BRADFORD – The Creamery Bridge in Bradford, VT has been closed since 2018 thanks to an angry Sasquatch, but you’d never know it by reading the local papers. The Sasquatch lobby has been putting pressure on the media to keep the incident shrouded in red tape and misinformation, and now Burlington’s own Seven Days paper has gotten involved in the cover-up.
“Bigfoot Not to Blame” reads a headline published by Seven Days last week, in an obvious attempt to curry favor with the Sasquatch itself. Interviews with local residents reveal that the yeti’s involvement in the construction delays are common knowledge, which is why it is so puzzling that print media continues to deny the existence of the creature.
“Yeah, I saw that story,” said life-long Bradford resident Goliath LePied. “They think they got their proof ’cause of that sign that got hung up at the post office. ‘Cept that sign was put up there by the Sasquatch, My cousin saw ‘im do it. Obviously he typed it up so’s you wouldn’t recognize his handwriting.”
An employee at the Bradford Public Library confirms that the Sasquatch had come in earlier that day to use the computers and had printed something out, but couldn’t say for sure if it was the notice hanging at the post office.
Seven Days reporter Sasha Goldstein denies any wrongdoing, saying he only reported the information that he was given, and points out that the Bradford Journal-Opinion has also refused to print confirmation of the monster’s existence.
“Look, I didn’t see any Sasquatch,” Goldstein said nervously. “I’ve never even met a Sasquatch. That photo going around online is me with my very hairy uncle.”
Goldstein insists that the Vermont Agency of Transportation has given him no reason to believe that anything other than general incompetence is responsible for most of the state’s construction delays. “Is a Sasquatch holding up CityPlace in Burlington? Is a Sasquatch rampaging through Manchester on Route 30? No, of course not. The truth is, there is no Sasquatch.”
The Sasquatch itself was unavailable for comment, saying only that it had a bridge to delay, and that we had better not print anything like this.