The GREAT Search For Bigfoot: ‘Finding Bigfoot’ vs ‘Expedition Bigfoot’

The legend of Bigfoot has intrigued people for generations, sparking debates, folklore, and a dedicated community of believers and skeptics alike. Among the numerous television shows dedicated to exploring this elusive creature, “Finding Bigfoot” and “Expedition Bigfoot” stand out for their unique approaches to the hunt. While both shows share a common goal—to find concrete evidence of Bigfoot’s existence—they differ significantly in their methods, tone, and overall execution. In this post, we’ll take a closer look at how these two series stack up against each other, providing a detailed comparison of their approaches, investigative techniques, and entertainment value.

Premise and Structure: Traditional vs. Modern Exploration

Finding Bigfoot made its debut on Animal Planet in 2011 and quickly became a staple in the realm of cryptozoology TV. The show ran for nine seasons, during which time the Finding Bigfoot team traveled across the United States and beyond, investigating reports of Bigfoot sightings. The core team—Matt Moneymaker, Cliff Barackman, James “Bobo” Fay, and Ranae Holland—became familiar faces to fans, each bringing their own perspective and expertise to the table.

The structure of Finding Bigfoot is relatively straightforward: the team arrives in a location with a history of Bigfoot sightings, holds a town hall style gathering, interviews witnesses, and then heads into the field for night investigations. These investigations typically involve techniques like using thermal imaging cameras, setting up audio recorders to capture possible Bigfoot vocalizations, and conducting “call and response” sessions where the team mimics supposed Bigfoot sounds to elicit a reaction. Each episode culminates in the team discussing the evidence they’ve gathered and debating whether it supports the existence of Bigfoot.

In contrast, Expedition Bigfoot, which premiered on the Travel Channel in 2019, offers a more high-tech approach to the search for Bigfoot. The show is led by Dr. Mireya Mayor, a primatologist, and Russell Acord, a military survival expert, alongside Bigfoot researchers Bryce Johnson and Ronny LeBlanc. Instead of traveling from one location to another, the team typically spends several weeks in one carefully chosen area that has a high concentration of reported Bigfoot activity. Their goal is to systematically explore and gather evidence using the latest technology, including drones, thermal imaging, and DNA analysis.

The premise of Expedition Bigfoot is rooted in the idea that Bigfoot sightings are not random but can be predicted using data analysis. The show often begins with the team analyzing sighting reports and using algorithms to identify hotspots where Bigfoot might be found. This method contrasts sharply with the more traditional, anecdotal approach seen in Finding Bigfoot.

Investigative Approach: Anecdotal Evidence vs. High Tech

One of the key differences between these two shows lies in how they approach the investigation of Bigfoot sightings.

Finding Bigfoot heavily relies on anecdotal evidence, valuing the stories and experiences of those who claim to have encountered Bigfoot. The team spends considerable time interviewing witnesses, visiting the exact locations of their sightings, and attempting to recreate the conditions under which the sightings occurred. This approach emphasizes the human element of Bigfoot research—how these encounters impact individuals and communities.

The investigation methods used by the Finding Bigfoot team, such as tree knocking (hitting trees with sticks to mimic what is believed to be a Bigfoot communication method) and vocalizations, are rooted in long-standing Bigfoot lore. The team’s effectiveness often depends on their ability to interpret the responses they receive during these experiments, which can be both subjective and speculative. The show does not shy away from presenting evidence that could be explained by natural or mundane causes, but the focus is always on the possibility that Bigfoot is out there.

In contrast, Expedition Bigfoot seeks to bring a more high tech approach to the hunt. The team’s use of technology sets it apart from Finding Bigfoot. For example, they employ thermal drones to scan large areas of wilderness from above, looking for heat signatures that could indicate the presence of a large, unknown animal. DNA traps and environmental DNA (eDNA) analysis are used to gather genetic material from soil, water, or other environmental samples, which are then tested for any unknown or unusual genetic markers as well as the use of Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) that creates 3D images of the landscape.

This approach is designed to reduce the reliance on anecdotal evidence and increase the chances of capturing hard, verifiable data. The Expedition Bigfoot team also incorporates scientific theories about animal behavior and environmental factors into their investigations, attempting to predict where Bigfoot might be based on factors like food availability and migration patterns. This methodical, research-oriented approach gives the show a distinctly different flavor, appealing to viewers who prefer a more evidence-based exploration.

