Operation Persistence

[Guest]

I often wish we had named it something else. It does have a "secret squirrel" quality that some find distracting.

The origin of the name is pretty mundane. Originally, for the camera trap operation, we had three areas of study we called X, Y, and Z. Y was in the Big Thicket preserve northeast of Houston. Z was short-lived and in the Sam Houston National Forest. X is the "sole survivor," so to speak.

Edited September 8, 2012 by bipto

[Guest]

Bipto,

Would it be fair to say that the apes are coming to the TBRC teams, rather than the TBRC going to the apes?

It appears that the bulk of activity is occurring at the cabin residencies of Operation Persistence.

If the cabins are used by hunters during various hunting seasons, have hunters been harassed by apes too?

Since you freely admit that you were unable to finish your tour because of frayed nerves, do we have credible reports of hunters likewise abandoning their hunting trips due to ape harassment? If not, why not?

You have remarked here that Mr. Strain saw a Wood Ape only a few feet away. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that he did not claim to see a Wood Ape at that distance and at the time he looked into the bush, and only later believed he saw two apes, based solely on inference.

You said you saw a Wood Ape, but didn't you really just see a "black ball" like object that you only infered was a Wood Ape based what others there said they saw?

Given that you are being harassed by unseen agents at a fixed location during late afternoon and night time over days, why not bring dogs with you? After all, if you had just one good rat terrier on location, it would have at least alerted your team to an ape or apes in the bush Mr. Strain peered into. Right?

Given that primates are generally fascinated with their own image, ever consider placing large mirrors near trail cams? (I've seen video of baboons finding hand mirrors in a dump and they were very keen to observe themselves. I've seen a gorilla at a zoo spend time observing his own reflection in plate glass. Even aboriginal peoples have been known to find fascination with their images when first introduced to mirrors.)

You are contending that very large apes are native inhabitants of Oklahoma. Furthermore, you posit a lifestyle of group habituation rather than nomadic, solitaries of the Krantz school of thought. Why then, do we not find the volume of scat or recognizable trails attributable to apes roughly twice the size of gorillas?

If it is firmly knowable that the animals in question are apes, why then does one of the owners of the property you research on state without equivocation that the creatures are people, and nice people at that? You have noted that the owners have known about these creatures for years. Do they know something TRBC doesn't, or vice versa?

Can you give reasons why the bulk of the events you have described are better attributable to anomalous giant apes and not to human hoaxers?

Any thoughts about winter operations instead of spring and summer?

Thanks in advance for any replies you offer.

[Guest]

Would it be fair to say that the apes are coming to the TBRC teams, rather than the TBRC going to the apes?

It appears that the bulk of activity is occurring at the cabin residencies of Operation Persistence.

They do come to us, but we've had encounters away from the cabins, too. I believe it's the case that most of the visual encounters have been away from the cabins, though it may be closer to 50/50.

If the cabins are used by hunters during various hunting seasons, have hunters been harassed by apes too?

Since you freely admit that you were unable to finish your tour because of frayed nerves, do we have credible reports of hunters likewise abandoning their hunting trips due to ape harassment? If not, why not?

The reason this area came to our attention was as a result of the owners reporting activity. Everyone I've personally spoken to in that group has stories to tell. Regarding the extreme activity we've encountered, keep in mind that we are there for much longer periods of time than the owners usually are. We were the same until last year. Two to three day trips, a week at the max. We presume the difference in their behavior is due to our longer stays.

You have remarked here that Mr. Strain saw a Wood Ape only a few feet away. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that he did not claim to see a Wood Ape at that distance and at the time he looked into the bush, and only later believed he saw two apes, based solely on inference.

Bob saw what he thought were logs but which later found to be missing.

You said you saw a Wood Ape, but didn't you really just see a "black ball" like object that you only infered was a Wood Ape based what others there said they saw?

As I said on the BFS, if I had been the only one to see what I saw, then I would have said it was, at best, a possible sighting. Since three other members of my team saw it better than I did at the very same moment (including one of the figures walking upright on the slope of the mountain), I feel confident saying I had a sighting. Saying that three of us had a confirmed sighting while I only had a possible seems silly since it was all the same event.

Given that you are being harassed by unseen agents at a fixed location during late afternoon and night time over days, why not bring dogs with you? After all, if you had just one good rat terrier on location, it would have at least alerted your team to an ape or apes in the bush Mr. Strain peered into. Right?

We *have* had dogs down there. It's usually the case that the presumed ape activity decreases when the dogs are present. The land owner has a dog that pretty much freely roams and has been heard having some kind of fracas in the bush and has come back to the cabin injured.

Given that primates are generally fascinated with their own image, ever consider placing large mirrors near trail cams? (I've seen video of baboons finding hand mirrors in a dump and they were very keen to observe themselves. I've seen a gorilla at a zoo spend time observing his own reflection in plate glass. Even aboriginal peoples have been known to find fascination with their images when first introduced to mirrors.)

We have, though we haven't deployed anything yet. We have several ideas like that.

You are contending that very large apes are native inhabitants of Oklahoma. Furthermore, you posit a lifestyle of group habituation rather than nomadic, solitaries of the Krantz school of thought. Why then, do we not find the volume of scat or recognizable trails attributable to apes roughly twice the size of gorillas?

There are a lot of trails in the area. The absence of scat is peculiar, though that's not to say we've never found any.

If it is firmly knowable that the animals in question are apes, why then does one of the owners of the property you research on state without equivocation that the creatures are people, and nice people at that? You have noted that the owners have known about these creatures for years. Do they know something TRBC doesn't, or vice versa?

If you're talking about Branson, we're not required to have the same opinions. I'm very comfortable saying we have more first-hand experience now with the animals than he does.

Can you give reasons why the bulk of the events you have described are better attributable to anomalous giant apes and not to human hoaxers?

We've seen some that are eight feet tall and four feet wide. We've seen their massive limbs. Others move up a hill like it was nothing. Besides the sheer physicality of what we've witnessed, a hoaxing scenario would suggest that the hoaxers are unafraid of wearing furry suits in our presence when it's known that many in our group are trying to collect a specimen. Also, they are apparently unaffected by the extreme heat in their suits. Their commitment to their taks is impressive since they were there for most of three months last year and all of three months this year (including a couple of impromptu visits before and after Persistence). It's actually far more difficult for me to image human hoaxers than giant apes.

Any thoughts about winter operations instead of spring and summer?

Sure. We've been in there over the winter. There isn't much cover. I personally hope to get in there this winter since I've never seen it that way (and woud be happy to get away from the frozen north for a week or so).

Edited September 8, 2012 by bipto

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply, Bipto.

As to your sighting, I am most interested in what each person saw individually and not what was collectively assumed afterward. Except for the sighting a short time later, the very, very brief upright biped sighting moving in the trees, the rest of the team individual descriptions don't necessarily describe a Wood Ape. Or at least that is my impression.

The owners may be giving accounts that imply Bigfoot, but my question really has to do with hunters who are leasing the cabins. It would seem that so far we have potential motives to foster belief in the Oklahoma Ape: First, the owners for financial gain, perhaps, and second, the TBRC hoping to discover an extraordinary new species. My question relates to neutral, disinterested, or motiveless (relating to Bigfoot belief) hunters or others. You must admit, if the TBRC is finding itself harassed to such a degree as it has reported, the occasional turkey hunter or the deer hunter should likewise be awaken at night by nuts thrown against cabin walls, or rocks hurled from nowhere, or giant hairy apes seen off in the distance.

You say that one reason the recent events are not attributable to hoaxers relates to the shear size of what team members are seeing (apes). People (hoaxers) are just not that big. My question related to the bulk of the phenomena the TBRC experienced, such as rock throwing, noises in the woods, etc. But, to your point. Correct me if I am wrong, but some of the sightings I've heard about concerning OP are of the type like yours; you said the black thing you saw was rather smallish and it was only later when you did a field observation that you concluded the thing was really Wood Ape size. Another sighter similarly thought the Old Gray was near human size until he saw another team member come up the same trail and then he concluded that the ape was giant and massive. I submit that some of the sightings like these are not immediately perceiving giant size at all; the size increase is after the fact and informal. Also, you noted the presumed Wood Ape ground impression you found was of human size.

Here are two sets of facts you have said occurred. 1. Ape activity decreased when dogs were about. (You remark about one injured dog, but it was unclear to me if that was based on a story told by an owner or an event that happened to a TBRC team.) 2. Ape activity decreased in areas whenever trail cams were set up and increased in areas where trail cams were taken down. Do you see that these types of facts are suspicious and damaging to the contention that TBRC has found a Valley of the Apes in Oklahoma?

[Guest]

Except for the sighting a short time later, the very, very brief upright biped sighting moving in the trees, the rest of the team individual descriptions don't necessarily describe a Wood Ape. Or at least that is my impression.

That's incorrect, unless there's another animal that runs on two legs out there that I'm aware of. At least two of the members there could see the back legs scissoring as it went up the hill. Kathy, who had the longest and best view, saw more detail than that.

