It's been a legend for years, but few realize that Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch or Yeti, gained official status in 1975. That year the Army Corps of Engineers published an environmental atlas that first recognized Sasquatch as a species indigenous to Washington state.

The $200,000 corps project found, among other things, that the big-footed animal is "covered with long hair, except for the face and hands, and has a distinctly humanlike form."

The corps described a Sasquatch as agile and strong, but so shy that it leaves "minimal evidence of its presence." It can grow up to 12 feet tall and weigh more than 1,000 pounds, eating mostly berries and small fish.

Acknowledging that the creature is the target of some debate; the atlas claims to base its findings on hair samples taken by the FBI that indicate an undiscovered creature.

Is it actually possible that a reclusive man-like creature inhabits the remote areas of our planet? Why not ? Isn't it arrogant of us to assume we know of all the species on this huge planet ? Scientists will tell you that we don't. Only a few years ago, a unknown animal now named the Okapi was discovered. What about creatures we know of , but are thought to be extinct ? The coelacanth was thought to be extinct for 70 million years until they were discovered alive and well in 1938. So is it really that hard to believe that a hair covered, man-like creature could exist on the verge of discovery ? In many remote areas of the world there have been sightings of just such a creature. Known by many names such as Sasquatch, Yeti, Almas and many more. Is this an unknown primate, the "missing link" or some other yet unknown species ? There is evidence to support the existance of just such a creature in the Northwestern United States as well as other remote areas.

There are still numerous sightings every year. The descriptions of the creatures are very similar from sighting to sighting. There are discrepancies in some of the details but the mind does play tricks on us when frightened. Exaggeration and hoaxes do account for some of the discrepancies in the descriptions as well. �The height is the most varied detail. Witnesses have reported the creatures to be from 5'6" to 8' +. This is easily explained if you take into account the possible age difference of the particular creature. Did they see and adult or juvenile ? There would be a noticeable size difference depending on the age. Then there are the foot prints.....

The footprints left by the creatures are, on average, considerably �larger than that of a human. �On the most part, the creatures have been shy and reclusive. �They normally try to avoid contact with humans. �Every now and then there are reports of sightings in populated areas. �Perhaps the creatures are just as curious about us as we are about them.


One of the most famous sightings occured at Bluff Creek in 1967. �Rodger Patterson and a friend were horse back riding when they saw a huge hair covered creature. They began to run away when it noticed the two men, but not before Rodger shot some film of the creature. �The creature that was filmed was a female, while you cannot see in this view, breasts are clearly visable in in other frames of the film. � Scientists who have studied the film have said that the estimated stride of the creature is larger than that of a man. �They also say it would have been very difficult for a man for simulate this large stride. Footprints were also found later at the same location. �The footprints were the same type as typically found at a bigfoot sighting.

The picture shown above was taken by a photographer on July 11, 1995 in the Wild Creek area in the foothills of Snoqualmie National Forest. �The picture was obtained from the photographer by Cliff Crook, the director of Bigfoot Central. �The cameraman was out looking for a bigfoot when he heard splashing coming from a stream, he found himself face to face with this creature.

This is a picture of a white Bigfoot sighted often in Fort Worth, Texas in 1969.

E-mail Me At: [email protected]