Chris Lau is Toronto’s only accredited Bigfoot researcher, intent on tracking down the hairy beast.
One decade ago, Christopher Lau was eating dinner when his father asked the 22-year-old to help him track down Sasquatch.
A month later, the Toronto native found himself camping in remote British Columbia when Lau began to hear rustling in the woods.
“We had started to brew some coffee, when I began to hear some monkey-like grunts,” he says. “Somewhere out there was something watching us closely.”
Pressing record on his camcorder, he captured three seconds worth of what he could only describe as a gorilla grunting.
“After that morning, I knew something was out there for sure.”
Now with several years of exploration behind him, Lau is one of Toronto’s only accredited researchers with the international Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization. (The terms Sasquatch and Bigfoot are interchangeable.)
Armed with a bachelor of arts in anthropology from York University, Lau — now a Markham resident — continues his pursuit of the legendary creature throughout the GTA and across the entire country.
Lau’s most recent major expedition occurred in 2011, when he visited North Bay and other locales scattered along Lake Superior. These tours are called “exhibitions,” weeklong conferences where upwards of 30 researchers convene to followup with witnesses, map possible track directions and measure step lengths.
Searching for Bigfoot is called “squatching.” The practice is guided by “the Flats,” a BFRO database that logs visual and audio sightings that are publicly submitted to the agency.
An important portion of Lau’s work involves screening these reports from locations as close to the GTA as Wasaga Beach, Lindsay and Muskoka.
Assessing the validity of each report is vital, because a majority of sightings quickly turn out to be false.
“People easily misidentify Bigfoot with animals, like if a bear was to stand on its hind legs,” Lau says. “The mind can play tricks on you.
“Other times, we’ll receive reports from armchair researchers who is likely some hillbilly who wants a Bigfoot show to set up in his backyard and interview him.”
When visiting the location of a potential sighting, Bigfoot trackers use a variety of tools and methodology to determine a report’s legitimacy.
Trail cameras are attached to tree trunks and small, two-toned percussion instruments called wood blocks are played, in an effort to mimic what the researchers believe are Bigfoot warning signals.
“Sasquatch like to tree knock,” Lau says. “It is a non-verbal method of communication used to tell one another that an intruder may be near.
“But then again, it could just be a woodpecker.”
Despite the notable lack of modern day evidence, the 32-year-old points to the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film as proof the Sasquatch exists.
The film contains the infamous and widely circulated image of a tall, black and hairy subject that the filmmakers, Roger Patterson and Robert Gimlin, claimed was not human.
“People consider it a hoax but it isn’t,” he says, acknowledging the grainy image is losing its relevance in an age of high-definition smartphone cameras. “So far, it is the only visual evidence of a Sasquatch.”
Still, he has questions that remain unanswered.
“You can never really know for certain,” Lau says. “It could be a mythical creature, sure.
“But for me, I’m set on Sasquatch being something . . . the last survivors of a great ape species, a true missing link.”
David D
Sorry Lau, there is no such thing as a “missing link”. All creatures reproduce after their kind. As far as it maybe being mythical, the Greeks don’t view it that way, that’s a western label. They say it’s historical. Wow! Just food for thought.
Steven B
…perhaps we have a “few links” with a lot of “missing chain” 😉 links…links…mmmmmmmmmm…sausage 😉
Seamus J. C
[Having a good laugh, thank you, Steven]
cyndie r
Yeah Lau is still behind the times a little bit I think. But his heart is in the right place. Maybe he should listen to SC once in a while and bring himself up to date. Then again he could just be a wood pecker.
Lee W
not worth reading,his info.sounds familiar bfro
Stacy F
That’s fricking hilarious… just exactly how does one become an “accredited” researcher? Because they paid for enough BFRO expeditions to earn his way in? There are some EXCELLENT researchers in the Toronto area. Don’t assume that because someone is not a BFRO member they haven’t got what it takes. This guy might be a great researcher too, but to say someone is “accredited” is just ridiculous.
