Speaker 1: Today, I want to tell you about a journey that
Speaker 1: I've been on for most of my life. Ever since
Speaker 1: I was a kid, I've heard tales of bigfoot and
Speaker 1: wild men while spending time with my friends and family.
Speaker 1: As I grew older and read more about the paranormal,
Speaker 1: my interest in encryptids and other things strange only deepened.
Speaker 1: That's why I'm so excited to share with you what
Speaker 1: I've personally become involved with the Untold Radio Network. The
Speaker 1: Untold Radio Network is a live streaming podcast network that
Speaker 1: airs a new show every day across all podcast platforms, YouTube,
Speaker 1: and more. They have eight different shows on all sorts
Speaker 1: of exciting topics such as bigfoot, cryptids, UFOs, aliens, and
Speaker 1: much more. I even have my own show called Weird Encounters,
Speaker 1: where I talk about all things strange. This is more
Speaker 1: than just a podcast network. It's a community that allows
Speaker 1: me to meet so many amazing people who share their
Speaker 1: stories and experiences with strange. If you're interested in hearing
Speaker 1: more of these stories and learning more about the paranormal
Speaker 1: and encryptids, make sure you check out the Untold Radio
Speaker 1: Network for all kinds of exciting shows. It's free to subscribe.
Speaker 1: So what are you waiting for visit www dot untold
Speaker 1: radionetwork dot com today.
Speaker 2: Now, what are your reporting? I got a screen going
Speaker 2: on here. Something just kid with my dog, something to
Speaker 2: kill your dog? My dog. We're flying through there, over
Speaker 2: the tree. I don't know how it did it? Okay, Damn,
Speaker 2: I'm really confused. All I saw was my dog coming
Speaker 2: over the fence, and they would dead once you hit
Speaker 2: the grill. I didn't see any cars. All I saw
Speaker 2: was my dog coming over the fence.
Speaker 1: Happen?
Speaker 2: What are you reporting? We got some wonder or something
Speaker 2: crawling around out here? Did you see what it was?
Speaker 2: It was enough out here. Look, I'm new to one
Speaker 2: doow now and I don't need anything. I don't want
Speaker 2: to go outside. Hello, hit the boddy out here? What quin?
Speaker 2: I'm out there? I thought of a venus about text nine?
Speaker 2: I don't know. Easy ann ount there. Yeah, I'm walking
Speaker 2: right heady.
Speaker 1: Before we begin today's exploration of Sasquatch in Native American history,
Speaker 1: I want to share something personal with you. Many of us,
Speaker 1: myself included, have seen these creatures with our own eyes.
Speaker 1: We know that they exist. This isn't just belief or speculation.
Speaker 1: It's based on direct experience. Now I understand skepticism. In fact,
Speaker 1: I remain deeply skeptical of many pieces of evidence and
Speaker 1: even some eyewitness accounts. I question blurry photos, analyze track
Speaker 1: casts critically, and approach every new Bigfoot video with healthy doubt.
Speaker 1: That kind of critical thinking is essential in this field.
Speaker 1: But there's something I found impossible to ignore, and that's
Speaker 1: the overwhelming number of references to these beings across Native
Speaker 1: American and First Nations cultures who had no way of
Speaker 1: communicating with one another. From the Pacific Northwest to the Everglades,
Speaker 1: from the Eastern Woodlands to the high deserts of the Southwest,
Speaker 1: Indigenous peoples described remarkably similar entities with consistent physical features
Speaker 1: and behaviors. This reality directly contradicts skeptics who claim there
Speaker 1: is no historical basis for sasquatch in indigenous traditions, that
Speaker 1: these beings were essentially invented in the mid twentieth century
Speaker 1: and retroactively inserted into Native American lore. Nothing could be
Speaker 1: further from the truth. It begs a fundamental question. Can
Speaker 1: all of these accounts across hundreds of distinct cultural groups
Speaker 1: with different languages, belief systems, and geographic locations just be stories,
Speaker 1: or should we apply our critical thinking skills and consider
Speaker 1: the possibility that these traditions contain more fact than fiction.
Speaker 1: As you listen particular attention to the detailed descriptions preserved
Speaker 1: across tribal traditions, height, hair covering, distinctive foot morphology, wood knocking, communications, whistling, vocalizations,
Speaker 1: and that characteristic odor. What's remarkable is how consistently these
Speaker 1: details align with contemporary accounts from people with no knowledge
Speaker 1: of these indigenous traditions. When a modern hiker in Washington
Speaker 1: State describes hearing the same pattern of wood knocks that
Speaker 1: the Yakama people documented generations ago, or when a contemporary
Speaker 1: tracker in northern California finds footprints showing the same mid
Speaker 1: tarsal flexibility described in traditional Urrok knowledge, we're witnessing connections
Speaker 1: that span centuries. This isn't about blindly accepting every claim.
Speaker 1: It's about recognizing and respecting the depth, breadth, and continuity
Speaker 1: of indigenous knowledge that has been too often dismissed, appropriated,
Speaker 1: or simply ignored. It's about acknowledging that Native Americans and
Speaker 1: First Nations peoples have been documenting these observations for thousands
Speaker 1: of years before European contact, observations that continue to be
Speaker 1: reported by people just like you and me today. So
Speaker 1: as we journey through this narrative together, I invite you
Speaker 1: to consider the evidence with both an open mind and
Speaker 1: critical judgment. What you're about to hear might challenge some assumptions,
Speaker 1: but it represents one of the most enduring and consistent
Speaker 1: bodies of traditional knowledge on this continent. The indigenous history
Speaker 1: of the beings we now call sasquatch, beings that many
Speaker 1: of us know without a doubt are real. Long before
Speaker 1: the name Bigfoot entered the American lexicon in the late
Speaker 1: nineteen fifties, long before grainy footage captured a large, hair
Speaker 1: covered figure striding along Bluff Creek in northern California, the
Speaker 1: indigenous peoples of North America shared stories of tall, powerful
Speaker 1: beings who dwelled in the shadows of forests, mountains, and
Speaker 1: remote valleys. These beings went by hundreds of different names
Speaker 1: in different languages, reflected diverse attributes depending on the tribe
Speaker 1: and region, and occupied various positions in the complex spiritual
Speaker 1: and cultural frameworks of Native American peoples across the continent.
Speaker 1: This is not a simple story with a clear beginning
Speaker 1: and end. Rather, it is a rich tapestry of tribal knowledge,
Speaker 1: oral traditions, spiritual beliefs, and lived experiences spanning thousands of
Speaker 1: years and hundreds of distinct cultures. The narrative of what
Speaker 1: we now collectively call sasquatch or bigfoot in contemporary culture
Speaker 1: is in reality many interconnected narratives that reflect the deep
Speaker 1: relationship between indigenous peoples and the landscapes they inhabited. In
Speaker 1: exploring this history, we must approach with respect and humility,
Speaker 1: acknowledging that these traditions are not mere folklore or campfire tales,
Speaker 1: but vital components of living cultural heritage. Many tribes consider
Speaker 1: their knowledge of these beings to be sacred, and while
Speaker 1: some information has been shared with outside researchers and anthropologists,
Speaker 1: much remains protected within tribal communities. The earliest known traditions
Speaker 1: of wild hairy humanoids in North America emerge from oral
Speaker 1: histories that, by their nature, are difficult to date precisely.
