presentation space in West Virginia twenty some years ago and did not make a farce out of his efforts. His cred as a wildlife educator and rehabilitator gave him entre apparently as well as being geographically situated to the venue.

 

PS Remember the late  William Dranginis had a sighting around Culpeper or Quantico, Virginia with  off duty FBI agents that was detailed to the nth degree, nobody made fun about that at the FBI. 

 

Edited June 5 by bipedalist

[Huntster]

6 hours ago, georgerm said:

........While they don't formally confirm Bigfoot's existence, they maintain open spaces and wildlife habitat on their lands, which could potentially include habitat for such a creature.........

 

This is an interesting statement. In short, they disregard potential existence (notice the wording "don't formally confirm"), yet still point out that an ideology of preservation would benefit such creatures should they actually exist.

 

Enjoying everybody's cake while discouraging (not denying) the possibility that cake actually exists?

[Patterson-Gimlin]

8 hours ago, cedar said:

the FS is well aware of BF, the admittance from them, well, don't hold your breath

How do you know or are you one of them?

[georgerm]

2 hours ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

How do you know or are you one of them?

 

[georgerm]

"The U.S. Forest Service had an equivalent of 31,147 full-time employees in fiscal year 2022. While specific data on the number of wildlife biologists within that workforce isn't readily available, wildlife biologists are a key part of the agency's work, focusing on research, habitat management, and monitoring of wildlife populations. The Forest Service employs both permanent and

seasonal staff, with28,330 permanent employees in FY 2008 and 4,488 seasonal employees. The U.S. Forest Service manages 193 million acres of land. This includes 155 national forests and 20 national grasslands. The Forest Service also helps steward approximately 900 million forested acres in the U.S. " google.

 

 I am going to guess that ten percent of the 31,147 full time employees or 3114 employees spent most of their time in the woods and traveling back roads in the forest where bigfoot makes its home. One of their jobs is to inspect stands of forest trees for potential logging projects. 

 

Do you think that Forest Service employees would be encouraged to make public reports of bigfoot sightings? Why or why not?

 

If bigfoot was classified as an endangered species what would happen to timber production?

 

"The Endangered Species Act (ESA), enacted in 1973, is the primary U.S. law protecting and conserving threatened and endangered species. 

It aims to prevent species from going extinct by requiring the federal government to list species as endangered or threatened and develop recovery plans. The ESA also prohibits the "take" of listed species, which includes actions like harming or killing them," google. 

 

 

[georgerm]

12 hours ago, cedar said:

the FS is well aware of BF, the admittance from them, well, don't hold your breath

Welcome aboard Cedar.

 

Can you be more explicit and explain why you think the Forest Service is well aware of Bigfoots?

 

My sighting report from 1980 is in the sighting section, Pacific Northwest b 

Edited June 8 by georgerm
add more information I

[CelticKevin]

In my profession as a barber, I have talked to many FS workers. They see my collection of Bigfoot stuff at my work station and after a few visits, they tend to broach the subject with me. Most of them work in different departments and don't know each other, but they all agree on one thing: Bigfoot exists. They know the creatures are out there, they know where they are likely to be depending on times of the year, they play it off as a "legend" to curtail economic and regulatory fallout, and some have seen them and would be happy to NOT see them again. 

As I understand it, witnessing one is nearly a FS rite of passage in the Estacada, Oregon area. I was told that pre-dawn hours and dusk offered a good chance on Cascade Lakes Hwy. And I was told that there was a general "ignore them" rule. You don't bother them, they won't bother you, nobody has to explain or report anything.

[MIB]

Could you clarify location?   The Cascade Lakes Highway runs from Highway 97 near Bend, heads west past Mt Bachelor, turns south, and reconnects with highway 58 just west of where 58 meets 97.    Estacada is fairly near Portland, a solid 90-95 miles from Cascade Lakes Highway.    I'm puzzled by what you are trying to describe.

[CelticKevin]

4 hours ago, MIB said:

Could you clarify location?   The Cascade Lakes Highway runs from Highway 97 near Bend, heads west past Mt Bachelor, turns south, and reconnects with highway 58 just west of where 58 meets 97.    Estacada is fairly near Portland, a solid 90-95 miles from Cascade Lakes Highway.    I'm puzzled by what you are trying to describe.

 

Cascade Lakes Hwy is a fair distance from Estacada. Two different FS employees talking two different areas.

 

[night912]

On 6/5/2025 at 7:57 PM, Huntster said:

 

This is an interesting statement. In short, they disregard potential existence (notice the wording "don't formally confirm"), yet still point out that an ideology of preservation would benefit such creatures should they actually exist.

 

Enjoying everybody's cake while discouraging (not denying) the possibility that cake actually exists?

You're seeing things that you want to see that's actually not there. They clearly stated their position regarding the existence of Bigfoot. Although they deny the existence of Bigfoot, they don't deny that it's possible for the existence of Bigfoot. The discouraging part that you spoke of, is all in your head.