1980squatch Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I just watched Stacy Brown's short video on his DNA dart gun set up, and think it has some merit. Been kinda thinking that for a time actually. I figure a sample taken with such a rig in combo with decent footage of the shot (most likely therm) would lend to the sample being taken seriously. So what do you think of this approach in comparison to such efforts as Grendal and NAWAC (whole body acquired with very high powered firearm/shotgun)? Some possible advantages I see could be: - Increased likelihood of taking the shot and thus getting physical evidence. You would not need a perfect hit on a vital area and the consequences of a mistaken shot at a human are much less. - Although the fundamentals are the same, it is much harder to properly handle a very large bore rifle/ heavily loaded 12 gauge then a dart gun with the recoil of a .22 or air rifle. More possible users of the rig. - More buy-in / support for the effort. Pro-kill is still a small sub-group. - Possible lower risk to shooter, with all BF able to retreat (hopefully discarding the dart). Of course I know there are drawbacks as well, but I'll leave that for discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 It all sounds good and humane, but its been my experience they see you long before you see them. If you have large scopes, cameras or other items you bring up to your face, they assume it is a danger of some type and the chances of even seeing them drops. If you are with someone they know and trust, the chances rise, but most folks who do know them that well will protect them as friends because that's exactly what they are... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I certainly like DNA collection methods better than trying to blast a so called ,, Wood Ape ,, with a large caliber rifle. That being said, you probably are better off saving for a nice thermal camera and just spend about 100 $ on a bulk { can you even get a bulk load ? } load of shotgun bore brushes for DNA collection as they make a fantastic hair snag. This is what they use for wolverine DNA studies and general carnivore range projects. This is what I use as well, I zip tie a sterile brush to the bottom of a branch at the desired height while wearing gloves. It is very difficult to spot them as they resemble pine cones when attached to the underside of a branch. It is cheap and easy to cover a sizable area. I have yet to check these snags I deployed last year as it is nearly impossible to get into the area they are located due to flooding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted May 1, 2014 Author Share Posted May 1, 2014 ^^^ I do see merit in that approach. But you have the downsides though of trying to ID BF samples from all that. And hair is not near as good a DNA source as fresh blood or flesh. You only have a very broad provenance on the samples you think are worth testing and it will be much harder to get buy-in to take those samples seriously. ... they see you long before you see them. If you have large scopes, cameras or other items you bring up to your face, they assume it is a danger of some type and the chances of even seeing them drops. Agree, but at this point I think it will take something very direct to prove the species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted May 1, 2014 SSR Team Share Posted May 1, 2014 I don't believe there is an argument between the merits of the two personally. One can be contested as per usual by all and sundry, the other can't be. I guess it would all depend on what the real objective of what you're doing actually was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted May 1, 2014 Author Share Posted May 1, 2014 ^^^ Yes, I suppose the DNA results can be contested, but I don't think "as per usual" would apply. The dart should provide enough material for repeated testing at different labs. It would not be an instant game changer like a body would be but I think it would be a game changer all the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I applaud all efforts to do science, like this one, but I can't help but ask: Is it really the lack of viable DNA that hampers progress, or is it the failure of those who collect it to get it into the hands of reliable individuals who will not only take the results seriously, but who also have the credibility to have their published results treated seriously in turn? Wherever the process is lacking...either in the collection, or in the anlaysis, or in the publishing...I think we should acknowledge it takes all three done really, really well to make a dent in the present scientific paradigm. I'll be interested to know what you collect Nathan, if anything, but what are your plans when/if you collect a likely sample? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 (edited) When I collect a sample that does not match known wildlife samples by morphology, I will find a way to get ahold of Sykes or Disotell and go forward from there. Edited May 1, 2014 by NathanFooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I just watched Stacy Brown's short video on his DNA dart gun set up, and think it has some merit. Been kinda thinking that for a time actually. I figure a sample taken with such a rig in combo with decent footage of the shot (most likely therm) would lend to the sample being taken seriously. So what do you think of this approach in comparison to such efforts as Grendal and NAWAC (whole body acquired with very high powered firearm/shotgun)? Some possible advantages I see could be: - Increased likelihood of taking the shot and thus getting physical evidence. You would not need a perfect hit on a vital area and the consequences of a mistaken shot at a human are much less. - Although the fundamentals are the same, it is much harder to properly handle a very large bore rifle/ heavily loaded 12 gauge then a dart gun with the recoil of a .22 or air rifle. More possible users of the rig. - More buy-in / support for the effort. Pro-kill is still a small sub-group. - Possible lower risk to shooter, with all BF able to retreat (hopefully discarding the dart). Of course I know there are drawbacks as well, but I'll leave that for discussion. As I told Stacy via pm, I feel this is a wonderful setup AFTER discovery for further study. I'll take it point by point: - This is untrue, has anyone shot a paintball gun? They have no range, they are inaccurate, the C02 freezes up and that's just the gun. Then you have a small biopsy dart that may bounce off of branches and leaves and has the trajectory of a bowling ball. Then on top of that you have a very very small skin sample to work with. What if it is contaminated by you or the lab? What if it took four samples of leaves before it got to Grendel? Also, I don't have to have a solid vital hit either to follow a blood trail and finish the job. - While I think this is marginal, as woman and even children hunt Deer and Bear every year in American forests? Sure, it's not going to kick like a rifle. But probably the biggest factor is a morality issue more than a handling issue. - And this HAS to change. It's my mission in life to make our mindset the majority. We are very tired of playing paddy cake with the mystery. It's the pro kill grass roots approach that will crack this thing wide open.........and not high profile researchers with tens of thousands of dollars in gear showing science really really cool video or foot casts. - Ummmm, I certainly hope that if your plan is to get within paintball gun range of a troupe of Grendel and start lobbing projectiles at them? That you have a plan B that involves heavy fire power. I am not a proponent of Bigfoot Army........but it obviously could be a dangerous situation for the researcher. Boiled down to brass tacks? It's a tool, but it's not a tool that I'm going to trust to proving to the world that they exist. After we prove they exist? Then that is ALL we should be shooting at them....... And if you miss? Or you cannot find your dart? Big deal, there is always tomorrow Nathan, With the hair of Grendel seemingly lacking a medulla? I am not sure your going to have a lot of success with your bore brushes in fir trees. But I will say it's a better approach than plaster casts and camera traps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Even the medulla being or not being present in hair from this species is debatable at this point, I can say with hair snags there may be a chance for collecting the root for DNA analysis. Also DNA labs are getting better all the time at extracting good DNA from smaller samples. Hair is not the only avenue for DNA collection planned for this years field work, I am going to do more work with putting out apples and other food items near the camp to attempt to both collect DNA in the form of saliva and some supporting backbone evidence in the form of finger prints as they are unique among primates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 ^^ Heya Nathan, how's the thermal imaging goin anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 It is fantastic so far, I do need a larger 12 volt deep cycle battery for DVR applications at the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I would suppose so, good work Nathan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Even the medulla being or not being present in hair from this species is debatable at this point, I can say with hair snags there may be a chance for collecting the root for DNA analysis. Also DNA labs are getting better all the time at extracting good DNA from smaller samples. Hair is not the only avenue for DNA collection planned for this years field work, I am going to do more work with putting out apples and other food items near the camp to attempt to both collect DNA in the form of saliva and some supporting backbone evidence in the form of finger prints as they are unique among primates. I wish you the very best Nathan and I truly mean that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted May 2, 2014 Author Share Posted May 2, 2014 He is not using a CO2 set up, these would seem to do fairly well at under 150 ft on an object of BF size: http://www.wildlifeanimalcapture.com/cartfired.html Agree totally that a standard CO2 set up would not be acceptable for this purpose, would be useless below about 40F or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts