Why is the federal government mum on Bigfoot.

[georgerm]

On 9/11/2025 at 7:35 PM, FLY said:

Why is the federal government mum on Bigfoot.  And that's the answer

The federal government is mum on Bigfoot for several reasons in my opinion. One of the possible reasons is the government's wildlife biologist have a rough time trying to locate Bigfoot and to study it. When wildlife biologists get close to Bigfoot all they find are footprints, a few hair samples, and a glimpse of Bigfoot escaping into the heavy timber and high mountains. The wildlife biologist probably have no idea what a healthy population of bigfoots is or if their numbers are dwindling to a low level that could put them in the endangered species category.  

 

"The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides legal protection for threatened and endangered species and their habitats by prohibiting their "take" (killing, harming, or harassing), requiring federal agencies to ensure their actions do not jeopardize listed species or their critical habitats, and providing for the development of species recovery plan.Enacted in 1973, the ESA aims to conserve ecosystems and prevent species extinction, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA Fisheries Service (NMFS) leading its implementation" google 

[FLY]

14 hours ago, georgerm said:

The federal government is mum on Bigfoot for several reasons in my opinion. One of the possible reasons is the government's wildlife biologist have a rough time trying to locate Bigfoot and to study it. When wildlife biologists get close to Bigfoot all they find are footprints, a few hair samples, and a glimpse of Bigfoot escaping into the heavy timber and high mountains. The wildlife biologist probably have no idea what a healthy population of bigfoots is or if their numbers are dwindling to a low level that could put them in the endangered species category.  

 

"The Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides legal protection for threatened and endangered species and their habitats by prohibiting their "take" (killing, harming, or harassing), requiring federal agencies to ensure their actions do not jeopardize listed species or their critical habitats, and providing for the development of species recovery plan.Enacted in 1973, the ESA aims to conserve ecosystems and prevent species extinction, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA Fisheries Service (NMFS) leading its implementation" google 

The ESA does not apply to human. Or even mostly human

[norseman]

16 hours ago, FLY said:

The ESA does not apply to human. Or even mostly human

We have no legal precedent as to what laws would apply to a unknown species that is “mostly human”.

 

We don't even know what its relationship is to humans. We assume it’s related to us because it’s bipedal. And we only know about bipedalism arising once in primates and we humans are the last of our genus of bipedalism.

 

But maybe Orangs or Gibbons spawned something bipedal that is on a parallel bipedalism trajectory?

 

We just wont until we have cracked the genome.

 

 

[Huntster]

16 hours ago, FLY said:

The ESA does not apply to human. Or even mostly human

 

10 minutes ago, norseman said:

We have no legal precedent as to what laws would apply to a unknown species that is “mostly human”.............

 

The ESA acronym stands for the Endangered Species Act.

 

It it exists, and if Science acknowledges that existence, it will be designated as a species.

 

Homo sapiens are in no danger of extinction. There are over 8 billion of us. Granted, numerous races or ethnicities have gone extinct or are in danger of doing so, but not the species.

 

The one way we can avoid the difficulties of recognizing their species and ESA designation is keeping them a myth.

[MIB]

Norseman is correct.    We do not know what laws apply until (or unless? :)) we have one, have DNA to test and retest.     

 

Like many here I've pondered this quite a bit.   I don't think they are descended from new world monkeys or anything else that originated here.   There's simply no fossil record.

 

I think we are left with two families / themes of possibilities.     First, they are a very close cousin to us, a recent split, with rapid evolution such that there are no older fossils because they didn't exist yet and the DNA is so close to ours as to appear merely contamination rather than distinct.   Second, they are from a very old, very remote split and have never existed in large numbers, not for possibly hundreds of thousands of years, and they exist only in temperate forests with highly acidic soils that destroy bones / remains rather than producing fossils.   

 

I lean toward the first of those though I can't disprove the second.    My best guess is, since we know there were at least 4 periods with land bridges from east Asia in the Pleistocene, that they likely crossed in one of the earlier 3, in small numbers, and somehow survived despite extreme environmental  pressure.   We know that small population and extreme forces of natural selection can push evolution much more quickly than it happens in a larger population.    It seems the simplest solution working within the things we've already studied scientifically.

 

I think having irrefutable DNA (which means a body .. I think) would allow us to answer a lot of questions.

[norseman]

1 minute ago, Huntster said:

 

 

The ESA acronym stands for the Endangered Species Act.

 

It it exists, and if Science acknowledges that existence, it will be designated as a species.

 

Homo sapiens are in no danger of extinction. There are over 8 billion of us. Granted, numerous races or ethnicities have gone extinct or are in danger of doing so, but not the species.

 

The one way we can avoid the difficulties of recognizing their species and ESA designation is keeping them a myth.

All species within the genus Homo are extinct except Homo Sapiens according to science.

 

So while Homo Sapiens are doing great the genus is doing terrible.

 

How Sasquatch fits into all this will not be settled if it remains a myth.