Team Dynamics: Chemistry and Expertise

The dynamics within the teams on these two shows also contribute significantly to their differing styles.

Finding Bigfoot is characterized by the lively chemistry among its team members. Matt Moneymaker, the founder of the BFRO, is the passionate believer and driving force behind the team’s efforts. Cliff Barackman, a field researcher, brings a deep knowledge of Bigfoot lore and a level-headed approach to the investigations. James “Bobo” Fay, the show’s most colorful character, adds humor and a sense of adventure to the mix. Ranae Holland, the team’s skeptic, plays a crucial role in grounding the show in reality, often challenging the more fantastical interpretations of evidence.

The interplay between these personalities creates a balance that keeps the show engaging, even when the evidence is inconclusive. The debates between the team members, particularly between the believers and the skeptic, add depth to the show, as viewers get to see different perspectives on the same evidence.

In Expedition Bigfoot, the team’s dynamic is shaped by their diverse expertise. Dr. Mireya Mayor, a former NFL cheerleader turned primatologist, brings a scientific background that lends credibility to the show’s approach. Russell Acord, with his military survival skills, ensures that the team is well-prepared for the often harsh conditions they encounter. Bryce Johnson and Ronny LeBlanc add their own unique insights.

While the Expedition Bigfoot team members are presented as more serious, their interactions are often more subdued compared to the more boisterous and casual banter seen in Finding Bigfoot. This difference in tone reflects the show’s more serious, field research approach, which is could be perceived as being less about entertainment and more about presenting the time in the field looking for evidence.

Tone and Entertainment Value: Fun vs. Suspense

The tone of each show further differentiates them and appeals to different audiences.

Finding Bigfoot is often light-hearted, with a strong emphasis on the cultural and community aspects of Bigfoot sightings. The show’s tone is one of adventure and curiosity, with a touch of humor that makes it accessible to a broad audience. The team’s willingness to engage with local legends and the communities they visit gives the show a grassroots feel, making it as much about the people who believe in Bigfoot as it is about the creature itself.

The entertainment value of Finding Bigfoot lies in its blend of mystery, folklore, and camaraderie. Even though the show rarely delivers concrete evidence, the journey is always engaging, thanks to the team’s enthusiasm and the colorful characters they meet along the way. The show embraces the speculative nature of Bigfoot research, making it a fun watch for anyone who enjoys the thrill of the unknown.

Expedition Bigfoot, on the other hand, adopts a more suspenseful and serious tone. The show is filmed with a cinematic style that heightens the tension and drama of the team’s expeditions. The use of advanced technology and scientific methods adds an element of credibility, but it also creates a more intense viewing experience. The show is structured to build suspense, often leaving viewers on the edge of their seats as the team uncovers potential evidence or faces unexpected challenges in the field.

For viewers who are looking for a more adrenaline-pumping exploration of the Bigfoot mystery, Expedition Bigfoot delivers. The show’s focus on cutting-edge technology and its serious tone make it feel more like a scientific expedition than a folklore-driven adventure. This approach may appeal to those who prefer a more evidence-based, less speculative exploration of Bigfoot.

Conclusion: Two Paths to the Same Mystery

In the world of Bigfoot hunting, Finding Bigfoot and Expedition Bigfoot represent two distinct paths. Finding Bigfoot offers a blend of adventure, humor, and folklore, making it a perfect choice for viewers who enjoy the cultural and community aspects of the Bigfoot phenomenon. Its focus on anecdotal evidence and traditional methods provides a more accessible and light-hearted take on the search for Bigfoot.

Expedition Bigfoot, by contrast, appeals to those who prefer a more serious, technological approach. The show’s use of advanced technology and data-driven methods gives it a modern, credible edge, making it a compelling watch for anyone interested in the cutting-edge side of cryptozoology.

Ultimately, both shows contribute to the ongoing fascination with Bigfoot in their own unique ways. Whether you’re drawn to the human stories and community legends explored in Finding Bigfoot or the high-tech, suspenseful investigations of Expedition Bigfoot, there’s something for every Bigfoot enthusiast in these two series. The mystery of Bigfoot continues to captivate, and these shows remind us that the hunt for the unknown is as much about the journey as it is about the destination.

4o