Speaker 1: Anthropologists estimate some of these traditions may extend back thousands
Speaker 1: of years, preserved through generations of careful storytelling and ceremonial recounting.
Speaker 1: The Yoku's people of California's Central Valley have traditions of
Speaker 1: a being called hairy man or chutia that predate European
Speaker 1: contact by centuries. Their stories describe these beings as having
Speaker 1: existed since the beginning, suggesting an ancient recognition of these
Speaker 1: creatures presence on the landscape. Similarly, the coast Salish peoples
Speaker 1: of the Pacific Northwest describe their encounters with Sasquatch like
Speaker 1: beings known as Sesquak, Seatko, or various other names depending
Speaker 1: on the specific langthanguage, as extending back to time immemorial.
Speaker 1: What striking about these early traditions is their consistency across
Speaker 1: geographic regions and linguistic families that had limited contact with
Speaker 1: one another, From the Algonquian speaking tribes of the northeast
Speaker 1: to the nod in A languages of the Sabardic, from
Speaker 1: the Salish languages of the northwest coast to the uto
Speaker 1: Aztecan languages of the southwest. Descriptions of large, hairy humanoid
Speaker 1: forest dwellers appear with remarkable similarity in basic physical characteristics,
Speaker 1: despite significant cultural variations in how these beings were understood
Speaker 1: pre contact. Descriptions of these beings across numerous tribes share
Speaker 1: several consistent elements, though with regional variations. The Lakota spoke
Speaker 1: of chia Tanka great elder Brother as standing taller than
Speaker 1: a man, covered in hair with a strong smell. The
Speaker 1: Hoopa of northern California described o Ma, a boss of
Speaker 1: the woods, as having a similar stature, but with distinctive
Speaker 1: backward facing feet. The Iroquois Confederation tribes shared stories of
Speaker 1: stone giants Gano's Giguaya, who, while sometimes described as wearing
Speaker 1: armor of stone, shared many physical characteristics with sasquatch like
Speaker 1: beings described by other tribes. The Tilamouk of Oregon told
Speaker 1: of multiple types of forest beings, including the fearsome ki
Speaker 1: mana wild man who would carry off women and children.
Speaker 1: The Klamath and Modoc peoples of the southern Oregon northern
Speaker 1: California region described a being called lumtock Maks, the one
Speaker 1: who whistles, as extremely tall with a covering of black hair,
Speaker 1: known for its distinctive whistling call used to communicate with
Speaker 1: others of its kind. Several common physical traits emerge across
Speaker 1: these early descriptions. Most traditions describe beings that stand considerably
Speaker 1: taller than humans, often seven to ten feet tall. They
Speaker 1: are almost universal described as covered in hair or fur,
Speaker 1: typically dark in color, though some traditions, particularly in the Arctic,
Speaker 1: describe white haired variants. They are frequently mentioned as having
Speaker 1: a distinctive, powerful smell, often compared to wet animal fur,
Speaker 1: rotten vegetables, or skunk. Despite variations, most traditions describe a
Speaker 1: being with a fundamentally humanoid appearance, walking upright on two
Speaker 1: legs with hands capable of tool use. They are invariably
Speaker 1: described as possessing strength far exceeding that of humans. While
Speaker 1: physical descriptions show remarkable consistency across tribal boundaries, the cultural significance,
Speaker 1: spiritual status, and relationship with humans attributed to these beings
Speaker 1: varied significantly between tribal groups. For some tribes, particularly in
Speaker 1: the Pacific Northwest, these beings were considered a separate race
Speaker 1: of people who shared the landscape with humans. The Quakiutl
Speaker 1: Quaquacka walk of British Columbia incorporated beings called Bukwus wild
Speaker 1: man of the woods into their complex clan structure and
Speaker 1: potlatch traditions, viewing them as transformed humans who had become
Speaker 1: lost in the spiritual realm. The Thompson Indians Lakapomas of
Speaker 1: the interior Pacific Northwest viewed the beings they called skocomic
Speaker 1: as powerful medicine beings who possessed supernatural abilities, including shape shifting, invisibility,
Speaker 1: and the power to paralyze humans with fear or drive
Speaker 1: them mad. Thompson elders taught that these beings should be
Speaker 1: respected rather than feared, and could serve as spirit helpers
Speaker 1: to particularly gifted Shamans. Among many California tribes, including the
Speaker 1: karuk Hoopa Valley tribe and Urak stories described Oma or
Speaker 1: similar beings as more animal like and potentially dangerous, though
Speaker 1: still possessing intelligence and supernatural qualities. These tribes often had
Speaker 1: specific taboos and protective practices regarding these creatures, including avoiding
Speaker 1: certain areas of the forest, particularly at night. The Algonquins
Speaker 1: speaking peoples of the Northeast, including the mick Mac, Panobscot,
Speaker 1: and Abenaki, spoke of the wendigo, a malevolent entity sometimes
Speaker 1: described with physical characteristics similar to other sasquatch traditions, but
Speaker 1: with a fearsome spiritual dimension as a spirit of greed, hunger,
Speaker 1: and winter. The Wendigo tradition represents one of the more
Speaker 1: negative portrayals, though scholars debate whether the Wendigo and more
Speaker 1: neutral sasquatch like beings represent the same or distinct traditional
Speaker 1: entities among the Iroquois confederacy. How Denisauni stone giants Geno's
Speaker 1: Kiawa were fearsome enemies in some stories, but became allies
Speaker 1: of humans and others. The complex relationship portrayed in these
Speaker 1: traditions reveals an understanding of these beings as having their
Speaker 1: own agency and moral complexity, capable of both harm and
Speaker 1: help depending on circumstances and how they were treated by humans.
Speaker 1: Pre contact traditions frequently embedded detailed ecological knowledge about these beings,
Speaker 1: information that contemporary biologists might classify as behavioral ecology or
Speaker 1: natural history. These details appear across tribal traditions with remarkable consistency,
Speaker 1: almost universally. They are described as dwelling in remote, mountainous
Speaker 1: or densely forested areas, often near water sources. Many traditions,
Speaker 1: particularly in regions with harsh winters, describe seasonal migrations between
Speaker 1: lowland and highland areas following food availability. They are commonly
Speaker 1: described as being more active at night, with daytime sightings
Speaker 1: considered rare, usually portrayed as omnivorous, eating a combination of
Speaker 1: plant foods, berries, roots, tree cambium, and animal foods fish,
Speaker 1: small game, though rarely described as hunters of large game,
Speaker 1: often described as living in small family groups rather than
Speaker 1: large communities, with some traditions mentioning male female pairs and offspring.
Speaker 1: Numerous traditions mentioned complex communication systems, including whistles, howls, knocking sounds,
Speaker 1: often by striking trees or rocks, and in some cases
Speaker 1: forms of language. Several traditions described these beings using simple tools,
Speaker 1: particularly wooden clubs or sticks, and having the ability to
Speaker 1: move large stones or logs. The Yakama nation of the
Speaker 1: Columbia Plateau region had particularly detailed traditions regarding the beings.
Speaker 1: They called stick Indians, a non pejorative term referring to
Speaker 1: their forest dwelling nature. Yakima elders described specific food plants.
Speaker 1: These beings, favored, their techniques for catching salmon, and their
Speaker 1: careful avoidance of human settlements, except during times of extreme
Speaker 1: hunger or curiosity about human activities. Yakima traditions also detailed
Speaker 1: how these beings would sometimes leave gifts of freshly killed
Speaker 1: game near the camps of hunters who had shown them
Speaker 1: respect by leaving offerings of tobacco, and stay tuned for
Speaker 1: more sasquatch Ottesee will be right back after these messages.
Speaker 1: The Lummy people of coastal Washington had similarly detailed ecological
Speaker 1: knowledge of the beings they called t semech ways, describing
Speaker 1: how they would construct temporary brush sheelters in remote valleys,
Speaker 1: their preference for certain berry patches which human gatherers would
Speaker 1: deliberately avoid harvesting completely, and their habit of pushing over
Speaker 1: small trees as territorial markers. For many tribes, stories about
Speaker 1: Sasquatch like beings served important pedagogical functions beyond simply acknowledging
Speaker 1: their existence. These narratives often embedded practical knowledge, moral lessons,
Speaker 1: and tribal values that helped prepare young people for life
Speaker 1: in their environments. The Salish peoples of the inland Northwest
Speaker 1: used Seat coast stories to teach children about dangerous areas
Speaker 1: in their terrors, proper behavior when traveling alone in the forest,
Speaker 1: and the importance of maintaining ceremonial cleanliness to avoid attracting
Speaker 1: unwonted attention from spiritual beings. Among the tilling It of
Speaker 1: southeast Alaska, stories of Kushtaka land otter man, sometimes described
Speaker 1: with sasquatch like attributes, warned of the dangers of hunting
Speaker 1: alone and the importance of proper preparation before journeying into
Speaker 1: remote areas. The Monomony of the Great Lakes region told
Speaker 1: stories of the large, hairy beings they called manaby walk
Speaker 1: to illustrate proper and improper behavior toward the natural world.
Speaker 1: In these narratives, those who showed respect toward the forest
Speaker 1: and its inhabitants might receive protection or gifts from the
Speaker 1: manabye walk, while those who were wasteful, greedy, or disrespectful
Speaker 1: might face frightening encounters or even disappearance. For many California tribes,
Speaker 1: including the Miewalk and Yucuts, stories of their respective wild
Speaker 1: men served as lessons about balance and humility. These traditions
Speaker 1: often portrayed the beings as ancient dwellers of the land
Speaker 1: who existed before humans and possessed knowledge of plants, animals
Speaker 1: and landscape features that humans would do well to respect
Speaker 1: rather than dominate. The densely forested mountains and valleys of
Speaker 1: the Pacific Northwest, stretching from northern California, through Oregon, Washington,
Speaker 1: British Columbia, and into southeast Alaska, contained the highest concentration
Speaker 1: and most elaborate traditions of Sasquatch like beings in North America.
Speaker 1: This region, not coincidentally, also accounts for the highest number
Speaker 1: of contemporary Bigfoot reports among the Coast Salish peoples, including
Speaker 1: the Squamish, musquaem Secualt and related groups. The traditions of Saskets,
Speaker 1: from which the anglicized Sasquatch derives, were particularly well developed.
Speaker 1: Coast Salish traditions often described these beings as a race
Speaker 1: of hairy giants who lived in parallel to human communities
Speaker 1: but avoided contact. They were believed to possess supernatural abilities,
Speaker 1: including hypnosis, telepathy, and the power to induce memory loss
Speaker 1: in humans who encountered them. The Quaquaka Walk formerly known
Speaker 1: as quak Utel of northern Vancouver Island and adjacent mainland
Speaker 1: incorporated wild men and women of the woods into their
Speaker 1: complex ceremonial system. Figures such as Baquas and Dessonoqua appeared
Speaker 1: in potlatch ceremonies, masked dances, and his figures carved on
Speaker 1: totem poles and house posts. These beings were understood as
Speaker 1: transformed humans who had become lost in the spirit world
Speaker 1: and now existed in a liminal state between human and
Speaker 1: supernatural realms. The Nisga people of the Nas River region
Speaker 1: in British Columbia speak of Bukwas, who lives near rivers
Speaker 1: and carries a large staff. According to tradition, this being
Speaker 1: has glowing eyes that can hypnotize humans, explaining why few
Speaker 1: people who see him can clearly recall the encounter. Among
Speaker 1: interior Salish groups like the Thompson, O'connigan and Shuswap, traditions
Speaker 1: of stick Indians or bush men Skocomic in Laka Pamluck's
Speaker 1: language describe beings who live deep in the forest and mountains.
Speaker 1: These traditions often emphasized the elusiveness of these beings and
Speaker 1: their ability to mimic human and animal sounds to confuse
Speaker 1: hunters or lure the unwary away from camp. Unique among
Speaker 1: Pacific Northwest traditions are those of the Simshian people of
Speaker 1: the northern British Columbia coast, who tell of both harry
Speaker 1: giants similar to other Sasquatch traditions, and a distinct category
Speaker 1: of being called bax Bakuwala Nuxiwi man eater at the
Speaker 1: north end of the world. This fearsome entity, while sharing
Speaker 1: some physical characteristics with sasquatch, was described as a cannibal
Speaker 1: spirit with a gaping mouth who ate humans who violated
Speaker 1: taboos or wandered too far from the protection of their community.
Speaker 1: The indigenous peoples of California, representing numerous langsguage families and
Speaker 1: cultural traditions, maintained some of the most explicit traditions of
Speaker 1: sasquatch like beings in North America. The Karuk, Koopa and
Speaker 1: Uruk tribes of northwestern California shared traditions of Oma, variously
Speaker 1: translated as boss of the woods or wild man. These
Speaker 1: traditions described beings of great size and strength who inhabited
Speaker 1: the remote ranges of the Klamath Mountains. Urak elders explained
Speaker 1: that Omah were known to occasionally kidnap humans, particularly women,
Speaker 1: presumably for breeding purposes, a motif that appears in Sasquatch
Speaker 1: traditions across multiple regions. The Modoc and Klamath peoples of
Speaker 1: the California Oregon border region told of Lumtok mocks, known
Speaker 1: for its distinctive whistling sounds. In Modoc tradition, these beings
Speaker 1: were said to live in the lava beds and caves
Speaker 1: of what is now Lava Beds National Monument, emerging primarily
Speaker 1: at night to hunt and gather food. Among the Yokits
Speaker 1: of central California, traditions of the hairy man Chu Taia
Speaker 1: included specific locations known to be inhabited by these beings.
Speaker 1: Certain valleys, caves, and remote canyons were deliberately avoided, with
Speaker 1: tribal elders warning that trespassing in these areas could result
Speaker 1: in frightening encounters or bad luck. Interestingly, some of these
Speaker 1: traditional Chutia territories remain hot spots for contemporary bigfoot sidings.
Speaker 1: The Miewok people of the western Sierra Nevada Foothills told
Speaker 1: of Uyami hairy forest beings who possessed powerful medicine and
Speaker 1: could cause illness in those who offended them. Meewok traditions
Speaker 1: emphasized that these beings should be treated with respect rather
Speaker 1: than fear, and offerings of tobacco or food should be
Speaker 1: left when entering their territory for hunting or gathering. While
Speaker 1: less numerous than in heavily forested regions, traditions of Sasquatch
Speaker 1: like beings also appear among indigenous peoples of the American Southwest.
Speaker 1: The Apache and Navajo DNA peoples share traditions of beings
Speaker 1: they call Yaidso Navajo or chie Tanka Apache. These were
Speaker 1: described as tall, hairy beings who lived in the higher
Speaker 1: elevations of mountain ranges in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado.
Speaker 1: According to Navajo tradition, these beings were dangerous and associated
Speaker 1: with witchcraft, while Apache traditions portrayed them as generally neutral
Speaker 1: toward humans unless provoked. Among the Hopi of Arizona, traditions
Speaker 1: speak of various categories of spiritual beings, some of which
Speaker 1: share characteristics with Sasquatch traditions. The Poco tocoala dog man
Speaker 1: was described as a dangerous hairy being that lived in
Speaker 1: remote canyons. However, Hope scholars have cautioned against simplistic equations
Speaker 1: between Poco Tacala, and Bigfoot as the hope. Conceptualization of
Speaker 1: these entities emphasizes their spiritual rather than physical nature. The
Speaker 1: Pueblo peoples of the Rio Grande Valley in New Mexico
Speaker 1: maintained traditions of mountain dwelling beings who were considered ancient
Speaker 1: and possessed of great wisdom regarding plant medicines and weather patterns.
Speaker 1: These traditions described beings who might reveal themselves to individuals
Speaker 1: of exceptional spiritual preparation, but would remain invisible to most humans.
Speaker 1: The indigenous peoples of the Great Plains, while inhabiting environments
Speaker 1: with less forest cover than regions to the east and west,
Speaker 1: nevertheless maintained traditions of sasquatch like beings, particularly in riverine
Speaker 1: forests and the foothills of mountain ranges at the plain's edges.
Speaker 1: Among the Lakota Sioux, traditions speak of chia Tanka Great
Speaker 1: Elder Brother, described as a tall, hairy being who lived
Speaker 1: primarily in the Black Hills and other mountainous regions. Lakota
Speaker 1: medicine man Pete catches Oglala explained in interviews during the
Speaker 1: nineteen seventies that Chiatanka were considered sacred beings who served
Speaker 1: as messengers between the physical and spiritual realms. According to Catches,
Speaker 1: these beings would sometimes serve as spirit helpers to medicine
Speaker 1: people of exceptional power and purity. The Cheyenne spoke of
Speaker 1: Maximista hairy man, describing him as a solitary being who
Speaker 1: avoided human contact, but occasionally left footprints around encampments as
Speaker 1: a way of monitoring human activities without direct interaction. Cheyenne
Speaker 1: traditions emphasized that Maximista was not hostile toward humans, but
Speaker 1: preferred to remain separate from human society. Among the Kiowa,
Speaker 1: traditions of hairy giants who dwelt in the mountains included
Speaker 1: stories of these beings occasionally taking human captives. Kiowa elder
Speaker 1: Billy Evans Horse shared in the nineteen eighties that his
Speaker 1: grandfather had warned him about places in the Wichita Mountains
Speaker 1: where one should not camp alone due to the presence
Speaker 1: of these beings. The Osage people of what is now
Speaker 1: Oklahoma and Missouri maintained traditions of shrewd Napiashka forest people,
Speaker 1: describing them as nocturnal being who lived along the fringes
Speaker 1: of Osage territory, and sometimes served as guardians against enemy raids,
Speaker 1: as they would vocalize loudly when detecting strangers entering their domain.
Speaker 1: The forests of eastern North America, from the Great Lakes
Speaker 1: to the Gulf Coast and from the Mississippi River to
Speaker 1: the Atlantic Ocean hosted numerous indigenous cultures with traditions of
Speaker 1: sasquatch like beings. Among the Iroquois Confederacy, Hawdenasaani of the northeast,
Speaker 1: traditions of Geno's Guawah stone giants share many characteristics with
Speaker 1: Sasquatch descriptions, though with the distinctive feature of stone like
Speaker 1: or armored skin. The Seneca in particular maintained detailed traditions
Speaker 1: of these beings, describing them as ancient enemies of humans,
Speaker 1: who later established an uneasy truce with some stone giants,
Speaker 1: eventually joining human communities. The Algonquian speaking peoples of New
Speaker 1: England and the Maritime Provinces shared traditions of several forest
Speaker 1: dwelling entities that share aspects of sasasquatch descriptions. The Panobscot
Speaker 1: and Abenaki spoke of Kiwak, a giant, hairy being of
Speaker 1: the deep forest. The Mickmack mick Mak traditions include Googo,
Speaker 1: a female giant said to capture humans in a large sack.
Speaker 1: The controversial Wendigo tradition, found primarily among Algonquian peoples of
Speaker 1: the northern forests, including a Jibwe, Cree and related groups,
Speaker 1: describes a malevolent entity associated with winter starvation and cannibalism.
Speaker 1: While some aspects of wendigo descriptions great height, unusual strength,
Speaker 1: and forest dwelling parallel Sasquatch traditions, the wendigo is distinctly
Speaker 1: characterized by its gaunt appearance and association with spiritual corruption,
Speaker 1: rather than the robust, hair covered appearance typically ascribed to Sasquatch.
Speaker 1: Among the Cherokee of the Southern Appalachians, traditions speak of
Speaker 1: nun Yinui stone man, and Ketsla Kudlah harry savage beings
Speaker 1: who inhabited remote mountain areas. Cherokee traditions, particularly those regarding Keklakudla,
Speaker 1: closely parallel other Sasquatch descriptions, depicting a large, hairy humanoid
Speaker 1: that avoided human settlements but might occasionally interact with hunters
Speaker 1: or medicine people in the deep forest. The Seminole and
Speaker 1: Mikosuki peoples of Florida maintain traditions of Stili swamp ape,
Speaker 1: a hairy being that inhabited the Everglades and remote swamp forests.
Speaker 1: These traditions describe a creature smaller than many Sasquatch descriptions
Speaker 1: from other regions, but sharing the characteristic hair covering and
Speaker 1: powerful build The indigenous peoples of the far North also
Speaker 1: maintain traditions of large, hairy humanoids, though with adaptations reflecting
Speaker 1: the unique environmental conditions of their homelands. Among the dean
Speaker 1: Athabaskan peoples of Alaska and northwestern Canada, traditions speak of
Speaker 1: Nikani or Nantina bush man, described as tall, powerful beings
Speaker 1: covered in hair who lived in the boreal forests and mountains.
Speaker 1: Dnate traditions often emphasize the ability of these beings to
Speaker 1: move silently despite their size, and to survive in the
Speaker 1: harshest winter conditions. The tling It people of coastal Alaska
Speaker 1: maintain traditions of several forest dwelling beings, including Kushtaka, usually
Speaker 1: translated as land otter man, but sometimes described with sasquatch
Speaker 1: like characteristics and Gagwok big man with little hat tling
Speaker 1: At traditions often emphasize the liminal nature of these beings,
Speaker 1: describing them as existing between human and animal realms. Among
Speaker 1: Inuit and Yupik peoples of the Arctic, traditions speak of
Speaker 1: several large humanoid beings, including torn It, described as powerful
Speaker 1: but shy humanoids who predated Inuit arrival in some regions,
Speaker 1: and the more fearsome Ijirak shape shifters who could take
Speaker 1: human or beast form. While these traditions differ in some
Speaker 1: respects from sasquatch descriptions in more southerly regions, they share
Speaker 1: the theme of humanoid beings who share the landscape with
Speaker 1: humans while largely avoiding direct contact. While most traditional knowledge
Speaker 1: of sasquatch like beings was transmitted through cultural narratives, ceremonies,
Speaker 1: and general traditional ecological knowledge, many tribes also preserved accounts
Speaker 1: of specific historical encounters. These narratives differ from general cultural
Speaker 1: descriptions in that they reference particular individuals, locations, and time periods,
Speaker 1: often within the remembered history of the community rather than
Speaker 1: in mythic time. Kurruk elder Charlie Tom Senior, a respected
Speaker 1: traditional healer and cultural knowledge keeper, shared numerous Oma accounts
Speaker 1: passed down through generations of his family. In one narrative
Speaker 1: documented by anthropologists in the nineteen seventies, Tom described an
Speaker 1: encounter from approximately eighteen fifty five when his great grandfather
Speaker 1: and several other care men were hunting in the high
Speaker 1: country near present day Happy Camp, California. And stay tuned
Speaker 1: for more sasquatch ott to see We'll be right back.
