What bothers me is that we have no trouble looking into new species based on a single photo, video, etc., but people refuse to do the same for the Sasquatch due to hoaxers.

There has been no large-scale air and land investigation to date. If they live in cave systems or in the mountains, it's not likely you'll see them often, if ever. There are many parts of the PNW that will not see more than one human a decade, if that.

Sasquatch, at least, would live in the rainforests of PNW, meaning any corpses or other biological matter would biodegrade or be eaten rapidly - wolves and cougars are more than capable of fully consuming corpses, bones included (my own dog can completely consume bones; no reason a wolf can't do the same). I never see corpses or scat from well-known species, so I'm not sure this is a valid reason to rule it out. Fossils of any species are practically impossible to come by in the PNW climate, as well.

The food thing is kind of irritating, too, as bears are pretty low impact on their environment, but are the same size (sometimes bigger) as the reported size of the Sasquatch. It could very easily be the case that we've attributed Sasquatch eating habits to bears.

As for the breeding population issue - there's been tribes in the Amazon we had zero idea about until the last decade (I believe there was one found within the last five years, but don't quote me on that). If it's a hominid, there's no real reason it has to have a massive breeding population if a tribe only 20-30 people strong has existed undetected.

I'm not convinced it exists, but I also would be wholly unsurprised if it did. There's been so many reports by otherwise completely credible people whose reputations could easily be ruined by belief in such a thing that it gets pretty hard to dismiss out of hand.