Operation Persistence

[norseman]

I would just like to hear how the other side really thinks this all works, if Squatch is human........

 

I have yet to hear any hypothesis that work for me.

 

And the most common one is that Squatch is some sort of Zen Buddha clan that chooses to live in harmony with the Earth. And they evidently have string theory all figured out as well. All of this higher learning lab work evidently takes place under a Spruce tree somewhere or down in a abandoned Bear den.

[Guest DWA]

Exactly.

 

This is one of my big problems with the field:  All the people who "know," just from what they've either fleetingly seen...or made up.

 

Fact is:  the vast majority of the evidence backs bipto, NAWAC, Meldrum and Bindernagel.

 

Anyone who wants to deviate from that better have the proof.

[norseman]

Exactly.

 

This is one of my big problems with the field:  All the people who "know," just from what they've either fleetingly seen...or made up.

 

Fact is:  the vast majority of the evidence backs bipto, NAWAC, Meldrum and Bindernagel.

 

Anyone who wants to deviate from that better have the proof.

 

Well...................we better all have proof.

 

From the outside looking in? They see us all as pixie believers arguing over the color of their wings.

Edited May 23, 2013 by norseman

[Guest DWA]

Oh, those definitely weren't orders to stand down, Mister Norseman.  ;-)

 

It's just that the discussion has to focus on search parameters....which are always based on evidence.  No reliably consistent strain of which has these guys going on and on to each other about how well this no-tech dodge is helping them steer clear of The Evil Urbanized Ones.

[Guest]

Are you sure their avoidance of people and camera traps isn't some kind of systematic learned behavior? How could one carry the perception that these two can influence where Sasquatch will go, then believe he has made no conscious effort in that act? Why will it not let you observe them with impunity?

 

You suggested their avoidance was evidence of culture. As if they all voted to be stealthy and furtive and shed clothing and shelter and fire instead of using their cognitive abilities to do the things other Homo did (or tried to do). That was your suggestion.

 

Alpha coyotes avoid camera traps, too. Is that learned? Or is it instinct? Or some combination? Animals can be instinctually stealthy and avoid threats without being human-like, even if they walk on two feet. 

From the outside looking in? They see us all as pixie believers arguing over the color of their wings.

 

The pink ones are very pretty, especially in the spring. 

And the most common one is that Squatch is some sort of Zen Buddha clan that chooses to live in harmony with the Earth. And they evidently have string theory all figured out as well. All of this higher learning lab work evidently takes place under a Spruce tree somewhere or down in a abandoned Bear den.

 

I quoted this only because I liked it. 

[southernyahoo]

 

Are you sure their avoidance of people and camera traps isn't some kind of systematic learned behavior? How could one carry the perception that these two can influence where Sasquatch will go, then believe he has made no conscious effort in that act? Why will it not let you observe them with impunity?

 

 

You suggested their avoidance was evidence of culture. As if they all voted to be stealthy and furtive and shed clothing and shelter and fire instead of using their cognitive abilities to do the things other Homo did (or tried to do). That was your suggestion.

 

 

I'm sure it's not because they could communicate the danger of being seen across the country, but it is a uniform atribute of their behavior across the country.  This defies all animal instincts because those with great instincts still get photographed. The need for trickier tactics just to get a clear view of one is a testimate to their intelligence or cognizant awareness that goes beyond instinct. I think it is unprecedented for an animal to display such a curiosity with people, like in area X and yet be such a booger to photograph over a period of a decade with the same researchers and in the same place.  Yeah, Houston, something is wrong.

 

 

Alpha coyotes avoid camera traps, too. Is that learned? Or is it instinct? Or some combination? Animals can be instinctually stealthy and avoid

threats without being human-like, even if they walk on two feet. 

 

 

 

 

 

Coyotes are breeze to photograph. They were easily duped into getting their photo taken by me in one nights worth of effort , on the outskirt of my own neighborhood, with as little bait as a small stain of hotdog juice. Yes those were becoming habituated and taking pets in the neighborhood, but they got busted quick, and the city had their evidence to have them caught and removed.

 

 

[Guest DWA]

The point he's making is that, while coyotes are a breeze to photograph (relatively speaking; here in the East one won't see one, generally, without very good luck and/or effort), alpha coyotes on their territories avoid camera traps.

 

Not speculation.  Researched and proven.

[Guest]

I'm sure it's not because they could communicate the danger of being seen across the country, but it is a uniform atribute of their behavior across the country.  This defies all animal instincts because those with great instincts still get photographed. The need for trickier tactics just to get a clear view of one is a testimate to their intelligence or cognizant awareness that goes beyond instinct. I think it is unprecedented for an animal to display such a curiosity with people, like in area X and yet be such a booger to photograph over a period of a decade with the same researchers and in the same place.  Yeah, Houston, something is wrong.

