Nine Feet in the Idaho Forest: Examining the 2026 Payette National Forest Bigfoot Report
The Bigfoot mystery continues to generate reports from across North America, but some cases stand out because of the number of witnesses involved, the circumstances surrounding the encounter, and the questions they raise about Sasquatch behavior.
A recent report from Idaho has all of those elements.
Published in the July 2026 issue of Bigfoot Times, the case involves a group camping in the Payette National Forest near McCall, Idaho, during Memorial Day weekend. What makes this report particularly interesting is that it was not a single person seeing something unusual from a distance. Multiple witnesses reported seeing or hearing unusual activity over several days.
Before examining the details, it should be noted that a sighting report does not automatically prove the existence of an unknown animal. However, good investigation requires looking at the details, considering alternative explanations, and asking what questions remain.
This is exactly the type of case where careful analysis is needed.
The Payette National Forest Encounter
According to the report summarized in Bigfoot Times, the incident occurred approximately 16 miles northeast of McCall, Idaho, in the Payette National Forest.
The BFRO report was listed as report number 81-202 and was submitted by Kyera Tipper on May 27, 2026.
The group consisted of approximately ten people camping from May 22 through May 25, 2026.
The first unusual incident reportedly occurred Friday night when Abby, one of the campers, saw a tall dark figure behind another couple’s tent. She reportedly did not mention it immediately because she did not want to frighten the group.
The following day, after an argument at camp, Colton walked into the tree line to get away from the situation. Kyera later followed, believing she was looking for him.
While in the woods, Kyera reported hearing someone walking nearby and whistling from different directions, creating the impression that whatever was making the sounds was moving around her.
She initially believed Colton was responsible. However, when she returned, Colton told her he had already been back at camp.
Later that night, the group reported hearing branches breaking, which they initially attributed to coyotes or other wildlife.
The most dramatic part of the report occurred around 3 a.m. on Sunday morning.
Daniel reportedly saw a figure standing on two legs, approximately nine feet tall, with “blank, reflective eyes,” walking toward him.
The group reportedly grabbed a .22 rifle and entered the woods to investigate.
According to the report, when they moved toward another camp because they believed the figure was heading in that direction, they felt they were surrounded by three or more creatures.
Daniel and Colton later described seeing figures approximately nine feet tall, covered in dark fur, standing upright, and moving in a way they felt was too fast and coordinated to be human.
They reported that the figures appeared to use trees for concealment and seemed to circle the group.
Additional reported activity included knocking sounds, a possible handprint on a vehicle, and a footprint photograph. However, the Bigfoot Times analysis noted that the footprint image was not detailed enough for meaningful examination.
Matt Moneymaker of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization reportedly spoke with two of the witnesses and stated that he believed they were telling the truth.
The important distinction here is that believing a witness is truthful does not necessarily mean every interpretation of an event is correct. A person can honestly describe an unusual experience while still being mistaken about what caused it.
That is why these cases require careful examination.
Multiple Witnesses and the Importance of Investigation
One of the strongest aspects of this report is the number of people involved.
A single witness report can be challenged in many ways. The person may have misidentified an animal, misunderstood distance or lighting conditions, or interpreted an unfamiliar experience incorrectly.
However, when multiple people report similar observations, the investigation becomes more complex.
That does not automatically prove a Sasquatch encounter occurred, but it does make the case more interesting.
Daniel Perez, editor and publisher of Bigfoot Times, has long emphasized the importance of actually investigating witnesses rather than dismissing reports without speaking to the people involved.
In my 2008 interview with Daniel Perez, he discussed the importance of eyewitness investigation and criticized situations where researchers dismiss cases without directly examining the testimony of those who experienced them.
Source:
Undebunking Bigfoot: Interview with Bigfoot Times Newsletter Creator Daniel Perez
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2008/04/interview-with-bigfoot-times-newsletter.html
The Migraine Question and Infrasound
One of the most interesting details in the Idaho report is that several witnesses reportedly experienced migraines before the encounter.
Some Bigfoot researchers have suggested that infrasound could potentially explain certain recurring experiences reported in some encounters, including headaches, discomfort, anxiety, or feelings of unease.
Infrasound refers to sound frequencies below the normal range of human hearing. While infrasound exists in nature and can be produced by storms, animals, machinery, and geological activity, the idea that Sasquatch produces or uses it remains a hypothesis rather than an established fact.
Still, the timing reported in this case is worth noting.
The witnesses did not simply report headaches after becoming frightened. They reported unusual physical sensations before the alleged encounter.
Whether this has a connection to the event or is simply coincidental remains unknown.
Could It Have Been Bears?
One of the most common skeptical explanations for Bigfoot reports is that witnesses are actually seeing bears.
This is a legitimate question. Bears can stand upright, and misidentifications can happen.
However, the bear explanation should be evaluated based on the complete description, not just the fact that bears sometimes stand on two legs.
The Sasquatch Field Guide by Dr. Jeff Meldrum compares distinguishing features between bears and reported Sasquatch characteristics.
A bear typically has:
ears positioned on top of the head,
a visible snout,
sloping shoulders,
shorter limbs.
