Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy

Down Classification Avenue with the Sasquatch

By Daryl Colyer

That being said, let’s walk this putative species down Classification Avenue and see where the sasquatch might end up (if what we think we may know is actually true and the sasquatch is more than just a hypothetical creature).

Starting at the broadest, most inclusive, level, the sasquatch would obviously be placed in Kingdom Animalia. In other words, in general terms, it is a multicellular creature sustained nutritionally by feeding on other life forms (plants, animals, etc.).

The next taxonomic level is Phylum, which would be Chordata (subphylum Vertebrata) for our species of interest. All we are saying here is that the sasquatch has to have at least a rudimentary skeleton with a spinal column and a tail or remnants of one (tailbone).

Few scientists would argue against placing the sasquatch within the Class Mammalia, the warm-blooded vertebrates with hair that feed their young on milk from milk-producing mammary glands.

The proper Order is most likely Primates. To this group belong the prosimians (lemurs and lorises), monkeys, apes, and humans. In general terms, primates are a group of mammals whose traits generally include mobile and opposable digits, nails instead of claws, binocular, trichromatic vision, and large brains relative to body size.

So far, so good. Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order… the familiar sequence memorized in grade school seems rather straightforward. Family is the next category.

Is the sasquatch in the Family Hominidae?

To gain membership into the Family Hominidae, the sasquatch must be a primate with erect posture, it must have stereoscopic vision, a large brain, and it must have a rounded skull and small teeth.

Historically, the Family Hominidae was made up exclusively of humans and their extinct ancestors. Chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, and bonobos (the great apes) were classified in Family Pongidae. However, due to recent genetic research and fossil evidence, chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans, and humans are all currently considered as members of the Family Hominidae. Also included would be the extinct human-ancestral hominids such as Homo habilis (about 1.6 million years ago) and Homo erectus (about two million years ago), as well as the more distant Australopithecines (about eight million years ago).

Sounds like it’s a safe bet to say that the sasquatch, if it really exists, is part of the Family Hominidae, given reported physical and behavioral characteristics and the available limited physical evidence.

Onward. We’re almost at the end of the road.

To what genus should the sasquatch be assigned? Is the sasquatch a member of the genus Homo?

This is where things get dicey and become even more controversial, if possible, and where some researcher hypotheses diverge. I mentioned earlier that some could argue that this is a debate about a horse and cart before we’ve even found a cart, but I think we can proceed a little farther.

Homo genus?

Species classified as Homo have especially large brains, in addition to the other features that characterize the Family Hominidae. Members of the genus include H. erectus, H. habilis, Homo sapiens, and Homo neanderthalensis. All are characterized by bipedal locomotion and are known for their ability to fashion precise tools. That’s key. In spite of thousands of reports and other accounts that have accumulated over the centuries, we have no physical evidence or any observational data regarding the use of tools by the sasquatch, other than in the most rudimentary sense.

Members of the genus Homo also used fire, but we do not have any reports of fire usage by the sasquatch. One of the most interesting reports from John Green’s Sasquatch: the Apes Among Us, dealt with a hunter who, from a hidden position, reportedly watched a sasquatch as it was fascinated by his campfire. The sasquatch took pieces of firewood and played with them, swirling the burning sticks through the air, like it had found some new toys. However, this account falls far short of indicating that the sasquatch has the capacity to use or make fire.

There are those who consider that the sasquatch is nothing more than another species of great ape, much like the gorilla or chimpanzee. This group includes most, if not all, of the scientists who have considered the question, including people like Grover Krantz, John Bindernagel, and Jeff Meldrum. Then there are those who consider that it may be human.

I think we will find that the sasquatch is closely related to both, but obviously quite unique. Simply put, we may be dealing with something that is in a sort of “no man’s land” regarding its place on the Tree of Life. Perhaps the moniker “ape-man” is more apropos than any of us have imagined.

References

University of Michigan Museum of Zoology.

Encyclopedia Britannica.

Green, J. (1978). Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us. 492 pp. Hancock House Publishers Ltd., Saanichton, B.C., Canada