N A W A C - Field Study Discussion

[Branco]

Jerry:  since I hate waiting for somebody to answer a question when I have something to say, here's my take on "habituation" scenarios and "habituators."

 

There is no way I can say that is not happening.  How would I know?  I would have to take their word on it.  But "word" is not "proof," and just like a report on the NAWAC website, a "habituation" story - whether or not it is in book form - is only one story.

 

The only reason I take this topic seriously is the weight of the evidence, its volume and its consistency, both factors of which imply many, consistent stories.  Anyone telling me one single story - particularly a story that goes well outside the mainstream of what a huge volume of consistent encounter reports is telling me - I just have to go, well, nice story.  I'm certainly not shelling out buckage to read it, when there are thousands I can read for free.

 

(The books I do buy are books in which scientists discuss the volume and consistency of the overall evidence, in other words, the scientific approaches to the topic.)

 

There's one more thing.  NAWAC appears to be encountering an animal of the kind the reports are describing to me, one difficult to see for long much less photograph or shoot in dense cover that it appears to use well.  Now, humans have habituated darn near everything; there is no reason we could not have habituated sasquatch.  But  habituators are describing situations conspicuously amenable to proof.  Their subjects are apparently conducting long interactions in the open; proof should be easy to obtain.  And if you are gonna publish a book ferpetesake about it, I would expect the proof to be in that book.

 

Otherwise, it's like any story.  Just a story.  And harder to swallow than the vast majority of the ones I have read.

 

Do you see any bias in your "swallowing"? How could it be easier for the "habituators" to provide you proof? They and the NAWAC are describing the same type of animals, or at least that's the way it  "appears". The fact that "habituators" generally have no desire to see one killed "for science" wouldn't affect your opinions at all, right?

[Guest DWA]

^^^The "bias" can't be helped.  If you are telling me they're hanging around your house, for years or even decades, and are publishing a book for profit, I better see the proof in the book before I pay for one.  Most witnesses do everything they can to ensure a penny never makes its way to them ("don't even use my name").  I'm allowed to apply sniff tests.  Way life is.

[Branco]

But, NAWAC passed the sniff test. No money involved. Got it.

[Guest DWA]

When you can show me how NAWAC is all wet and the habituators have the goods, all ears.  How it works.

[Guest zenmonkey]

so.....back to asking bipto questions?? bipto any major changes in strategy this season or just minor changes to last years?

Edited April 7, 2014 by zenmonkey

[Lake County Bigfooot]

I have a question for Bipto as well, have you observed any unusual behaviors such as objects being placed in strange ways.

Say like a "wood ape" found some human artifact and stuck it somewhere for you guys to find it?  I know this seems like a leading

line of questioning, but that is completely not my intention, I simply am interested in what oddities you guys have discovered in the

X area, or if there are none at all.

[Guest Migrantworkers]

Why not place some fly paper or some more "camouflagable" substance in known paths in an effort to catch some hairs?

[Guest zenmonkey]

Thats a great idea but remember the agenda is to take a specimen not collect hair

[Guest]

I've been on vacation and down with the flu and am not reading to the end of the thread before responding to questions...

 

In your view, Bipto, what are the similarities and differences in your organization's experiences in Area X in Oklahoma and the experiences said to occur in much maligned "habituation" locations of, say, Janice Carter or others in Kentucky and elsewhere?

 

Someone in my group said it best, so I'll just steal their take on this subject:

 

 

Generally speaking, the term “habituation†refers to the reduction or elimination of a response to a frequently repeated stimulus. More specifically, in the case of primate habituation, scientists seek to overcome the natural apprehension most wild animals exhibit towards people. By means of an ongoing process that can take years to accomplish, primatologists strive to be ignored so that normal animal behavior takes place and can be recorded, unaltered by the presence of a human observer.

