Bigfoot Hunter Struggles to Validate Alleged Sasquatch Corpse

Charles “Snake” Stuart says DNA testing supports his extraordinary claim, but independent scientific confirmation has not been made public.

OLD FORGE, NY — A self-described Bigfoot hunter who says he recovered the body of a Sasquatch in New York’s Adirondack Mountains is renewing his effort to prove the specimen is authentic, citing disputed DNA findings that have not been independently verified.

Charles “Snake” Stuart says the roughly 8-foot specimen, which he calls “Dack,” contains a mixture of Neanderthal and modern human DNA. Stuart has promoted the results as scientific evidence that Bigfoot exists. However, no peer-reviewed study, complete laboratory report or confirmation from an independent scientific institution has been released publicly.

Stuart said he found the body while camping near Old Forge in 2024. According to his account, he played recorded howls in the woods, heard noises in response and later followed a strong odor to a large, decomposing figure. He said the specimen was dead when he found it and was later preserved with help from an acquaintance using taxidermy methods.

The circumstances of the discovery, the handling of the remains and the claimed genetic testing have drawn skepticism. Stuart has acknowledged that persuading scientists and members of the public has been difficult. His central challenge is establishing a documented chain of custody and allowing qualified researchers to examine samples under controlled conditions.

Stuart says testing showed the specimen’s genetic makeup was 58.5% Neanderthal and 41.5% human. He has linked the analysis to Cornell University’s veterinary DNA laboratory and has described the specimen as a Neanderthal-human hybrid. A June 30 report by Detroit television station WDIV repeated those claims after Stuart appeared for an interview.

The available reporting does not establish that Cornell University endorsed Stuart’s conclusion or identified the material as coming from an unknown primate. Cornell has not publicly announced the discovery of a Bigfoot specimen, and detailed records showing how the sample was collected, tested and interpreted have not been released for independent review. Without those records, the percentages cited by Stuart cannot be treated as confirmed findings.

Genetic evidence would need to be examined carefully because contamination can occur when biological material is collected, transported or preserved outside a controlled laboratory setting. Human DNA in a sample does not by itself demonstrate the existence of a humanlike species. Researchers would also need to determine whether the material came from the specimen, the people who handled it or another known source.

Stuart has displayed the alleged body publicly, including at the New York State Fair, where visitors could view the large, hair-covered figure in an exhibit. Public display, photographs and video may attract attention, but they cannot replace independent examination, reproducible testing and publication of the underlying evidence.

Claims involving supposed Bigfoot bodies have faced intense scrutiny because similar announcements have collapsed under examination. In 2008, two Georgia men promoted what they said was a frozen Bigfoot corpse and presented DNA results during a news conference. The supposed body was later found to be a costume, reinforcing public doubt toward later claims involving physical remains.

Bigfoot, also called Sasquatch, is commonly described in folklore and witness reports as a large, upright, hair-covered creature living in remote forests. Sightings have been reported across North America for decades, but no body, fossil or genetic sample has gained broad acceptance from zoologists as evidence of an undiscovered species.

Stuart continues to seek recognition for Dack and says the effort to establish the specimen’s authenticity has been an uphill battle. Until independent specialists receive documented samples, reproduce the tests and publish their methods and findings, the identity of the displayed figure will remain unresolved.

Author note: Last updated July 14, 2026.