The owners may be giving accounts that imply Bigfoot, but my question really has to do with hunters who are leasing the cabins. It would seem that so far we have potential motives to foster belief in the Oklahoma Ape: First, the owners for financial gain, perhaps, and second, the TBRC hoping to discover an extraordinary new species. My question relates to neutral, disinterested, or motiveless (relating to Bigfoot belief) hunters or others. You must admit, if the TBRC is finding itself harassed to such a degree as it has reported, the occasional turkey hunter or the deer hunter should likewise be awaken at night by nuts thrown against cabin walls, or rocks hurled from nowhere, or giant hairy apes seen off in the distance.

No, I don't have to admit that. As I said above, we are there for long periods of time, continuously. Hunters are typically not. They're there for a weekend or maybe a bit more, then they leave. The owners, when they're there, are also usually only present for short periods.

I'm unclear how the owners have benefited much at all financially. I think you must be making an assumption that we've paid them over the years for access.

Correct me if I am wrong, but some of the sightings I've heard about concerning OP are of the type like yours; you said the black thing you saw was rather smallish and it was only later when you did a field observation that you concluded the thing was really Wood Ape size.

No, we pretty much knew what they were as soon as we saw them. There are a number of possible sightings from Persistence and Endurance, but there are also several clear sightings. For example, Colyer's sighting from last year where he could make out the shape of the head, the long hair, the shoulders, etc. McClurkan has had at least two sightings that include specifics with regard to body shape and size including his most recent encounter with the gray animal where he was able to make out its back, buttocks, and legs. Some are fleeting, "blackish" and inconclusive, but several are not.

Another sighter similarly thought the Old Gray was near human size until he saw another team member come up the same trail and then he concluded that the ape was giant and massive. I submit that some of the sightings like these are not immediately perceiving giant size at all; the size increase is after the fact and informal. Also, you noted the presumed Wood Ape ground impression you found was of human size.

You're referring to Daryl's sighting. In that case, he saw it step up out of the creek bed onto the overhanging bank. He appreciated the size of the animal when he asked another team member to make the same step and found that member to be far too small to do it. The figure I saw was perhaps 40 yards away on a slope so it was difficult to establish scale. Luckily, it passed behind a distinctive boulder so I was able to establish a better estimate of its size. With regard to the possible track, we've found some that are small (as in, child size), some closer to typical human size, and some much larger. Presumably, if there is a population of animals there, they're not all the same size and they're not born eight feet tall.

Here are two sets of facts you have said occurred. 1. Ape activity decreased when dogs were about. (You remark about one injured dog, but it was unclear to me if that was based on a story told by an owner or an event that happened to a TBRC team.) 2. Ape activity decreased in areas whenever trail cams were set up and increased in areas where trail cams were taken down. Do you see that these types of facts are suspicious and damaging to the contention that TBRC has found a Valley of the Apes in Oklahoma?

They may sound suspicious and I suppose they could be viewed as damaging, but they are what they are. I have no explanation for it except to point out that both other primates and animals like coyotes have both been observed avoiding game cams. I believe every time I've mentioned the camera avoidance issue that we're perplexed by the behavior. But, as I said, it is what it is.

We're exploring different types of camera systems and novel ways of deploying the cameras we have in order to capture an image. However, if we did, it would likely be rejected by the expected groups.

[Guest]

While I appreciate healthy skepticism, in this particular case I'd say that TBRC members out-and-out lying about their experiences or actually interacting with sasquatches is far more likely than human beings dressing up in costumes for 4 months out of the year constantly harassing TBRC members just for kicks. Who has that kind of time and resources? Also, the TBRC has been very clear on many of it's members deliberately trying to kill one to gain a specimen for scientific acknowledgement of the species. What kind of group of well funded human beings would run around in fur suits trying to be seen by TBRC members but also avoid being shot and killed? And for what purpose?

It is a ridiculous proposition. There is skepticism and there's crazy. If you absolutely can't believe in bigfoot, then you've got to believe the TBRC is lying. It makes no sense that they're telling the truth, but being hoaxed.

Sure. We've been in there over the winter. There isn't much cover. I personally hope to get in there this winter since I've never seen it that way (and woud be happy to get away from the frozen north for a week or so).

I've been to the Ouchitas (probably not too far from Area X, on the OK/AR border) in both winter and summer. It's completely different. I would wager your level of activity would drop down substantially due to the lack of cover in the winter. You can see much further in most areas. Might be a good time to pay them a house visit instead of the other way around...

[Guest Fanofsquatch]

Been reading up, podcasting up, and catching up on this. All I can say is you are brave individuals flirting with the unknown, or should I say 700 lb. unknown and several of them to boot!

Most of all thanks for sharing, I really mean that, area X is a world away from me being in Southern CA where there is zero BF activity, yet the BFRO world HQ is 13 miles from my house.