 

You're giving the tech and the animal too much credit. The cameras are inconsistent at best and I don't say this based on something I've read, it's based on actual experience I and my group have gleaned from deploying dozens of different models over six years. We've spent thousands of dollars (well into five digits) over the years and would be considered experts in the art of camera trap deployment. Also, they only cover a small area, relative to the area the animal can traverse. Even if you have a hundred in an area like X, you've only covered a veritable postage stamp on the fifty yard line of Cowboys Stadium. Also, the animal is probably not as numerous as the animals we do photograph (bears and coyotes, mostly). Lack of coverage plus low population density equals low chance of success. Also, they're a lot smarter than those animals and might, like alpha coyotes, avoid unfamiliar human devices and structures by instinct. 

 

Coyotes are breeze to photograph. They were easily duped into getting their photo taken by me in one nights worth of effort , on the outskirt of my own neighborhood, with as little bait as a small stain of hotdog juice. Yes those were becoming habituated and taking pets in the neighborhood, but they got busted quick, and the city had their evidence to have them caught and removed.

 

You should call the University of Nebraska. They could use your insight, apparently.

 

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1227&context=icwdm_usdanwrc

 

Abstract: The primary objective of this study was to develop a better understanding of coyote (Canis latrans) wariness

particularly as it related to social status. We determined that territory status (controlling alpha, resident beta, or

nonterritorial transient) affected vulnerability to photo-capture by infrared-triggered camera systems. All coyotes were

wary of cameras, leading to relatively low numbers of photo-captures, most of which occurred at night. Alphas were

significantly underrepresented in photographs and were never photo-captured inside their awn territories. Betas were

photographed inside and outside their territories, whereas transients were most often photographed on edges of territo-

ries. Both alphas and betas were photographed more often on territorial edges when outside their territories. We next

addressed the question of how alphas were better able to avoid photo-capture. Alphas tracked human activity within

their territories and presumably learned the locations of cameras as they were being set up. They did this either by ap-

proaching our location directly or by moving to a vantage point from where they could observe us. Betas and tran-

sients either withdrew or did not respond to human activity. Trials in which a dog was present were more likely to

elicit an approach response from alphas. Avoidance of camera stations and the tracking of human activity implied wari-

ness toward objects or locations resulting from their learned association with human presence rather than neophobia to-

ward the objects themselves.

Edited May 24, 2013 by bipto

[southernyahoo]

You should call the University of Nebraska. They could use your insight, apparently.

 

It wasn't difficult because their routes of travel were limited. Knowing they will stick to cover along creeks, much like Sas, means all you need is a choke point and an appeal to their senses.

 

 

You're giving the tech and the animal too much credit.

 

 

Not really, there are numerous attempts with camera traps of all models and they work fine with most animals and will trigger on people. Your reports that they didn't in some cases just says they don't hold up for ever or with constant field deployment. I've had some go bad myself, but they weren't Reconyx models. I don't think I'm giving them too much credit because the repeating theme we've heard over and over as to what happens when cameras are deployed in the middle of what is reported to be extreme activity. You've said yourself that they would stay away from the cabin if the cameras were close. You moved them out and away then had action at the cabin. Note that if you can have action at the cabin then it's not necessarily the presence of man made objects that repels them.

[indiefoot]

You should be able to design an experiment using camera traps and a plain metal box the same size. Placing and removing each around the cabins at Area X and recording the resulting activity or lack of activity.

[Guest]

We should, shouldn't we?

Not really, there are numerous attempts with camera traps of all models and they work fine with most animals and will trigger on people...

 

I anxiously all the bigfoot photos that will inevitably come flooding in as a result of this fantastic technology. 

[southernyahoo]

I anxiously all the bigfoot photos that will inevitably come flooding in as a result of this fantastic technology.

You know, that sounds just about word for word from about 2006.

I think you learned as much about having all the eggs in one basket.

[Guest]

What basket was that? And which are the eggs in this metaphor? 

[Guest]

A Buddhist Luddite basket full of Sasquatch eggs? I think they make cases for those type of baskets.

See what I did there?

Edited May 24, 2013 by Irish73

[southernyahoo]

What basket was that? And which are the eggs in this metaphor? 

 

That was the act of going all in with camera traps, (all your effort in that basket) which the TBRC did for five years. What you learned was that the activity there is better observed and experienced by being there more often or longer. No photo's for five years meant you didn't get any data to learn from. 

 

You also said that one nights audio recording had gathered more data than five years of camera trapping. I was onto that about 7 years ago, and it was nice to hear you say it. I do hope you guys keep that up, and share what you get.