Speaker 1: After these messages, according to the account, the hunting party
Speaker 1: discovered an o Ma sleeping near a spring. The being
Speaker 1: was described as over seven feet tall, covered in reddish
Speaker 1: brown hair, with a face like a man, but not
Speaker 1: a man. The hunters quietly withdrew without disturbing the creature,
Speaker 1: considering it bad luck to harm or even wake an
Speaker 1: oh Mah. Tom noted that this location remained known in
Speaker 1: cark oral geography as a place where oma were occasionally
Speaker 1: seen into the twentieth century. Yakama Nation tribal members have
Speaker 1: preserved numerous accounts of encounters with the beings they traditionally
Speaker 1: call stick Indians. One particularly detailed narrative documented by ethnographer
Speaker 1: Lucille Housley in the nineteen forties, but describing events from
Speaker 1: the eighteen seventies of a Yakama woman who was picking
Speaker 1: huckleberries in the foothills of Mount Adams when she was
Speaker 1: surrounded by several hairy manlike creatures who communicated among themselves
Speaker 1: with whistling sounds. The woman, who had been taught traditional
Speaker 1: protocols for such encounters, sat perfectly still and began softly
Speaker 1: singing a spirit song. After observing her for some time,
Speaker 1: the beings eventually left, leaving a freshly killed deer nearby,
Speaker 1: interpreted as a gift acknowledging her respectful behavior. This location
Speaker 1: in the Mount Adams Foothills continued to be known among
Speaker 1: tribal members as a place where human sasquatch interactions occurred,
Speaker 1: with the last reported tribal encounter dating to the nineteen sixties.
Speaker 1: Lakota elder Asa Primo Senior shared an account passed down
Speaker 1: from the late eighteen eighties during the early reservation period.
Speaker 1: According to this narrative, a group of Lakota men who
Speaker 1: had slipped away from Pine Ridge Agency to hunt in
Speaker 1: the traditional manner in the Black Hills encountered a family
Speaker 1: group of Chiato, two large adults and what appeared to
Speaker 1: be a juvenile. The beings were observed from a distance,
Speaker 1: gathering routes along a stream bank. Following traditional protocol, the
Speaker 1: hunters left tobacco as an offering and withdrew without attempting
Speaker 1: to approach the beings. Primo explained that this was considered
Speaker 1: an auspicious encounter, as Chia Tanka sidings had become rare
Speaker 1: after widespread European American settlement of the region. The hunters
Speaker 1: interpreted the siding as a sign that, despite reservation confinement,
Speaker 1: the traditional spiritual relationships between the Lakota and other beings
Speaker 1: of their homeland remained intact. In the nineteen twenties and
Speaker 1: nineteen thirties, anthropologist Erna Gunther collected numerous Sasquatch encounter narratives
Speaker 1: while working with Coast Salish communities in Washington and British Columbia.
Speaker 1: One particularly detailed account came from a Scaggitt elder named Patrese,
Speaker 1: who described an encounter from approximately nineteen ten near the
Speaker 1: headwaters of the Scaggitt River. According to this narrative, Patriseus
Speaker 1: and his brother were hunting elk when they discovered enormous
Speaker 1: human like footprints crossing a muddy stream bank. Following the tracks,
Speaker 1: they observed a large, hair covered being washing roots in
Speaker 1: the stream. The being appeared to sense their presence and
Speaker 1: quickly disappeared into dense forest. Patrice noted that his grandfather
Speaker 1: had told him of similar encounters in the same valley
Speaker 1: dating back to the mid eighteen hundreds. The arrival of
Speaker 1: European colonizers fundamentally altered the context in which Indigenous knowledge
Speaker 1: about Sasquatch like beings existed and was transmitted. This period
Speaker 1: of cultural disruption, which played out differently across regions and
Speaker 1: time periods, had profound effects on traditional knowledge systems, including
Speaker 1: those related to Sasquatch. Among the earliest written references to
Speaker 1: what might be Sasquatch traditions appears in the journals of
Speaker 1: members of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. While ascending the
Speaker 1: Missouri River through what is now Montana, the expedition heard
Speaker 1: accounts from local indigenous peoples about hairy giants that reportedly
Speaker 1: inhabited remote mountain areas. Meriwether Lewis in particular, noted the
Speaker 1: seriousness with which these accounts were conveyed, though he himself
Speaker 1: remained skeptical. In the Pacific Northwest, early fur traders and
Speaker 1: missionaries frequently encountered Indigenous traditions about wild hair covered humanoids.
Speaker 1: The reaction of these European observers varied considerably. Some dismissed
Speaker 1: these accounts as pure superstition, while others noted similarities to
Speaker 1: European folklore traditions of wild men and forest beings. A
Speaker 1: few took the accounts more seriously, particularly those colonizers who
Speaker 1: had spent significant time living among indigenous communities and had
Speaker 1: come to respect native knowledge systems. J. W. Burns, a
Speaker 1: Canadian Government Indian agent working on the Schehalis Indian Reserve
Speaker 1: in British Columbia during the nineteen twenties, was among the
Speaker 1: first non natives to extensively document Indigenous sasquatch traditions. Burns
Speaker 1: collected numerous accounts from Shahila's people and other Salish communities,
Speaker 1: publishing them in Canadian newspapers and magazines. Burns is credited
Speaker 1: with popularizing the Anglicized term sasquatch, derived from the Salish
Speaker 1: word saskets or similar variants. Christian missionaries across North America
Speaker 1: frequently targeted Indigenous beliefs about non human entities, including Sasquatch traditions,
Speaker 1: for suppression as part of conversion efforts. Traditional beliefs about
Speaker 1: forest beings were often explicitly condemned as pagan superstition or
Speaker 1: even devil worship among tribes heavily influenced by Christian conversion.
Speaker 1: This led to a significant reduction in the open transmission
Speaker 1: of Sasquatch knowledge, though such traditions often continued privately. In
Speaker 1: some regions, syncretism occurred between traditional beliefs and introduced Christian concepts.