Reported Sasquatch descriptions commonly include:
ears positioned more to the side of the head or hidden,
a flatter facial structure,
broad shoulders,
longer limbs,
different body proportions.
This does not mean every Bigfoot report is correct. It does mean that “it was probably a bear” should not automatically end the discussion without examining the details.
I previously examined this argument in:
The Bigfoot Are Really Just Misidentified Bears Argument
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-bigfoot-are-really-just.html
The question is not whether bears can explain some sightings.
The question is whether a bear explanation fits every detail of every report.
A Question of Sasquatch Behavior
Perhaps the most unsettling aspect of the Idaho report is not simply the size of the figures described, but the behavior witnesses believed they observed.
The witnesses interpreted the movement of the figures as an attempt to circle them and separate members of the group.
That interpretation cannot be independently confirmed.
However, it raises an important question:
If Sasquatch existed, would we expect every individual to behave like the gentle creature portrayed in popular culture?
A real animal would have instincts, individual personalities, territorial behaviors, and survival needs.
The idea that every member of an unknown species would be harmless is an assumption.
In the Bigfoot Times discussion of this report, the behavior described was compared to possible hunting strategies used when pursuing deer.
That does not mean the witnesses were being hunted.
It means the reported behavior raises questions about how an unknown large primate might interact with its environment.
I explored this broader question in:
Could Bigfoot Be Dangerous? Examining the Overlooked Question of Sasquatch Behavior
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2026/08/could-bigfoot-be-dangerous-examining.html
The point is not to portray Sasquatch as a monster.
The point is that if it were a real animal, it would not necessarily fit into a simple category of either “friendly” or “dangerous.”
Nature is more complicated than that.
Another Idaho Report: Lowman, Idaho
The Payette National Forest report is not the only recent Idaho case.
BFRO report number 81-276 describes a June 2026 sighting near Lowman, Idaho.
Unlike the Payette report, this involved a single witness during daylight.
Donald Schmidt reported seeing movement approximately 60 to 70 yards away while hiking near Deadwood Reservoir.
He initially considered the possibility of a bear or mountain lion.
After watching for approximately a minute, he reported seeing the animal stand upright and walk away.
Schmidt described the figure as between five and six feet tall, with reddish hair, a tall head, no visible neck, and broad shoulders.
The witness reportedly had extensive outdoor experience and regularly encountered wildlife.
Interestingly, Schmidt stated that he had previously been skeptical of Bigfoot reports and had even teased his brother about a previous sighting near McCall.
After his own experience, he reportedly became less certain.
This type of report is interesting because it comes from someone who did not appear to be actively searching for Sasquatch.
Why No Photograph?
A common criticism of modern Bigfoot reports is:
“Everyone has a camera. Why didn’t they take a picture?”
It is a fair question.
However, the existence of a camera does not guarantee a usable photograph.
Wildlife encounters often happen:
unexpectedly,
at distance,
through vegetation,
in poor lighting,
before a person has processed what they are seeing.
A person may spend the first few seconds trying to understand whether they are looking at a bear, a person, or something unfamiliar.
The Bigfoot field also does not lack claimed photographs and videos.
The debate has generally centered on interpretation, authenticity, and quality rather than a complete absence of imagery.
I previously examined claimed Sasquatch photographs and videos in:
Highly Probable, Possible, Inconclusive, and Widely Rejected Sasquatch Videos and Photos
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2014/11/highly-probable-possible-inconclusive.html
More recently, I examined newer high-resolution footage and the challenges of evaluating modern digital media in:
Evidence That New Real Up Close Sasquatch Video Is Real and Todd Standing's Footage Too!
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2026/06/evidence-that-new-real-up-close.html
The issue has never simply been a lack of images.
The issue has been whether the images can reach a level of certainty that convinces everyone.
Final Thoughts
The Idaho reports from 2026 are interesting because they bring together many of the biggest questions in Bigfoot research:
How reliable are eyewitness accounts?
How should multiple witnesses be evaluated?
How do we distinguish Sasquatch reports from bear encounters?
What would the behavior of an unknown large primate actually look like?
How much weight should be placed on photographs and videos?
The Payette National Forest report does not solve the Bigfoot mystery.
But it is exactly the type of case that keeps the discussion alive.
The most important question may not simply be whether Bigfoot exists.
It may be this:
If an unknown intelligent animal existed in the wilderness, would we really understand its behavior before encountering it?
Sources:
Bigfoot Times
https://www.bigfoottimes.net/
Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization
https://www.bfro.net/
Undebunking Bigfoot: Interview with Bigfoot Times Newsletter Creator Daniel Perez
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2008/04/interview-with-bigfoot-times-newsletter.html
The Bigfoot Are Really Just Misidentified Bears Argument
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-bigfoot-are-really-just.html
Highly Probable, Possible, Inconclusive, and Widely Rejected Sasquatch Videos and Photos
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2014/11/highly-probable-possible-inconclusive.html
Could Bigfoot Be Dangerous? Examining the Overlooked Question of Sasquatch Behavior
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2026/08/could-bigfoot-be-dangerous-examining.html
Evidence That New Real Up Close Sasquatch Video Is Real and Todd Standing's Footage Too!
https://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2026/06/evidence-that-new-real-up-close.html
