It is my opinion that the government does not want the species ever discovered to be TRUE. Because of the major disruption to many aspects of our economy.
I do not feel that my statement is one anchored in conspiracy but one of deduction. As I have asked other people the same question I'll pose it here:
If you were at a court of law, and presented the evidence obtained in its entirety - including hoaxed material, you would find it impossible to disprove the existence of sasquatch. We are talking about new clippings, photos, videos, audios, eyewitness accounts, hair and other DNA samplings which are inconclusive or matching no known species, and the list of evidence is still longer.
Proving the species aside, who would be most affected by the protection of a sasquatch?
the logging industry, the Department of natural Resources, National Parks, and others I cannot readily think of would all be influenced heavily by the proof of sasquatch. If you hobbled the logging industry by creating protected lands that a sasquatch roams in...their wood collecting would slow down, creating a shortage of wood for building. If your shorting the supply of wood, you drive up the price of wood and economic snowball effect just starts rolling.
Without even considering the logging industry for a moment...say you had proven sasquatch.
Then consider the sightings and your a resort owner. I feel confident that there would be one of a couple issues generated.
1) your area is known for sightings...you would have a flood of people and then it would slow down based on interest in a sighting.
2) people would just not be interested in your place because they are afraid to have an encounter and a slow down in business would happen.
3) some variation of 1 & 2.
All of these effect the economy in its own right.
No matter how much I don't want sasquatch to be a political issue...it is...which is why it has not been recognized yet.
This is just my 3 cents.