Speaker 1: Among some converted Salish communities, for instance, Sasquatch came to
Speaker 1: be explained as descendants of Kine from biblical tradition, cursed
Speaker 1: to wander the wilderness. Similar syncretic interpretations appeared in other
Speaker 1: regions as Indigenous people sought to reconcile traditional knowledge with
Speaker 1: new religious frameworks. The boarding school era approximately eighteen sixty
Speaker 1: to nineteen seventy eight was particularly devastating to traditional knowledge transmission,
Speaker 1: including Sasquatch traditions. Indigenous children forcibly removed from their communities
Speaker 1: and forbidden to speak their languages, lost access to the
Speaker 1: cultural contexts in which traditional ecological knowledge was embedded. Many
Speaker 1: elders today cite this period as critical in the fragmentation
Speaker 1: of continuous knowledge about beings like Sasquatch. As awareness of
Speaker 1: Sasquatch traditions spread beyond tribal communities, particularly after the nineteen fifties,
Speaker 1: Indigenous perspectives were frequently marginalized in emerging popular and scientific
Speaker 1: discourse around Bigfoot. Traditional knowledge was often cherry picked for
Speaker 1: sensational els elements while being stripped of its cultural and
Speaker 1: spiritual context. The commercialization of Bigfoot as a cultural icon,
Speaker 1: appearing in everything from beef jerky advertisements to monster truck rallies,
Speaker 1: has been particularly problematic from indigenous perspectives. Many tribal elders
Speaker 1: have expressed concern that sacred beings from their traditions have
Speaker 1: been reduced to cartoon characters or horror movie monsters in
Speaker 1: mainstream American culture. Simultaneously, some non native researchers and Bigfoot
Speaker 1: enthusiasts have appropriated elements of indigenous ceremonial practices, claiming these
Speaker 1: will help attract or communicate with Sasquatch. Such appropriation has
Speaker 1: been criticized by tribal cultural preservation officers and elders as
Speaker 1: both disrespectful to Indigenous cultures and potentially dangerous from a
Speaker 1: traditional perspective, as proper protocols for interaction with powerful non
Speaker 1: human beings are not being followed. Despite the challenges of colonization,
Speaker 1: forced to say, and cultural appropriation, traditional Indigenous knowledge about
Speaker 1: Sasquatch like beings has persisted and in many communities, experienced
Speaker 1: significant revitalization in recent decades. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries,
Speaker 1: even as traditional knowledge systems faced extreme pressure, Indigenous people
Speaker 1: across North America continued to report encounters with Sasquatch like beings.
Speaker 1: These experiences, shared within family and community contexts, helped maintain
Speaker 1: continuity of tradition despite external pressures. Yakama Nation tribal member
Speaker 1: Leo Aleck shared in a two thousand and three interview
Speaker 1: that his family maintained an unbroken tradition of leaving offerings
Speaker 1: at specific locations known to be visited by Stick Indians
Speaker 1: from his great grandfather's time into the present day. Similarly,
Speaker 1: Lakota medicine man Basle Braveheart noted in the nineteen nineties
Speaker 1: that despite over a century of Christian missionization on Pine
Speaker 1: Ridge Reservation. Traditional knowledge about Chietanka had been preserved in
Speaker 1: certain families and spiritual societies among Northwestern tribes, where some
Speaker 1: of the strongest Sasquatch traditions exist. Numerous contemporary tribal members
Speaker 1: have reported encounters Urrok. Tribal member Wanda Benson described a
Speaker 1: detailed sighting near the Klamath River in nineteen eighty one
Speaker 1: that closely matched traditional descriptions of o Ma passed down
Speaker 1: by her grandmother. Notably, Benson observed that her experience was
Speaker 1: met with acceptance rather than skepticism within her tribal community,
Speaker 1: where such encounters are considered unusual but not beyond the
Speaker 1: range of normal experience. Beginning in the nineteen sixties and
Speaker 1: accelerating in subsequent decades, many tribes established formal cultural preservation
Speaker 1: programs that included documentation of traditional knowledge about non human beings,
Speaker 1: including Sasquatch traditions. These efforts often involved recording elder's knowledge
Speaker 1: before it was lost, creating tribal archives accessible to community members,
Speaker 1: and developing educational materials for tribal schools. The Confederated Tribes
Speaker 1: of Warm Springs and Oregon, for example, included detailed information
Speaker 1: about traditional beliefs regarding Sasquatch like beings in their Cultural
Speaker 1: Resources curriculum, developed in the nineteen nineties. The curriculum contextualizes
Speaker 1: these traditions within broader indigenous understanding of relationships between humans
Speaker 1: and other beings, emphasizing protocols for respectable behavior in remote
Speaker 1: areas where such entities might dwell. Similarly, the Quinau Indian
Speaker 1: nation of Washington State has incorporated traditional knowledge about Sasquatch,
Speaker 1: which they call Siatco, into their natural resources management planning.
Speaker 1: Kenout elders have identified certain remote areas as Tiatco habitat
Speaker 1: deserving special protection and limited human access, a traditional conservation
Speaker 1: approach now finding expression in contemporary resource management. As scientific
Speaker 1: and popular interest in big fis has grown since the
Speaker 1: mid twentieth century, Indigenous communities have developed varied responses to
Speaker 1: external research efforts. Some tribes have chosen to keep traditional
Speaker 1: knowledge private, sharing little with outside researchers. Others have selectively
Speaker 1: engaged with researchers whose approaches they find respectful and aligned
Speaker 1: with indigenous values. The Yakama Nation has prohibited non tribal
Speaker 1: bigfoot researchers from conducting investigations on their reservation lands, citing
Speaker 1: concerns about sacred sites and cultural protocols. By contrast, the
Speaker 1: Tellalip tribes of Washington have occasionally collaborated with certain non
Speaker 1: native researchers while insisting that such research respect tribal cultural
Speaker 1: perspectives and sovereignty. Kathy Moskowitz Strain, herself of Miwok ancestry
Speaker 1: and an archaeologist who has worked extensively with California tribes,
Speaker 1: has documented how some tribal communities are reclaiming authority over
Speaker 1: Sasquatch discourse. Through formal consultation processes. Tribes have begun asserting
Speaker 1: that any Sasquatch research in their traditional territories should proceed
Speaker 1: only with tribal approval and oversight, a significant shift from
Speaker 1: earlier eras when indigenous perspectives were routinely ignored. In recent decades,
Speaker 1: a more respectful relationship has begun to emerge between some
Speaker 1: indigenous knowledge keepers and non native researchers interested in the
Speaker 1: Sasquatch phenomenon. This convergence represents a significant shift from historical
Speaker 1: patterns of dismissal or appropriation of Indigenous knowledge. Contemporary Bigfoot
Speaker 1: researchers have increasingly recognized the value of traditional indigenous ecological
Speaker 1: knowledge regarding these beings. Details about preferred habitats, seasonal movements,
Speaker 1: food sources, and behavioral patterns described in tribal traditions often
Speaker 1: align with patterns emerging from analysis of contemporary sighting reports.
Speaker 1: For example, traditional Salish knowledge describing Sasquatch's affinity for riparian
Speaker 1: zones areas along rivers and streams has been corroborated by
Speaker 1: geographical analysis showing clusters of modern sidings along waterways. Similarly,
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge from multiple tribes describing these beings using wood
Speaker 1: knocking for communication parallels the experiences of contemporary field researchers
Speaker 1: who have documented similar phenomena. Doctor Jeff Meldrum, a professor
Speaker 1: of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University and a
Speaker 1: prominent scientific researcher on the Sasquatch question, has noted that
Speaker 1: indigenous traditional knowledge often provides testable hypotheses about Sasquatch ecology
Speaker 1: and behavior. Mildrum has collaborated with tribal representatives in several regions,
Speaker 1: finding that traditional knowledge about seasonal movements, food resources, and
Speaker 1: habitat preferences often corresponds with contemporary data. Indigenous knowledge has
Speaker 1: also proven valuable in the interpretation of potential physical evidence.
