Sasquatch Chronicles Blog

Jan 15

How tall do bigfoot get?

Mattsquatch Presents writes “Lets take a brief look at how big and tall Sasquatch actually get. The answer might surprise you.

The farther North you go, the bigger animals get. This is called Bergmann’s rule and it applies to bigfoot as well. Thanks for watching.”

11 Responses to “How tall do bigfoot get?”

  1. Kelly W

    Ok well I asked Tom Sewid this question about why those in the Pacific Northwest seem larger than in other area’s and I told him this is my personal theory… I read a study done many years ago, some where in the 1930’s I believe, of 20 Japanese children they started feeding milk and dairy.. and a rich calcium diet into a dietary plan that was normally low in calcium intake.. those children after the 12 yr study had grown on average 4 to 8 inches taller than their classmates, of the same age.. so I was thinking, that the available food sources in the PNW of shellfish’s, and abundant in calcium rich foods, might be indicative to the larger growth of those who reach a larger size..anyone else have any thoughts on that?.. just curious…

    • Jeffrey H

      Kelly W: You could be on to something here. Science has told us for decades that the environment determines the growth scale of many species. In hot invoroments we hear the Sasquatch/Skunk Ape are shorter(6-7.5) and thinner(shape more like a muscular basketball player) then those in the Pacific NW. A lot of big football players in college sports had come out of the mid west including PA. The old saying was “the farm feed boys”, being that area was madeup mostly of farms. Because of how the differently looking Sasquatch come from the different areas of the US, it makes you wonder if they were crossbreed from different species. Example would be that some Sasquatch look like they have gorilla in them, others have more of a monkey look, yet some in Florida are said to look more like a orangetang. It just must be the environment and genetics that form the different looking and size Sasquatch, in my opinion. Just a quick thought!

    • Jonathan G

      I had a similar hypothesis to rationalize the size variations of these creatures from region to region. I always use the example of moose when this discussion comes up. Specimen are larger in say British Columbia, versus animals found in say the Addironack mountains of NY. This is due to environmental conditions that include the amount of food resources available. Similarly, Sasquatch size reports are larger in Canada and the Western United States than the specimen sighted on the East Coast or Southern States where resources are less plentiful.

      #Sasquatch

      Bergmann’s rule states that, within species of mammals, individuals tend to be larger in cooler environments. However, the validity of the rule has been debated. We examined the relationship between size and latitude as well as size and elevation for our subject, the North American Sasquatch, via the 2,194 reports where ‘height’ is described, that we have locked and loaded in our database from across the continent.

      There are a lot of variables that can be used to influence these datasets. Latitude, Elevation, Annual Snowfall, Average Temps and a whole lot more, and we will look to use those in future studies for sure.

      For this particular case study however, our 5 degree Latitude jumps are as follows and all Latitude data is taken from latlong.net :

      · 30 Degrees Latitude > 35 Degrees Latitude – FL, LA, TX, AL, MS, GA, SC, AZ, NM and AR.

      · 35 Degrees Latitude > 40 Degrees Latitude – NC, TN, OK, CA, KY, VA, KS, MO, WV, DE, MD, CO, UT, NJ, NV. For clarity’s sake, due to extreme elevation differences within this Latitude range in certain States, we split this Latitude range in to three. We have split the high elevation States of NV, CA, CO and UT in to their own section, we combined the entire range and we also split this entire Latitude range without the high elevation States of NV, CA, CO and UT. We have used the video to show the differences within the datasets of each range.

      · 40 Degrees Latitude > 45 Degrees Latitude – IL, IN OH, PA, NE, CT, RI, IA MA, NY, WY, VT, OR, NH, ID, MI, WI and SD.

      · 45 Degrees Latitude > 50 Degrees Latitude – ME, MN, MT, ND and WA.

      · 50 Degrees Latitude Plus > CAN and AK

      Conclusion : The biggest standout is at the two ends of the chart, starting from the left hand side and the most Southern States and the 30 Degrees Latitude > 35 Degrees Latitude range (5,9% of all reports where ‘Height’ is described are 9ft or over), to the far right hand side of the chart, and the far north, Canada and Alaska, and 50 Degrees Latitude plus (12% of all reports where ‘Height’ is described are 9ft or over), which gives us a 103% increase.

      It is interesting to see within the 35 Degrees Latitude > 40 Degrees Latitude range, the differences in report %’s when adding and subtracting the high elevation States of the West (NV, CA, CO and UT) to the range, and even more so when taking in to consideration that elevation averages for reports in the different sections of this range can jump, on average, 3,500ft approximately, with those reports from the higher elevation areas seeing a higher % of 9ft and above animals as the video and graphs shows.

      https://fb.watch/9LrXkkw_tY/

  3. Bal G

    I think it has a lot to do with genetics. If your parents are tall, then so will you. And vice versa. Don’t know if I buy into the “tall theory” the farther North you go as far as bigfoot are concerned. I think they need to be bulkier or fatter and maybe have more hair, because it so much colder up north. I do buy into the theory that the sasquatch up north are far more carnivorous than their southern cousins, because vegetation is scarce in ice and snow. Which means they are probably more dangerous to humans, because of these elements.

  4. m99

    That was a very good explanation of the (comparative) sizes. I still get blown away by the fact these large creatures are so stealthy. I can’t remember who I was listening to, but the other day someone was talking about the ‘Mountain Giant’ with tusks. It wasn’t in a Sasquatch site either. Probably Steve Quayle. Anyway, I’d like to hear you speak of those type creatures too. Thanks Matt.

  6. Steven P

    Have no doubt available food plays a part as well as genetics and enviroment. If sasquatch was contemporaneous with smilodon /the saber tooth tiger, along with the huge short faced bear makes perfect sense they would have to be large,smart and elusive just to survive. Who knows though, maybe they were almost wiped out but had the intelligence and adaptability to hang on in small groups while other so called ice age animals died off.LOL and thats all before modern man came along posing Not to mention the southern bigfoot and the like,may be a whole different species to begin with.Would think we are on the brink of getting some answers with so many encounters, or at least more evidence. Keep waiting for a Go Pro camera footage or something along the lines of that footage of the girl skiing on the mountain,she was getting ready to go down a big slope and just as she gets going here comes a pretty big bear charging after her in her rear view camera, and she was totally unaware how close it got to her.

Leave a Reply