Jump to content
NathanFooter

The Researchers Habituation And Field Observations Thread "a Place To Discuss Your Activities, Thoughts, Observations, Methods And Results.

Recommended Posts

Guest Suesquach

Great article Branco. It's something I've also thought about. I hope more researchers look into this possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

KB I am on the same page as you... was thinking about the Lenni Lenape tribe that was here many moons ago. There are sites all over the area. It led me to a BF sighting 2 weeks agi, me and my friend were looking for an Ancient burrial ground on the southern end of Jenny Jump mountain.. Happened to be in an area, though surrounded by people, not used much by people. Thinking of doing  Lenni Lenape relic searches and maybe I will find more than just relics...Great post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor

We NEVER use white light or any color light if I can help it , { if we need light in the tent for second or 2 we use red } .

 

Just curious what the thought process was behind this SOP Nathan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NathanFooter

Norseman , it is clear they have great night vision and so white light can make them night blind for a period of time. 

 

 You can do this test on your self , go outside late at night for 25 minutes with no light to let your eyes adjust to the dark , then blast your self in the face with a bright light , you will not be able to see anything for up to 5 minutes.

 

  This has been noted in reports and in the early BFRO investigations { and my own } that when you blast them with a light the activity ends right then, they leave and avoid you. 

 

As to why red light in the tent , red light impact the eye much less than the rest of the light spectrum. that is why it is common place on headlamps, so hunters can navigate to their tree stand without spooking much game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor

Norseman , it is clear they have great night vision and so white light can make them night blind for a period of time. 

 

 You can do this test on your self , go outside late at night for 25 minutes with no light to let your eyes adjust to the dark , then blast your self in the face with a bright light , you will not be able to see anything for up to 5 minutes.

 

  This has been noted in reports and in the early BFRO investigations { and my own } that when you blast them with a light the activity ends right then, they leave and avoid you. 

 

As to why red light in the tent , red light impact the eye much less than the rest of the light spectrum. that is why it is common place on headlamps, so hunters can navigate to their tree stand without spooking much game.

 

I'm very aware of all of this.........just remember, Apes have trichromatic vision. Which means that when you turn on your red light? They can see that too.

 

The trick in Nam if you do not want to attract attention is yes use a red light so you don't ruin your own night vision, but throw a rain poncho over your head and study your map, whatever. It doesn't ruin your night vision, but it also hides your light source as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NathanFooter

Norseman , I know they can see the red light, I was getting at that red is better and less harmful to their eyes.   I am not trying to be hidden or covert by using red light , I am trying to avoid blinding them or making myself less approachable. 

 

I am being considerate of how they view me and what I am doing in their environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor

Gotcha! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

A good tip for keeping your night vision is to close one eye when your using a light. I forget where I learned that but I use that trick often and it works good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Pirates wore an eye patch not to look scarey, but to force one eye to adjust to darkness, so when they boarded a ship, they wouldnt be blind below decks. Modern military training teaches to close one eye while a flare is up so as not to lose your night vision.

 

I was actually thinking of useing a yellow lens on my headlamp. There have been reports that they dont seem to mind the yellow light. (Dont ask, i dont know why).

 

A thought on foods. Anything with lots of butter or cheese. Mac n cheese, buttered popcorn, cooked meats.

 

A bait/feeding station should be protected from mini-bears as well as the full sized ones. A post with an inverted trash can (plastic not metal) and a platform nailed to the top, set at an appropriate heigth should do the trick. Set this in their comfort zone.  This can be gradually moved over time, into an area more condusive to photography.

 

I havent tried this yet, but a friend swears he has luck using glow sticks as an attractant. I was thinking, since they seem to be attracted to white objects (white glossy pickup trucks comes to mind. White colored gifts they leave)  createing a tent from white sheets, leaving a latern inside, and sit in a spot i can observe not the tent so much as the places THEY will watch the tent from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Branco

For those that actually conduct fieldwork, or interesting in doing so, here are a few observations, conclusions and comments; all based solely on field work done in the Southern & Southeastern states. All the subjects to be covered have been discussed in numerous threads on the forum.

 

1. Habituation

Nearly all of the many "habituation" cases I have investigated are situations in which the people involved moved into homes -new or old - which were situated in long established Bigfoot foraging areas. Many of the people involved lived for several years on their property without knowing it was part of the creatures' travel routes. Over time some of the residents unintentionally made their home sites specific foraging spots for Bigfoot by storing and/or growing food that the creatures found to be to their liking and easily accessible. (Livestock, livestock feed, pet foods, garden produce, fruits, berries. and table scraps.) In some cases the people involved discovered what was actually going on and deliberately demonstrated their lack of malice toward the creatures to attempt to insure there would be no aggressive or dangerous interactions between them and the creatures. "Habituation" around those home sites was nothing more than the result of the Bigfoot having been there first, and the "new residents" accepting their presence. The situation is not much different than a home site being “habituated†by any of the other smaller wild animals that typically forage around rural home sites seeking a more reliable and accessible source of food.

 

The only difference between the “habituation†of typical wild animals and Bigfoot is that the latter’s highly intelligent and rightly attained distrust of humans keeps them in the shadows at night and at least mostly concealed from the residents during daylight hours, even though they may have no real fear of those particular residents.

 

The folks who live in rural areas and who do in fact have Bigfoot routinely foraging on their property seldom talk to “outsiders†about the matter. When they do, it is always with the conditions that their names and locations not be disclosed. Nearly all of them feel an obligation to protect the creatures, even though at times the creatures do things that infuriate them.

 

Some skeptics – most from outside the area of study - persistently and sarcastically discount the possibility that Bigfoot and humans could, or would, somewhat routinely and peacefully co-exist in any location. It is not only a certain fact that some humans and Bigfoot do share the same general habitat in the South & Southeast, but anyone that does a quick study of the history, geography and topography of  these areas should be able to understand why these situations appear to occur there more frequently than in most other areas.

 

Most of those same skeptics attempt to justify their erroneous beliefs that such human/Bigfoot interactions do not exist because the people involved are unable, or unwilling to provide clear and compelling photographs or videos of the creatures. The fact that they believe Bigfoot should be easily photographed or videoed under any circumstances is a pretty compelling reason to believe that those skeptics actually know very little or nothing about the subject animals, or about the people who do.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest WesT

Hey Tal, long time no chat buddy. That's a nice summary you put together there.

 

In regards to your statement about protecting them, I can relate. Last fall I tracked bigred to where he lives. It was surprisingly easy. But when I came to realize there was a little one involved, I backed off and never returned there. I don't want any harm to come to him and his family, so I resolved to never disclose the location. I just don't have the heart to turn bigred in. Call me crazy, call me selfish, call me whatever, I don't care. I'm done!!

 

Providing pictures or video to back up claims of habituation is a trap set by people who would, and have, instantly cry "fake" to discredit the claims of people who are brave enough to publicly talk about it. I think of it as hollering for ammo in a firefight. Because all the while, the bottom line is, and always will be, "no body=no proof." All other evidences, no matter what, will always be inconclusive at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

Calling fake is also an excuse to get people/witnesses/researchers to disclose exact locales of the target species for those that wish to take the easy way to putative "fame & fortune" or so they think.  Think watersheds when thinking habitat.  Rick Noll published some good notes on this approach.  

Edited by bipedalist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest WesT

Gorilla rarely drink water because they get all the water they need from the vegetation they consume.  A good watershed would help keep the vegetation from being stressed during times of low precipitation. I'm sure it's all just coincidence...

 

Edit to add: "fame and fortune"...

 

well shoot, I can't find an emoricon that's laughing so hard that snot and hairpins are flying out of it.

Edited by WesT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NathanFooter

Hey everyone , I have ment to keep posting here but my computer had been giving me trouble when it came to going through the hundreds of hours of audio that I have now collected.  I have a ton of information to share from this years efforts but I have to whip all of this into breakdowns of my field operations and observations. 

 

It also has not helped that I have lost portions of my written notes { no idea where they went to } so I will have to go by what was recorded on the dictation recorders for most of my environmental notes.

 

What I can say right now is that we did collect some very interesting audio and some possible tracks { suggestive impressions really }. We also noted movement around our camp and a couple knocks in response to a few activities.   

 

Much to come as I get this all worked out , in case you missed it , the link to my notes on the May 7th track way/ general field outing notes are at the bottom of the first page of this thread.     :D  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...