Map Shows 3,312 Bigfoot Sighting Locations Over 92 Years

The Cartographer and Geography graduate student Josh Stevens of Pennsylvania State University has the sighting database of American “Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization” (BFRO) compiled in an impressive map of North America and that 3,312 sightings of a total of 92 years charted visualized.

“Every now and then you come across records that you just have to map out.’s Data inventory BFRO is such a case,” said Josh Stevens ( joshuastevens.net ) his current work in the introduction. 

“Bigfoot. Sasquatch. Skookum. Yahoo. matter how it is called, this huge, man-like ape is a part of our folklore of stories about the Yeti in the Himalayas, to the wild men of the Pacific Northwest -. everywhere people talk about it and have been trying for centuries to find this creature.

Through the archival work and reports that can be sent directly to the website that has the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization ( BFRO ) a database with thousands of Sasquatch sightings collected. Each report is geocoded (ie the Sichtungsort assigned) and arranged chronologically. In some cases there are even photos and videos of the evidence. “ 

The resulting map of North America visualized Total 3,313 sightings of the legendary “forest people” of North America 1921-2013 (s.Abb.o.). 

Already at first sight striking that the sightings are not evenly distributed across North America this explains Stevens. “Initially, you might think you look at a map of the population distribution. Indeed, one might suspect, too, that the most regular and most sightings come to pass in more populated areas. A bivariate (two-dimensional) view of the data, however, paints a very different picture: There are certain areas where sightings are incredibly common, although they are sparsely populated. On the other hand, there are in some of the most densely populated regions in almost any Sasquatch sightings. “

Sasquatch sightings with respect to the distribution of the (human) U.S. population. (Click the image center to go to an enlarged view. ) To explain the color code: Green means much population – few sightings Light purple: little people and lots of sightings White: lots of people – a lot of sightings Black: little people – little sightings.

Stevens explains itself that he has no really good explanation for this fact, however, in the field of Bigfoot research (cryptozoology) is also devoid of any expertise, “For me, however, based on the data of a clearly:.., if it really is the legendary two-legged, thus attracting he west. “ 

Maybe, speculates the geologist and cartographer, the terrain and habitat plays an important role in the distribution of the reports. “It should be noted that the map displays only reports of sightings and not actually proven copies,” says Stevens. 

“Even if in reality is not a Bigfoot in the area, so it might be difficult in rugged terrain or in a dense forest to determine whether there has since currently only somewhere cracked a branch, or whether there sneaking around a giant primate. The need to at least think that you have seen a Bigfoot could be particularly large especially when one has previously heard reports of such creatures in their own environment.

Right away you can see that sightings are not evenly distributed. At first glance, it looks a lot like a map of population distribution. After all, you would expect sightings to be the most frequent in areas where there are a lot of people. But a bivariate view of the data (right) shows a very different story. There are distinct regions where sightings are incredibly common, despite a very sparse population. On the other hand, in some of the most densely populated areas sasquatch sightings are exceedingly rare.

I don’t have a really good explanation for this. These are sasquatch sightings we’re talking about and I’m way out of my area of expertise (do bigfoot experts exist?). But it’s clear that if the legendary biped is real, it’s thriving out west.

The terrain and habitat likely play a major role in the distribution of reports (note: reports, not sasquatch themselves!). Even if bigfoot wasn’t lurking nearby, it might be hard to tell when surrounded by rugged terrain and dense forest. Was that a stick cracking naturally or is a giant primate creeping around? The desire to find, or think you saw, bigfoot might be especially high if you’ve heard tales of giant, ape-like creatures calling the place you’re in home. A combination of environment and legend likely combine to at least put wary outdoorsmen on the lookout. These environmental factors could be explored with a dasymetric map that accounts for the habitat and separates the wilderness from suburbia. Furthermore, the population data are based on the US Census, which is based on where people live. The places we live, and the places we spend the other 50% of our time (at work, traveling, camping, vacationing, etc) are very different. We don’t have data for that, unfortunately.

There’s also inherently some bias in the report data. Being a US-based website, it is dominated by US reports, and the reporting mechanism is not precise: if coordinates are not known (would you really log a GPS reading while staring ‘squatch in the eye?!), the BFRO site only allows reporters to enter the nearest city. This could be many miles away.

Ultimately, I’m not convinced there’s a descendant of Gigantopithecus playing hide and seek in the Pacific Northwest. But if respectable folks like Survivorman Les Stroud and primatologist Jane Goodall believe there’s something more to the myth, I think it’s at least worth putting on the map.

Source: Josh Stevens