Speaker 1: When unusual hairsaand footprints, or other possible Sasquatch evidence is discovered,
Speaker 1: Traditional knowledge about these beings physical characteristics sometimes provides useful
Speaker 1: comparative frameworks. For instance, the distinctive foot morphology described in
Speaker 1: some indigenous traditions, including details about tow length, art structure,
Speaker 1: and dermal ridges, has helped researchers evaluate the authenticity of
Speaker 1: purported Sasquatch tracts. William Jevning, a researcher who has worked
Speaker 1: extensively with Northwestern tribes, has noted that certain subtle features
Speaker 1: reported in traditional knowledge, such as a mid tarsal break
Speaker 1: in the foot allowing for greater flexibility, appeared in track
Speaker 1: evidence long before modern researchers recognize their significance. Similarly, traditional
Speaker 1: descriptions of Sasquatch vocalizations, often characterized as complex, modulated calls
Speaker 1: with linguistic qualities rather than simple animal sounds, have helped
Speaker 1: audio researchers analyze enigmatic recorded sounds from will alderness areas.
Speaker 1: The Takilma people of Oregon traditionally described three distinct types
Speaker 1: of vocalizations used by the beings they called amha low
Speaker 1: whoops for territorial announcement, sharp howls for alarm, and complex
Speaker 1: varied sounds for communication between individuals. This traditional classification has
Speaker 1: proven useful for categorizing and analyzing modern audio recordings of
Speaker 1: unidentified vocalizations. Several formal research collaborations between indigenous communities and
Speaker 1: scientific researchers have emerged in recent decades. These projects typically
Speaker 1: operate with explicit protocols ensuring respect for tribal cultural knowledge
Speaker 1: and sovereignty while applying contemporary scientific methods to questions surrounding
Speaker 1: the Sasquatch phenomenon. The Olympic Project, a research group operating
Speaker 1: in Washington State's Olympic Peninsula, has established consultation relationships with
Speaker 1: several local tribes, including the Scocombish, Quinaut, and Akaka. These
Speaker 1: relationships include regular communication about research activities in traditional territories,
Speaker 1: cultural sensitivity training for field researchers, and agreements about handling
Speaker 1: potential evidence in ways that respect tribal cultural concerns. In
Speaker 1: Northern California, the Hoopa Project two thousand and three to
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight represented one of the most extensive
Speaker 1: collaborations between tribal members and outside researchers. With formal approval
Speaker 1: from the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council, researchers worked alongside tribal members,
Speaker 1: incorporating traditional ecological knowledge about oma, habitat, preferences, and behavior
Speaker 1: into their research design. Tribal elders provided historical accounts of
Speaker 1: encounters and guidance on appropriate protocols for researchers operating in
Speaker 1: culturally sensitive areas. Perhaps most significantly, some tribes have initiated
Speaker 1: their own formal research projects, utilizing both traditional knowledge and
Speaker 1: contemporary scientific menathods. The Sasquatch Investigations Team of the Yakama Nation,
Speaker 1: established in twenty nineteen, combines traditional tracking knowledge with modern
Speaker 1: tools like thermal imaging and environmental DNA sampling. This tribal
Speaker 1: led approach represents a significant evolution in Sasquatch research, centering
Speaker 1: indigenous perspectives and sovereignty. Sasquatch traditions continue to hold significant
Speaker 1: cultural importance for many indigenous communities across North America. Far
Speaker 1: from being merely historical curiosities, these traditions remain living elements
Speaker 1: of cultural identity. Spiritual practice and ecological relationship. For many tribes,
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge about Sasquatch like beings retains important spiritual dimensions.
Speaker 1: Among some Northwest tribes, including branches of the Coast Salish,
Speaker 1: ceremonial songs relating to Sasquatch continue to be performed in
Speaker 1: appropriate contexts. These songs are understood as maintaining proper relationships
Speaker 1: with these beings and the landscapes they inhabit. The Lakota
Speaker 1: and related Siwan speaking peoples continue to include references to
Speaker 1: Chia Tanka in certain healing ceremonies and vision quest preparations.
Speaker 1: Lakota medicine man Arvole Looking Horse has spoken about the
Speaker 1: continued spiritual significance of these beings, noting that they represent
Speaker 1: important connections to pre reservation relationships with the land and
Speaker 1: its many inhabitants. In the Southwest, some Apache communities maintain
Speaker 1: ceremonial traditions relating to the beings they call Chiye, including
Speaker 1: specific taboos and observances when entering areas traditionally associated with
Speaker 1: these beings. These practices are considered an important aspect of
Speaker 1: maintaining spiritual balance and proper relationships with powerful non human entities.
Speaker 1: Traditional knowledge about Sasquatch has increasingly intersected with contemporary environmental
Speaker 1: protection efforts and indigenous land rights movements. Veral tribes have
Speaker 1: cited the cultural significance of traditional Sasquatch territories in legal
Speaker 1: arguments against resource extraction projects or development. The Tellalip tribes
Speaker 1: of Washington successfully argued for special protections of certain old
Speaker 1: growth forest areas based partly on their cultural significance as
Speaker 1: traditional territories of the beings they call Siatco. Similarly, the
Speaker 1: Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde in Oregon have incorporated information
Speaker 1: about traditionally recognized Sasquatch habitats into their forest management plans,
Speaker 1: designating certain areas for limited human access and special protection.
Speaker 1: Perhaps most notably, the Lakota and other tribes opposing the
Speaker 1: Dakota Access Pipeline cited the protection of Chiatanka habitat as
Speaker 1: one component of their cultural heritage concerns about the project.
Speaker 1: While this aspect received little attention in mainstream media coverage,
Speaker 1: it represented a significant integration of traditional knowledge into contemporary
Speaker 1: environmental justice work. Stay tuned for more Sasquatch otty see.
Speaker 1: We'll be right back after these messages. As part of
Speaker 1: broader cultural revitalization movements, many tribes have incorporated traditional knowledge
Speaker 1: about Sasquatch like beings into educational programs for tribal youth.
Speaker 1: These efforts typically emphasize not just the beings themselves, but
Speaker 1: the broader cultural frameworks of respectful relationship with the natural
Speaker 1: world that these traditions exemplify. The Confederated Tribes of Silet's
Speaker 1: Indians and Oregon include traditional knowledge about the hairy Man
Speaker 1: in their summer culture camps for tribal youth. These programs
Speaker 1: teach young people not only about the specific traditions, but
Speaker 1: also the proper protocols for moving through remote landscapes and
Speaker 1: showing respect to all beings that might be encountered there. Similarly,
Speaker 1: the saleis coutin a college on the Flathead Reservation in Montana,
Speaker 1: includes traditional knowledge about Sasquatch like beings in its Native
Speaker 1: American Studies curriculum, contextualizing these traditions within broader Salish and
Speaker 1: coutiney relationships with the land and its many inhabitants. Contemporary
Speaker 1: Indigenous artists and writers have increasingly engaged with Sasquatch traditions
Speaker 1: as powerful symbols of resistance, continuity, and relationship with the land.
Speaker 1: These artistic expressions often reclaim narratives that have been appropriated
Speaker 1: or commercialized by mainstream culture. Comanche Blackfeet artist Bentley Spang's
Speaker 1: multimedia installation Modern Warrior Series Warshirt Number six Waterways incorporated
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge about Sasquatch like beings as symbols of Indigenous
Speaker 1: knowledge systems that have survived despite colonial attempts at erasure.
