The family, who reportedly have has encounters with the hairy creature since last year, are now claiming, "We know where it lives and how it travels, all we want is for someone to capture and remove it, or we will find it and kill it."
The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) has done field work in the area and the local representative does agree that there is a Bigfoot in the area.
You can read the rest of the story here.
This brings up the question; should we kill Bigfoot to prove its existence?
There are places, including Skamania County, Washington, in which it is illegal to kill a Sasquatch, but in the majority of states, there is no such law in place. Many argue that since the animal, if it exists, would be so human-like the act of killing one could be equated with the murder of another human being. Others point out that the animal might be severely endangered, so killing one might be significantly negative for the recovery of the animals.
But to look at the other side of the argument;
In the history of zoology, most large mammals were categorize by the killing of a specimen and then the capture of another. Also, they argue that without a body many will continue to be skeptical of the existence. There are multiple shows where people hunt for Bigfoot in order to kill it, such as Killing Bigfoot and the 10 Million Dollar Bigfoot Bounty.
What do you think? I see merits on both sides, but I tend to lean to the anti-killing side. Let me know your thoughts in the comments!