 

Our contention that wood apes take note of and interact with us does not mean that these creatures are habituated. (If anything, I think one could argue that some of us who have spent a great deal of time in Area X may be in the process of becoming habituated ourselves to the presence or actions of the apes!) At this point in time, the apes hide from and flee from us, or they approach us with caution when they reckon (from all appearances) they can do so without being detected. As long as that remains the case, we cannot say that they are becoming habituated to our presence. Since we are not there on an ongoing basis for years at a time, we do not have the resources to pursue a habituation strategy. Since the process of habituation can only take place under non-threatening circumstances, we cannot say that we are attempting to habituate wood apes in Area X.

 

Beyond that, and in comparison to Coy, et. al., I think the major difference is the nature of our respective claims. We leave it to the reader to make their own conclusions regarding which they'd like to believe. 

I would think that NAWAC ought to be further down the proof-road than it is, given their claim of virtual nightly ape visitations.

 

What proof would you accept? 

[Guest]

This was great and spot on

 

(If anything, I think one could argue that some of us who have spent a great deal of time in Area X may be in the process of becoming habituated ourselves to the presence or actions of the apes!)

[Guest]

any major changes in strategy this season or just minor changes to last years?

 

Evolution, not revolution. We came close last year and are modifying those nearly successful tactics in ways we believe will enhance our chances this year. We have dismantled the security system are using the proceeds from its sale to purchase more thermal equipment and enhancements to our facilities and Overwatch station. 

Have you observed any unusual behaviors such as objects being placed in strange ways. Say like a "wood ape" found some human artifact and stuck it somewhere for you guys to find it? 

 

Not that I can think of. Not in a way suggesting they wanted us to find it. We have found firewood in places it doesn't belong and suspect they're using it to make signalling knocks, etc., but I can't think of any "tokens" they've taken or left. 

This was great and spot on

 

It's become a significant challenge. We've come to expect such wonders and excitement from the apes that when they don't "perform" we say to ourselves that activity's down. But, when we keep careful and thorough field notes, we see that's not really the case, only the impact of their actions has decreased. We have become desensitized to their presence, in a way. 

 

Sometimes they're more inclined to get in our grill and other times they're more inclined to sit back. There are many variables, but we are trying to deduce why this is. We may never know since their motivations can only be speculated about. 

Edited April 15, 2014 by bipto

[Drew]

Why would you suspect that a Wood Ape, who has the ability to make loud primate-like vocalizations, would need to utilize a chunk of firewood to make a signalling knock?  I would think a deep vocalization would travel far more distance than a wood-knock, especially from a short stubby piece of fire wood.

 

Can you specify an instance where a sound that could be deduced to come from a short piece of fire wood was knocking against something?

 

If you already did bring this up, I am sorry, I either missed it or have forgotten about it.  

[Guest]

Firewood is nothing like forest wood. It's usually dense, cut to a uniform size and heft, and is dry and resonant. Random wood found on the forest floor is wet or rotting and can't be used as well to knock on a tree. As to why they'd use wood to signal rather than vocalize, you'll need to direct that question to them. 

[Guest Stan Norton]

In wooded environments it is often short, sharp sounds that will get attention rather than deep, intense ones. Just listen to birdsong in dense woodland habitats. Wood knocks, just like woodpecker drumming, may be a great method of signalling in forest where low frequency sounds will soon be deflected. It does make sense, regardless of whether one thinks it's an ape or not.

 

The other issue may be detectability: it is no coincidence that bird species have a special call which alerts congeners and other species to danger whilst being extremely difficult to locate. Part of being cryptic. 

Edited April 15, 2014 by Stan Norton

[Airdale]

Hope you're feeling better Bipto. WRT to wood knocks, I seem to recall you or one of your compatriots in "X" mentioning that a knock was heard when a vehicle approached or departed the area, suggesting the presence of a "sentry" alerting the "clan" to changes in the status of the hairless visitors they have been studying! I believe it was in an episode of "The Bigfoot Show", though I may have read it in this thread or its predecessor. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. Thanks, good luck and stay safe in the upcoming season.