Speaker 1: Spang's work explicitly challenges the commodification of these traditions in
Speaker 1: mainstream Bigfoot representations. Coast Salish artist John Marston has created
Speaker 1: numerous traditional cedar carvings depicting Sasquatch, explaining that these works
Speaker 1: honor beings who have shared the landscape with Coast Salish
Speaker 1: people since time immemorial. Marston's artistic representations are based on
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge passed down through his family, rather than popular
Speaker 1: culture depictions. In literature, Indigenous authors including Eden Robinson, Heisler Heiltsuk,
Speaker 1: Thomas King, and Linda Hogan have incorporated Sasquatch like beings
Speaker 1: into their works, often as symbols of Indigenous relationships with
Speaker 1: the land that persist despite colonial disruption. These literary representations
Speaker 1: generally emphasize the complex cultural contexts of these traditions, rather
Speaker 1: than sensationalizing the beings themselves. While this narrative has traced
Speaker 1: numerous commonalities and Indigenous traditions regarding sasquatch like beings, it's
Speaker 1: important to acknowledge the diversity of contemporary tribal perspectives on
Speaker 1: this subject. Not all Indigenous communities or individuals share the
Speaker 1: same views on the reality, significance, or appropriate treatment of
Speaker 1: these traditions. Contemporary Indigenous perspectives on sasquatch exist along a
Speaker 1: spectrum similar to that found in non Native communities, ranging
Speaker 1: from literal belief to metaphorical interpretation to skepticism. Some traditional
Speaker 1: knowledge keepers and tribal elders maintain that sasquatch like beings
Speaker 1: are literally real, physical entities that continue to inhabit remote areas.
Speaker 1: Wilber Slockish, a respected Yakama elder, has stated unequivocally, they're real.
Speaker 1: They've always been here, our people have always known them.
Speaker 1: This perspective often emphasizes personal or family experiences and continuous
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge. Other Indigenous scholars and community members interpret these
Speaker 1: traditions more metaphorically, seeing them as embodiments of cultural values,
Speaker 1: ecological relationships, or spiritual principles. Doctor Daniel Wildcat, a UCI
Speaker 1: member of the Muscoge Nation and an Indigenous scholar at
Speaker 1: Haskell Indian Nations University, has suggested that, regardless of their
Speaker 1: literal existence, the Sasquatch traditions embody important indigenous understandings about
Speaker 1: proper relationship with the natural world and the recognition of
Speaker 1: non human agency and intelligence. Still, others within indigenous communities
Speaker 1: express skepticism about the literal reality of these beings, viewing
Speaker 1: the traditions as valuable cultural heritage but not necessarily descriptions
Speaker 1: of physically existing entities. As in any culture, perspectives vary
Speaker 1: based on individual experience, education, spiritual orientation, and family background.
Speaker 1: Indigenous communities also vary considerably in their approaches to sharing
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge about Sasquatch with those outside their tribes. These
Speaker 1: differences reflect broader variations in tribal policies regarding cultural knowledge
Speaker 1: and intellectual property. Some tribes have explicitly restricted information about
Speaker 1: their Sasquatch traditions, considering this knowledge sacred or sensitive and
Speaker 1: not appropriate for general dissemination. The Yakaman Nation, for instance,
Speaker 1: has formal policies limiting what information about Stick Indians can
Speaker 1: be shared with non tribal members, and has objected to
Speaker 1: unauthorized publication of traditional knowledge on this topic. Other tribes
Speaker 1: have chosen to share certain aspects of their traditions more openly,
Speaker 1: particularly when they feel doing so serves educational purposes or
Speaker 1: corrects misrepresentations. The Confederated Tribes of Grown Rond in Oregon
Speaker 1: have included information about their traditions regarding forest beings in
Speaker 1: public facing cultural education materials, seeing this as an opportunity
Speaker 1: to correct misconceptions and assert the continuing relevance of traditional knowledge.
Speaker 1: This variation in approach reflects broader principles of tribal sovereignty
Speaker 1: and self determination regarding cultural knowledge. Each tribe has the
Speaker 1: inherent right to determine how, when, and whether to share
Speaker 1: traditional knowledge, including that relating to Sasquatch like beings. The
Speaker 1: indigenous traditions regarding Sasquatch, Bigfoot, and similar beings represent one
Speaker 1: of the most extensive and well documented bodies of traditional
Speaker 1: ecological knowledge in North America. Far from being simply legends
Speaker 1: or folklore in the diminutive sense, these terms sometimes carry
Speaker 1: these traditions constitute sophisticated, multi generational observations of the landscape
Speaker 1: and its inhabitants. What makes these traditions particularly significant is
Speaker 1: their persistence. Despite enormous cultural disruption through forced relocation, missionization,
Speaker 1: boarding schools, and the many other challenges of the colonial era,
Speaker 1: knowledge about these beings has continued to be transmitted within
Speaker 1: indigenous communities. This persistence speaks to both the resilience of
Speaker 1: indigenous knowledge systems and perhaps to the continuing experiences that
Speaker 1: reinforce and revitalize these traditions. In the contemporary context, traditional
Speaker 1: Indigenous knowledge about Sasquatch serves multiple important functions, connecting tribal
Speaker 1: members to ancestral relationships with the land, providing frameworks for
Speaker 1: environmental protection and land management, offering counter narratives to colonial
Speaker 1: assumptions about what is real or known, and maintaining distinct
Speaker 1: cultural identities in an increasingly homogenized world. Whether one approaches
Speaker 1: these traditions from a perspective of literal belief, metaphorical interpretation,
Speaker 1: or anthropological interest, their significance as living cultural heritage is undeniable.
Speaker 1: They represent not fossilized remnants of pre scientific thinking, but dynamic,
Speaker 1: evolving bodies of knowledge. That continue to inform how many
Speaker 1: Indigenous people understand and relate to the landscapes they have
Speaker 1: inhabited since the beginning of time as we know it.
Speaker 1: As interest in the Sasquatch or Bigfoot phenomenon continues in
Speaker 1: mainstream American culture and scientific circles, centering Indigenous perspectives offers
Speaker 1: not only ethical recognition of the original sources of much
Speaker 1: of this knowledge, but also practical benefits in understanding these
Speaker 1: elusive beings. The thousands of years of observational data embedded
Speaker 1: in indigenous traditions represent an invaluable resource for anyone genuinely
Speaker 1: seeking to understand the mysteries of the deep forest and
Speaker 1: its most enigmatic inhabitants. Perhaps most importantly, Indigenous Sasquatch traditions
Speaker 1: remind us that Western scientific frameworks represent just one way
Speaker 1: of knowing and understanding the world. The possibility that multiple
Speaker 1: knowledge systems might offer complementary, rather than competing, insights suggests
Speaker 1: a more humble and open minded approach to the profound
Speaker 1: question at the heart of the Sasquatch phenomenon. What beings
Speaker 1: might we share this continent with that we have not
Speaker 1: yet fully recognized or understood In the words of Lummy
Speaker 1: elder Pauline Hilaire. Our ancestors knew many things about the
Speaker 1: world that modern people are only beginning to rediscover. The
Speaker 1: forest people have always been part of our understanding of
Speaker 1: this land. Whether others see them or not doesn't change
Speaker 1: what our people have always known.
Speaker 2: Ditto