Inquiry Into A Nw Oregon Field Plan

[SWWASAS]

Explorer:   "Camera trap strategies by NAWAC, Olympic, and Bluff Creek Project have all failed. So not sure if your friends will do any better."     

 

I do not think enough attention has been given to why these strategies have failed.      First of all,   no one really knows if BF know what cameras really are.    The possibilities run the gamut  that they know full well what they are,  down to they know they are something man made and possibly dangerous.    Thom Powell was involved in a habituation thing in Washington for several years.     BF would be active in a certain area, cameras would be placed, and the activity would stop.     An outdoor refrigerator or freezer, I cannot remember which, would be raided,  cameras placed to watch the door, and the raiding would stop.    When the camera was removed the raiding would start again.     That would imply that either BF know what a camera is, or they assume them to be dangerous.       The reason could be a simple as the game cameras have a lens, just like a rifle scope does,.   so it might be perceived as being dangerous.     Certainly BF have watched deer hunters peering through rifle scopes before they shoot deer.   Or they associate a lens with an eye and being watched.    Who knows.      But I do not think any of those groups you mentioned made any effort to hide their cameras.      The ideal would be a game camera deployed in an active area that was so well hidden, other humans could not find it even if they knew it was in the area.    I have woods surrounding my back yard.    If someone deployed a game camera there, that was not well hidden, I would see it in an instant.   BF cannot be any different.    Anything short of that in my opinion has little chance of success other than pure luck to be placed in just the right place at the right time.     Once BF is aware it is there, it will likely be avoided.   

 

I suspect once researchers enter a BF active area they are under nearly constant observation.    Even if you have a very well hidden camera,   if under observation, BF will know you hid something and avoid it.     That is the second problem.       Has that been addressed by any of these groups?     Some by their own admission assume they are looking for a big dumb ape and expect it to react like a bear or something.     Apparently that is not the case or their results would be different.     The Olympic Project, which I am most familiar with, believe that part of the problem is rarity of BF in the first place, and the resulting number of cameras required to cover an area.     I seem to remember that they think adequate cameras in an area to have a good chance would cost 2 or 3 million dollars.     Then you have to have a large number of people, changing batteries and SD cards.     That means a lot of human presence which tends to push BF away from an area.     And in the case of the Olympic Project, they started butting heads with the Park Service who threatened them with fines if they continued to deploy cameras.    So I think they have all but quit trying.  

 

So there have to be rational explanations why the game camera thing has not worked.    Some have just chosen declare like you have, it does not work, without careful consideration why.     I think it too early to call it a bust without careful study and experimentation.    More of that needs to be done.     

[joebeelart]

I have seen camera shots that are very positive, very clear of whole bodies.  I have one of a hand reaching for one of my cameras before it was torn from the mount.  However, random images taken here and there are not conclusive in any manner. 

 

What a wonderful discussion.  As far as why go up the hill?  Well, when you are 68 years old, what's more fun?  A TV or a sanitized gym; or watching stars, hiking the hills, perking fresh coffee and butter on campfire biscuits?  And pleasant conversation around a campfire?  Then, snuggling into a good, dry warm bedroll for a cool nights sleep.  Mix in a dram of good scotch along the way and life becomes very good.

 

Thank you all so far.  I especially appreciate the off-forum messages to me which have proved helpful.  If we knew the answers, the mystery would be solved.  Fresh ideas are excellent.

 

Joe Beelart, West Linn, Oregon      joebeelart@comcast.net

[BobbyO]

I've offered to do a little something for Joe and his team from the SSR numbers so I'll also share it on here for those that are interested in the potential of what we can do.

Hopefully ill add tomorrow.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

A stationary barrage type balloon hoisting a good telescopic system with pan zoom and down link real time viewing and up link controller. You could put at a ridge line of intersection valleys and cover an immense area. 

https://youtu.be/08h8RTLkKHQ

[SWWASAS]

Sorry Cryptic but I have investigated aerial photography and your idea is not practical.      First of all just the lens you showed is $25,000  and weighs nearly 36 lbs and it is inadequate for anything any distance away.      It would take a nearly 18 cubic meters of helium just to lift the lens at sea level.    Higher altitude means less lift.    Blimp, tether, camera, transmitting equipment,  and devices to move and stabilize the camera would double that lift requirement.     If you have put a 1000MM lens on a camera you know that it has to be on a tripod to stabilize it and a good one at that.   So some sort of gyrostabilizaiton would be necessary because of wind movement of the blimp.       Do you know that an 18 cubic meter blimp is 20 feet long?  Double the lift and the blimp is 30 feet long.      So we are looking at something nearly twice that size to lift the camera gear, blimp, and tether rope.      So now we have something over 30 feet long that cannot be out in much of any wind.    The wind comes up and you have to get it in a hangar, and a fairly large hangar at that, to prevent the wind from tearing it apart.   