Any thoughts on how you are going to "get" one? I have yet to hear a shooting story that produced a body and I cringe of the thought of it taking multiple shots to wound it enough stop it from running. Odds are it will be messy.

[Guest]

It is a ridiculous proposition. There is skepticism and there's crazy. If you absolutely can't believe in bigfoot, then you've got to believe the TBRC is lying. It makes no sense that they're telling the truth, but being hoaxed.

I couldn't agree more. I don't think those proposing we're being hoaxed really understand the mind-boggling effort and total disregard for their own safety it would take. I'd believe the apes turn into rabbits and scamper off before I'd believe that. It's totally nuts. (And, of course, my refusal to accept outside tampering will now be turned against me so I can be portrayed as an addle-minded romantic.)

Might be a good time to pay them a house visit instead of the other way around...

My thoughts exactly.

Any thoughts on how you are going to "get" one? I have yet to hear a shooting story that produced a body and I cringe of the thought of it taking multiple shots to wound it enough stop it from running. Odds are it will be messy.

We have not yet been successful. As I mentioned on the last show, when you're using deadly force to collect a specimen, you need to take your shots with caution. The perfect combination of opportunity and luck has not yet presented itself.

Not being a "gun guy" myself, I can only say that the loads those looking to take the specimen are carrying are thought to be sufficient to the task.

[dopelyrics]

Don't do it. Don't shoot one. I know you have your reasons and I can understand them to a degree, sure. But what if it's a family - perhaps the only breeding family in the area and you shoot and kill the mother, or maybe the only male capable of siring off-spring? What if you are actually helping to exterminate what is obviously a rare animal? I'm sure these are things you guys have discussed many times.

I know it's a highly contentious issue and it's all about opinion and what might be best for them in the long term. And I know this isn't the thread to talk about it.

I think the work you have done so far is absolutely great.

Best regards,

Lee

Edited September 10, 2012 by dopelyrics

[Guest]

...perhaps the only breeding family in the area and you shoot and kill the mother, or maybe the only male capable of siring off-spring? What if you are actually helping to exterminate what is obviously a rare animal?

If they're that rare at this point, then they're about to go extinct anyway. Thing is, they're in a vast area of contiguous forest. The likelihood that they're the very last of their kind is low.

Edited September 10, 2012 by bipto

[dopelyrics]

Hi Bipto,

I always thougt these things were a type of person, not an ape as you suggest.Do you think they might be tree-dwelling?

Best.

Lee

[Guest]

"Dwelling," no, just because of the very large sizes that can attain. But, one of the earliest reports we have from the area is of a hunter seeing a smaller one swinging in a tree. It's possible the young or some of the smaller ones might go up for protection, but I doubt any dwell there for long periods. We assume they're more like gorillas, but don't know for certain.

[Guest Shaun]

Hi Bipto,

Sorry if I've missed this. Any indication on their diet?

Thanks

[Guest]

Sorry if I've missed this. Any indication on their diet?

Nothing conclusive, but when John Mionczynski was in the area a few years ago, he found ample food for a large omnivore.

[Guest Strick]

Last year, during Operation Endurance, I had some concerns that the family, or accomplices thereof, were hoaxing the TBRC. I always thought it was suspicious that, at the time of the Colyer shootings, the son and his girlfriend were so close to the scene as have hightailed it out of there by car such was the proximity of the gunfire.

I realise that you would have to completely nuts to be messin' with the TBRC these days, given their deadly intent, but there you go. Some of the noises coming out of the family have not inspired me with much confidence: I seem to remember they had the TBRC confused with the BFRO and, as jerrywayne alludes, their assertion that the wood apes are "real nice people" was bizarre.

However, I agree with Bipto and Shadoangel that to hoax so consistently over a three month period describes a dedication and persistence to duty - as well as the proverbial cojones of steel - that are more implausible than the wood ape scenario itself. So no, at this stage, I don't think that endemic hoaxing can account for the phenomena described at Area X.

I also don't think the TBRC are coordinated liars - I just don't buy it.

I kind of know where jerrywayne is coming from as some of the events, as told by Brian, are a little ambiguous and leave wiggle room for interpretation. For example, Brian never says: "Daryl saw a freaking great Bigfoot there in the creak", he says he saw something he thought was a wood ape, but still got his companion to go and stand in the spot just to make sure and for scale. Similarly, because of the angle he was sitting, Brian did not discern the wood apes in classic bipedal form during his sighting, but as more circular, barrelling figures - though he has qualified that Kathy's view was much clearer.

So all in all, a lot of supporting evidence for the wood ape hypothesis in Area X buy no money shot just yet. I share the reservations many have in regard of taking a specimen but, like many others again, I'm itching for a resolution.