We still don't know for sure that the elusive North American Bigfoot exists, but if it is ever proved, the implications are startling. To those who believe in its reality, Bigfoot (a.k.a. Sasquatch) is a hairy man-beast, 7-9ft (2.1-2.7m) tall, possibly a kind of Gigantopithecus survival. To the disbelievers, all sighting reports are lies or misidentifications and all photographs are hoaxes. In the event, reports and photographs are just anecdotal evidence and only an independent scientific examination of an actual Bigfoot is going to settle the matter. Close encounters between the creature and armed men are rare and it has,to date, proved difficult to track and kill. The opinion also exists that Bigfoot ought to be left in peace, for if its existence were proved, its isolated life would be disrupted forever.

There are well over 1,000 recorded sightings of Bigfoot going back nearly 200 years. It has been seen in all parts of the North American continent, but mainly in the Pacific North-West: in British Columbia, Oregon, Washington State and California. Sightings continue to be reported today, but photographs and othert angible evidence are rare.The most convincing and convenient proof of Bigfoot's existence would be the discovery of a carcass ­ but that's not likely. Any wildlife remains are rare finds in the North American forest where scavenging creatures can reduce something as substantial as a dead moose to just toenails,teeth and antlers in a few days. And after a week even those tail-ends are usually gnawed away. The only dead wildlife that most people see are fresh victims of collisions with vehicles. So far, Bigfoot has avoided becoming a roadkill. You are more likely to get a glimpse of Bigfoot in your rear-view mirror than in your headlights.

Bigfoot researchers say that drivers consistently report rear-view sightings ­usually of something large hunched down at the roadside, rising to cross the road after the vehicle passes. The evidence suggests that Bigfoot is canny enough to stay out of traffic as well as avoiding definitive proof of its existence. The simple solution to some is to shoot the elusive beast.

Dr Grover Krantz, professor of anthropology at Washington State University, author of Big Footprints and renowned cryptozoologist, advocates a hunt to track and kill a Bigfoot. He believes it's the only way to remove any doubt about the thing's existence. Inevitably, his position has drawn opprobrium from other Bigfoot searchers and researchers.I think it's wrong.It would be criminal and totally unnecessary, objects Peter Byrne, a former big game hunter, author of The Search for Bigfoot and head of The Bigfoot Project based near Mount Hood in Oregon.I think shooting a Bigfoot is something proposed by people who are desperate to get one of these things.

Worse, says Byrne, Bigfoot might already be an endangered species. His own research team has not found any likely footprints in years. Byrne figures that, even if there are only a handful of the beasts around, they should be leaving thousands of prints:I have no idea how many Bigfoots there are, but there are not very many; otherwise there would be more evidence on the ground. In Byrne's view, killing a Bigfoot would be tragic:As one schoolboy said: 'Suppose it's the last one?'