steenburg Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Hi Steenburg, Did you happen to get the coyote making the Chehalis Sound vocalization on video? I watched your, The Sasquatch Files- Bigfoot Howls? Solved! video. But I didn't see the coyote that you claim you saw making the Chehalis Sounds or any other vocalizations in it. If you have the coyote on video making the Chehalis Sound vocalization I would love to see it! Thanks CM that would be great indeed, but no we did not get footage of the coyote making that call! Myself, I was carrying a still camera that day. One which would take short bad video. The type you used to put an old floppy disk in. No longer use it. Gerry had a camera that day as well be he didn't get it recorded ether. Dumb mistake on our part no doubt about that. In fact I spent, I don't know how many hours on the Chehalis flats after that, trying to get this on video. But never saw a coyote make this type of cry again. In fact i still have not seen a coyote make this call. But I have seen many coyotes since then making the fa miler yip, yip type sound we have all heard a million times over. It was bad judgement on my part that day and I have kicked myself over and over for it. When we saw what we saw our reaction was for about 10 seconds, 'Dam, it's only a coyote'! And by the time I had the camera up a second coyote had come out of the bush and it looked like a happy reunion between to puppies as they jumped all over each other, and bounded away towards Morris valley road. Thomas Steenburg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDBigfooter Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Hey Steen, That is too bad you didn't get the video. It is definitely humbling to witness something incredible in nature only to miss the "money shot". I will say that it is easy to take your word for your scenario because it is not outrageous or out of the question. It does seem like it was a big moment in your research so you'll have to forgive me for chuckling to myself when I hear you missed the video. About ten years back (in my late teens early twenties) I was fishing with my family in the north woods of Wisconsin when I caught a giant snapping turtle with my bare hands. It was huge and very prehistoric looking with long spikes but unusually calm. I saw it moving slowly in about 3 feet of water and jumped in after it. It was at least 70 pounds (2 foot wide 3 feet long estimate) and massive. I picked it up and got it out of the water to show it off to my family. All of them were speechless to see me emerge from the water with it. About 30 people were with me that day and not one person had a camera. Years later nobody (people who weren't there I mean) believes my story. In another instance I was with my cousin fishing on the shores of Baja. The Grunion were running at noon in the middle of the day and were mating right on the shore. I got some great video of that day. Anyways, I got a hunch and grabbed a grunion and set it on my hook. I threw a deep cast and gave my cousin my GoPro, thinking I might hit something. I immediately hook a huge Corvina, 3 feet long so not that big but massive for me. We both go crazy getting excited as I real it in and my cousin has my GoPro going and I'm thinking I have a great viral video coming. Well, he hadn't really used the GoPro much and instead of rolling video during the catch, he took a single frame picture right from the beginning. I got pictures of the catch but the moment I missed would have been magical. A little off topic but oh well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Very interesting and good thread Woodslore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted June 15, 2015 Author Share Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) Thank you Gumshoeye. I have to say that a head mount cam might not be such a bad idea. I have gave it some thought and well, one thing that is asked of people who claim to have seen a Sasquatch is why didn't you take a photo? Some claim fear, or nervous, or even things such as lost in the moment. So having a camera on you head seeing what you see, or on your vest seeing what you see may not be a bad idea, for a visual. However what about the sound? That is the question? What would work best to gather a recording, for starters? I have a few more questions to ask.1) For those who have collected sounds in the field do you use your own sounds when talking to a witness or another source?2) Do any of you keep a recording list of known animals? Be they similar to or differing from Sasquatch sounds? (To play for the witness or compare with for personal evaluation of future recordings)3) have you ever tried Call blasting your own sounds into the area where you got the recording to try and get a response? What was the out come? 4) have you ever caught a sound that made you more afraid than an actual visual sighting? Edited June 15, 2015 by Woodslore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted June 15, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 15, 2015 (edited) 1) Not so far 2) Nope, we have youtube for that. 3) I don't call blast. I don't wood knock or do howls either. 4) Yes. a: I don't recall fear being part of any of my sightings. In each case, something happened to remove fear from the table. That same something has happened other times without sightings that I would have expected to be afraid but was not. b: I don't know what I heard and recorded. I'm more "afraid" if it was not bigfoot than if it was. Edited June 15, 2015 by MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 1) For those who have collected sounds in the field do you use your own sounds when talking to a witness or another source? Both, I think we should have a comprehensive collection of both suspect and known animal sounds.2) Do any of you keep a recording list of known animals? Be they similar to or differing from Sasquatch sounds? (To play for the witness or compare with for personal evaluation of future recordings) Yes, and always looking to compare with future recordings.3) have you ever tried Call blasting your own sounds into the area where you got the recording to try and get a response? What was the out come? We sometimes use manual calls when we want to use our own voice and will only blast a few different known suspect BF vocals that are of sufficient quality for use in that manner. I've had several creepy responses to call blasting and a few responses to manual calls but they weren't as bizzare.4) have you ever caught a sound that made you more afraid than an actual visual sighting? There's been a few intense moments when recording close movement that probably had my heart rate higher than when we had vocal responses. I'm sure it doesn't compare to a sighting reaction which I've not had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 17, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) ....................................................................................................................... There is a reason that science isn't responding to your submitted recordings. Personal attacks aside, I do not call myself a researcher. I am a naturalist with an investigative background. In fact, I am skeptical that they exist. I would have to see one up close and personal in order to be convinced. And if I am that close, I am coming away with video. 1080p HD video, with an audio of me screaming like a little bitc girl. So why does a skeptic like myself go out in the woods each week looking for evidence........................................... Since this post seems directed as chopped at me only I will respond. #1 You are a skeptic doing research, I am a witness, researcher and knower that has had a sighting and done enough sound prospecting to insure my responses can not be known hoaxer/human in return. #2 Science has not accepted my recordings because someone that came highly recommended and honorable as a biologist/ornithologist has chosen not to honor his promise to process some data. No other reason, despite your allusions (and in my mind delusions). I will leave it to that scientist (who is published and came highly recommended by a top three BF researcher) to make good on his promise (I will give him a subtle reminder that he owes me a reply shortly as the academic year will have concluded). #3 Seeing a BF and recording visuals and sounds of a BF obviously is a hard bargain to hammer out, or your own Steenburg would not be making excuses, comprende? #4 If you do not believe Sasquatch/BF has accomplished phonologics then maybe you would not understand a recording that you yourself are analyzing as captured since your trump card is that there is no analogue. Quite the Catch-22, why bother? There are many BF recording protocols that can minimize known animals and enhance the probability that sound captures are nothing but complex vocals from a sentient being and not a woodape. Also, the highly touted NAWAC "woodape" recordings, and other recordings regionally and from the southeast have backed up my own research, though you will never HEAR that from NAWAC. That is confirmatory validity for me, as a researcher, I don't need it from forum members. So when I hear calls for evidence on a non-evidentiary BF forum, I yawn and think, there is more to life than proving these beings to those that are stimulus-bound in their mantra. And as an aside, I have never recorded a coyote or coyote like sound in my research area, not to fear. Someday you too will make the connections between raps, rock clacks, stick structures and BF phonologics, and like NAWAC I would think you will underestimate what it is that you have captured for fear of letting the cat out of the bag or maybe hurrriedly doing damage control. Edited June 17, 2015 by bipedalist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted June 17, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted June 17, 2015 I'll give you some vocalization numbers from the SSR. We have a total of 272 vocalization reports in the SSR, with just 17% of them coming in daylight hours. Of the vocalization reports that were at night and with a moon visible, 69% where within the moon's four brightest moon phases. In the State of WA we have a total of 53 vocalization reports in the SSR, with 18% of vocalization reports come in the daylight hours. Of the vocalization reports that were at night and with a moon visible, 75% where within the moon's four brightest moon phases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 My data: 199 vocalizations (out of 697 total reports) 50 or 25% coming during daylight hours, 84 during dawn, dusk, or nighttime - the other 65 are un-characterized at this time simply because I haven't gone over the reports again. In 50 of the dawn/dusk/nighttime encounters, the moon information was given or could be determined; 34% occurred from the waxing gibbous through waning gibbous phases. I believe that's generally consistent w/the four phases used by the SSR. If I use the waxing quarter moon through the waning quarter moon, the percentage jumps to 72%. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I'll give you some vocalization numbers from the SSR. We have a total of 272 vocalization reports in the SSR, with just 17% of them coming in daylight hours. Of the vocalization reports that were at night and with a moon visible, 69% where within the moon's four brightest moon phases. In the State of WA we have a total of 53 vocalization reports in the SSR, with 18% of vocalization reports come in the daylight hours. Of the vocalization reports that were at night and with a moon visible, 75% where within the moon's four brightest moon phases. BobbyO or Trogluddite, I wonder if it is possible to crunch the reports for say, the top five descriptors of the vocalizations. Particularly those with a single word describing the sound or spelled out like AAAHHHHH or whooooop.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted June 18, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted June 18, 2015 Unfortunately we can't do that SY. My personal belief is that it would be too subjective anyway to really take a great deal from but anyway, we don't have the ability to currently do that with the SSR. We have split vocalisation, whistles and growling though so can give separate and collective numbers for each of those, that's as far as we've gone I'm afraid. Trog how are you getting on with your moon ohase data these days ? Are you able to split nights where the moon is actually visible as opposed to nights when it's not ? If you haven't, shout me and I'll point you in the direction of a great tool to use to do so.. Great work as always too Trog.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 SY, I don't differentiate between the vocalizations, although it could be done. I tend to agree w/Bobby O's subjectivity comment, although they could be characterized broadly, such as howls, growling, coughs, etc. I do use that type of characterization of the vocalization to (very subjectively) categorize what the Bigfoot was doing into broad behavior common to animals - e.g., a Bigfoot behind a tree growling at a witness appears to be marking territory, two Bigfoots whooping on opposite sides of a valley would appear to be communicating with each other. Bobby, I've had a long hiatus from any Bigfoot related stuff for a variety of reasons. As always, I appreciate the offer of assistance and insights you have but I'll pass on that offer - as you know from doing this, many times the basic data is not available. Even where there is complete (and accurate) data on location, time, etc., there can still be variations in placement of the witness and Bigfoot, variations in cloud cover, differences in BMNT and EENT that put that issue in the "too hard" category for me. Actually, if there is that much detailed information, the witness has probably mentioned something about the amount of light visible, so same result, different trail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted June 19, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 19, 2015 BobbyO or Trogluddite, I wonder if it is possible to crunch the reports for say, the top five descriptors of the vocalizations. Particularly those with a single word describing the sound or spelled out like AAAHHHHH or whooooop.. SY Are you speculating that all these calls that fall on certain nights or moon phases might be related to mating? It makes sense ! Just like deer or any other animal it goes through it's heated Phase. But then it could be a time of month for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trogluddite Posted June 19, 2015 Share Posted June 19, 2015 SB, That's an interesting theory - I think that the sample size would be too small to determine with any certainty, but that is a logical theory that explains some situations. There are a fair number of reports where a witness hears either 1 (believed to be) Bigfoot howling at night and, based on the direction of the howls, covering a lot of ground. I say only 1 Bigfoot because there are no return howls heard. Would that make sense that a single animal, in search of a mate, would be announcing its presence? A similar type of report is where two sources of howls bounce are separated by a significant distance (two ridges on either side of a river, e.g.,) but periodically howl and respond. This strikes me as just a type of "check-in" procedure. Don't need to communicate a lot of info, I'll just make a sound to let you know I'm here and you howl back to let me know you're there. Maybe animals foraging in separate areas, but wanting to periodically verify that each is ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted June 19, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 19, 2015 This is why I like databases, they will give you answers. The only problem is setting your database to get the answers you want. If you place the right keys in your database and let the function of database work. On your data base , even though it might be small you should be able to work it so that the sounds made can be matched with certain reports that you might already have. You can maybe set it up so that it can show you what scream goes with what by witness statement. A statistical factor can be had by adding the right key words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts