Sasquatch Must Die: Why Cryptozoology Needs a Body

Sasquatch Must Die: Why Cryptozoology Needs a Body


The topic has been debated from every vantage point over the years:  Do you support “kill” or “no kill” in regards to Sasquatch?  In the field of cryptid research, few topics are more divisive and evoke such raw emotion.  It’s time to bring some clarity to this issue.  The simple fact is, we need a body.  It needs to be said firmly and unapologetically that someone needs to kill a Sasquatch.  Nothing else is going to resolve the issue of Sasquatch existence.  Nothing else is going to move this creature from myth into reality.  No amount of photographs, video, hair, tracks, prints, or alleged DNA is going to do in 100 years what a body could do in a matter of minutes.  In the digital age, a picture is not worth any factual words.

It needs to be made clear that the “no-kill crowd” has an agenda.  It may come as a shock to some, but many people support a no-kill philosophy only to preserve their own standing.  They know that if a body is found that they will be out of business.  All their paid “Bigfoot excursions” will come to a halt.  No more “membership dues” to bogus organizations.  They will be relegated to the background as academia and grant-funded scientists take over.  The hobbyists will need to find a new cryptid (or mythical creation) of which to declare themselves experts.

For these folks, no body equals job security.  Therefore they organize “hunts” and “expeditions” while making sure everyone in the group subscribes to their same philosophy.  They take to the woods en masse and act surprised when they fail to locate anything (have you ever hunted deer in a large crowd?).  They taut their experience and expertise in tracking, calling, communicating, but somehow never finding, a Sasquatch.  It is easy to claim to be an expert on cryptic topic when there is no verifiable, scientific evidence to support that such a thing exists.  I am reminded of a lecture I attended at which Dr Esteban Sarmiento stated, “No one knows anything about Sasquatch, because we have no proof it exists.”



The “no-kill crowd” uses numerous tactics to support their single-minded position.  They claim that Sasquatch is “too close to human” and killing one would be murder.  This is nonsense.  Sasquatch are not human.  If they exist, they are animals.  They should not be given protection via scare tactics or a threatened murder charge.  It is not in argument that Sasquatch should be a protected species after it is verified that they exist.  Certainly, this would make sense.  However, threats of criminal charges and laws that preemptively protect Sasquatch are nonsensical tripe unless someone presents a body.  Following the “no-kill” logic, why are they not proposing legislation outlawing the killing of unicorns and the harvest of their magical glitter?

It is amazing  how many self-proclaimed “Bigfooters” have had these animals in their sights and not pulled the trigger.  Happy, touchy, good feelings aside, we all know human nature.  Money, while perhaps the root of much evil, is also a hearty means to an end.  Such human nature should take over in at least one instance if these stories are true.  It would be the find of the century, and worth millions dollars if someone had a body.  One shot, one death.  However, the “no-kill crowd” will tell you that you might kill “someone in a suit.”  I think this speaks volumes about the fact that there are probably more hoaxers in the woods than real Sasquatch.  Again, simple deflection to protect their own interests and agenda.

Further, how many times are we going to have to listen to the “Bigfooters” who are scared out of the woods after “seeing” one of these things?  Isn’t that what they are supposed to be looking for?  These fools rank right up there with the “shadow-jumping,” ghost-hunting crowd: the ones who go running from haunted locations at the first noise or cold spot they encounter.  These folks are an embarrassment.

Science will not take Sasquatch seriously until the people who present themselves in this field do so in a professional, logical fashion.  Science is cold and heartless.  It’s science!  It is supposed to work without emotion.  Too bad the same cannot be said for the majority of “Bigfooters.”  All the “wanting Sasquatch to exist,” all the “eco-protection” babble, and all the “don’t kill the big guy,” has clouded their minds.  Too many are looking for what they want to find and do not want their dream to be killed.  Emotional response to this issue is the problem, not part of the solution.

As long as the individuals in the woods, who are doing the true legwork, are afraid to pull the trigger and kill one of these beasts, we will never make any progress.  Acknowledgement and respect go out to those who are getting off the couch, putting miles on their cars and boots, and looking for Sasquatch.  Now they just have to have the fortitude to follow through.

Too many people have used the paranormal and, in particular, the hunt for Sasquatch to further their own agenda.  In the realm of ecology (a science) and taxonomy (a science) a body is required before a new species is recognized.  The pseudo-groups need to understand simple reality.  Anything short of what is necessary for true science is just feel-good nonsense.  Those with the “no-kill” philosophy should be relegated to the “Sasquatch is a shape-shifter, trans-dimensional, UFO pilot” camp.  Their position does nothing to further professional research or bring any legitimacy to the field.


Join the Traveling Museum of the Paranormal and get awesome perks!

Kwin The Eskimo

Kwin The Eskimo

In the mid 1970s, Kwin the Eskimo was trapped under an avalanche of ragged Weekly World News, National Enquirer and Sun Magazines. It was a dodgy few weeks until he clawed his way out of the pile, squinting as if seeing sunlight for the first time. He survived the ordeal only to wind up wandering around Canada, Europe, the Caribbean, and the Middle East delving into all things esoteric. He finally found his way home again, settling in the Eastern Woodlands of the United States. These days he gets paid to uncover the truth, but seldom finds the answers as enlightening as the journey to the question. Most of the time he would rather be stalking through the wilds trapping his next meal than dealing with the unwashed masses. He resides with Mrs Eskimo and an ever changing cadre of wildlife.

Leave a Reply

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Why not capture one? Mankind has been making traps to catch stuff size we realized it took less energy to make lunch if we could get prey animals in a box. Live trapping is an art but with new composite material, and wireless technology a trap large enough and strong enough, yet portable enough to hump into the mountains should be an easy project. In Monterey County we have Mountain Lions, and Bobcats, but few people know that there are also ring-tailed cats. Few people know about them because they are extremely rare, and sneaky. It would make no sense… Read more »

I completely agree that a body is needed to prove scientifically and conclusively that the species is real. However, I would like to call into question the need for proving its existence in the first place. I have come to the conclusion that it is far better for THEM to remain off of the establishment’s radar. I personally don’t see any good that would come from furthering professional research and/or legitimacy being brought to this field.

I vote no kill. Tranquilize, take tissue samples and put one of the heaviest endangered species fines on any one who seeks to do them harm. Because if we’ve learned anything by how the gorillas have been treated the Sasquatch will be poached to near extinction coz every yahoo with trophy room will want a preserved hand as an ashtray or a decapitated head as a bubble gum dispenser.

I was just thinking the same thing. If Bigfoot exists, leave it alone. I personally have very fond childhood memories of Harry and the Hendersons, and I wouldn’t want that ruined by a front-page picture of a beer-bellied redneck holding up Squatch’s head under the headline “LOCAL MAN BAGS LEGEND” or something like that.

How do you tranquilize an animal of unknown size and unknown metabolism? I’m no expert, but my impression is that when biologists go out to tranquilize a wild animal, they have *some* idea of the animal’s size and reaction to the tranquilizer (which may dictate what drug to use). There are too many unknown variables with Sasquatch to safely tranquilize one. Any attempt is going to be risky not just to the animal, but to the researcher. Would you want to be on the bad side of an angry and inadequately tranquilized 10-foot-tall ape? Never mind that you’d have to… Read more »
The gorillas have been poached by the “bush meat” trade. Impoverished starving people that live enmasse near or in the gorilla habitat borders. It has absolutely nothing to do with trophy hunting. The macabe furniture is a by-product of the killing not the motivating factor. Dr. P.N Stuff Congo

Well spoken, Kwin!

There are definitely those of us working towards that goal. We’re not predators, super-hunters, or trigger-happy murderers. We really just need one body. For those of us truly interested in learning about this species and protecting its habitat – Sasquatch must die.

I’m slightly disappointed given the recent more racy if not raunchy material on here I saw the picture an’ thought now there’s a type o’ porn y’don’t hear much about Sasquatch rapin’ Frosty the Snowman. I even thought I’d finally find out what Frosty’s carrot was for. Mighty Kwin you say you’re a trapper but there’re many trappin’ methods. Couldn’t you go for a honey trap an’ sidle up t’Bigfoot in a bar makin’ goo-goo eyes at’im? I’m bein’ facetious because I’ve a suspicion things wouldn’t work out quite as you hope. Bryan Sykes’s been criticised for puttin’ out material… Read more »

Wow, I love how you put down everyone who is against killing something. I’m a vegan, and I’m against hunting. I am no-kill because I believe all animals have a right to live. Do I believe in Sasquatch? I would like to, just like I would like to believe in ghosts. I want to know there are things about this world that we have yet to discover. But killing one just to satisfy my thirst for knowledge? Cruel and selfish. Shame on you

I’m also in the “no kill” group but for another reason than those stated. I’m of the opinion that there is not now and never has been any such animal as bigfoot so any killing that would be done would probably only result in the death of some harmless hoaxer.

KTE, you come off as many KILL supporters do, as condescending. As a NO KILL activist, I will tell you I get it, perfectly. I don’t care. I GET that science needs a body to prove to itself and the world that Bigfoot does exist. The point is, I don’t care if that proof is ever found. For many witnesses who have seen Bigfoot, they don’t need proof. They don’t need proof because they’ve see one. I have not (yet) seen one, so I can’t say it is a fact BF exists. I do choose to believe friends and family… Read more »
While I agree with the spirit of the article. There is are a few factors I don’t think it addresses. I don’t think it is wise to let a bunch of armed Sasquatch hunters loose in the woods with the expectation that if they see a bipedal dark figure, then shooting it could possibly give them fame, fortune, and an opportunity to stick it to PETA. In their minds, there are two possible candidate identities for large bipedal creatures walking around in the woods: humans or bigfoot. For the others, and I would have to say the vast majority of… Read more »

I would have to go along with kill
We need a body I no it not nice but I think it is the only way to go