Jonathan B
I agree with dave
Dave S
+1 to all you guys…… I hope Lau has a day job. Tree knocks have shown to be part of food search. I always wondered if BF walked around with a hunk of wood or a rock so that he could make tree knocks at just the right time. As far as accredited if a BA IN ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOME BRFO meetings GETS YOU THAT DIPLOMA I might as well be a monkey uncle. Lol. I like my title to be UNCREDENTIALED CRYPTOZOOLOGIST. W an concentration in Bigfoot, Dogmen and Yowee
Mitchell K
Tree knocks for food ? Yes sometimes but it doesn’t mean it’s only for that. I’m certain it used for communication also. And missing link. Everything living creature that’s ever existed is a link. Same goes for transitional species. Every living thing that is and ever was is a transitional species
darren w
He’s only speculating – just like everyone else – because thats all anyone can do at this point.
Accredited – definition. a person, organization, or course of study officially recognized or authorized.
Why is this a problem? He doesn’t claim to be an expert, only that this is what he does “officially”. He’s just looking for answers like everyone else. Why are we taking jabs at him?
Mitchell K
Totally agree
Michael K
Come on Darren it is funny. Accredited? What cereal box do I fill in? Or is it the back of a comic?
Our ManBearPig group is seeking researchers and can offer you credentials and an authorized I.D. card housed in a cool wallet, with a gold “federal” looking badge, all for the low, low outrageous price of $29.95. Decoder ring sold seperately. T-Shirts sold out.
darren w
What are you 10 years old? Unbelievable!
Kay S
That might make a good show. A collection of all the crackpots and hoaxes.
Robert W
Agree – give the guy a break. Bob Garrett says tree knocking for both food foraging and some communication. Will however dismissed tree knocking. Nice casting! Take care everyone!
Avis B
Some hillbilly that has hunted all their life and knows all the tracks of all wild life …. Means for the most part they live way back in the country woods.. Guess what… That is where Bigfoot lives most of the time… So what is being said is … That if you have NOT been “accredited” researcher, your word means nothing… Somebody needs to get with the times.. BFRO has turn into a joke for me… If I was to see something, BFRO would be the LAST group I would talk too… Sorry for the rant…. This is why I Listen to this show SC… I get real info from real people, with nothing to hide… Thank you Wes for taking the time to do this …
Paul M
Hey hay Hey… LAU = DA MAN. well maybe not. But likes what he does. So it’s cool.
Dave T
I won’t pick on Lau. He’s on the same team. Like it’s been said a 1000 times before, there are no experts in this field.
Eddie M
I’m not an accredited Bigfoot Researcher but, I looked at a Booger up close for as long as I wanted to at the time. I don’t believe he’s ever seen one. It’s kinda like fishing … If your not there when they feed you aren’t gonna catch any….I just don’t think many are seen on concrete.
Indignico
I get suspicious whenever any article succumbs to these types of paragraphs:
Assessing the validity of each report is vital, because a majority of sightings quickly turn out to be false.
“People easily misidentify Bigfoot with animals, like if a bear was to stand on its hind legs,” Lau says. “The mind can play tricks on you.
“Other times, we’ll receive reports from armchair researchers who is likely some hillbilly who wants a Bigfoot show to set up in his backyard and interview him.”
——
Where is any kind of evidence to believe such claims are even remotely true? In a social environment with such a great cost for making any claims regarding discovery of anything construed as evidence for the existence of BigFoot I think people are much more likely to be extremely careful about what they think they’ve seen or found before daring to publicly say so… In which case I doubt that the ‘majority of sightings quickly turn out to be false’
Starts seeming like the purpose of the seemingly pro-existence of BigFoot article is actually there to convey the false truisms that a majority of sightings quickly turn out to be false or that there is a such a thing as a hillbilly desperate for his 15 minutes on a half-assed ‘reality’ show… Afterall that entire meme of people that desperate to be on tv was shown to us regularly by those same producers of that same sneering TV-imposed supposed reality… I say don’t trust the premise until you’ve encountered it yourself actually in real reality a few times… And assessed how likely it is that the example of it you’ve found occurring in real life is an example of life imitating art imitating agenda-driven contrived faux life.