 

I mentioned the lens is inadequate.    Ok lets say that you want a frame filling DSLR  picture of a  3 meter BF that is 2000 meters away.    There are some photographic calculators that will compute the required lens.     That lens has to be a 14883mm lens.    That is over 14 times your 1000 mm lens.   With your 1000mm lens,  the 3meter BF would be roughly 1/14 or .07 the size of something that fills the frame the long way.   Pretty small and you would immediately be arguing with skeptics it was even a BF.   Blow it up much and you get square pixels.      http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-lenses.htm

 

However, if you take the longest lens you can afford to high ground, put it on a good tripod,  then I think your plan does have some merit.    Putting it in the air just makes it more difficult because of weight and stabilization issues.   

Edited February 29, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[BobbyO]

I'm really struggling for time, apologies Joe, but here's some loose numbers from the SSR when ch I'd hope could prove beneficial to you.

I've combined the Cascades in Oregon numbers with the Southern WA Cascades numbers.

I've done that firstly we get a larger data set to,work with and secondly we have seen a number of reports of these animals crossing in to both States and both geographical zones via the Columbia River.

We have a total of 281 total reports from these geographical zones, with 42% of those being actual visual sightings.

[BobbyO]

Of the 117 actual visual reports, 62% have been in daylight hours.

Of the reports in hours of darkness, the Waxing Gibbous moon phase is considerably the most popular moon phase to have a sighting.

It's interesting to note that in the last 10 years of all night time actual visual sightings in hours of darkness, the moon has not been visible for any of them.

From all reports when the person reporting the encounter have been camping (49), 80% of those where a time was logged in the report have come in the hours of darkness, with only 6% of all reports being actual visual sightings (all of which came in 1995) all of which were in daylight hours.

Edited February 29, 2016 by BobbyO

[joebeelart]

Wish to thank BobbyO for his submittals.  They are very helpful.  For years I have used The Old Farmer's Almanac for planning outings.  Also, while I haven't run the dot matrix and calendar through my statistics program, from observation there is a high correlation of sightings to weather, elevation, hunting seasons, and declining temperature. 

 

None of that is new, but I haven't seen it on paper before now.  Thank you again BobbyO. 

 

Ps:  We make our first scout foray for the late March long camp tomorrow.  Also, more on cameras later.  Long ago I invested in a super strong Gitzo tripod and a Nikon F3 to use with a Nikon 400 2.8 lens.  {Check that lens on the web for current pricing, which is consistent with the consumer goods inflation index. }

 

So, I think I know a little about big time bucks photography and have put $$ where my mouth is.  My basic idea now?  Don't spend a lot on photo equipment unless you have many, many hours, especially at dawn in warm clothes, to spend with binoculars or a good spotting scope to watch a likely area.  You will end up with some great wildlife photos.   

 

I also think airborne photo systems will yield little; maybe not even much in regards to elk butts on the run.  Maybe I'm wrong. 

Edited March 5, 2016 by joebeelart

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

If you can get declassified satellite spy photography it is equivalent to having you face 6 inches of the ground. 

Whether that is useful for wildlife or whether anyone bothered pointing the systems at mountain ranges instead of high value targets I don't know.

 

I have used plenty of mapping arial imagery from plane and satellite platforms and that has no use, though.

The resolution is not sufficient to pick out most wildlife.

 

It probably could be enhanced to have some use if using infra red and near red bands but you might need a jewelers loup.

[SWWASAS]

You are right about the elk butts running from the air but even that is difficult.     What people do not realize is flying you are even more affected by lighting than being on the ground.    Early morning and late evening the shadows are longer and anything in the shade is not likely visible from the air.     The best time is late morning and early afternoon.    Probably not the time you are likely to have BF moving around if humans are in an area.     Then if you see you do see a BF from the air,  you see something brown and upright.     You cannot tell if it is a man in a ghilly suit,  Kitakaze wearing the P/G suit,  or a BF which will likely duck behind a tree so you cannot see it for long.     And of course you cannot land and look for footprints after the sighting either.    

 

When I left the military in 1989 satellite photography was good enough that if a BF was imaged you could tell what it was.      I am sure it is much better now.      I would guess that it is probably as good as the P/G film now.     So I would not be at all surprised that Russian photo analysts have seen BF around US military installations if they are in the area.     The satellites are tasked, and don't just orbit and take random pictures.     They are directed to take pictures of areas of interest.     Since most US military bases are not BF habitat there are only a few that I can think of that might be.   Ft Lewis McCord is one and I would love to have access to images of that area.    Who knows maybe the Russians would sell them?    They are really hurting for money now that oil prices are down.   

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

You are right about the elk butts running from the air but even that is difficult.     What people do not realize is flying you are even more affected by lighting than being on the ground.    Early morning and late evening the shadows are longer and anything in the shade is not likely visible from the air.     The best time is late morning and early afternoon.    Probably not the time you are likely to have BF moving around if humans are in an area.     Then if you see you do see a BF from the air,  you see something brown and upright.     You cannot tell if it is a man in a ghilly suit,  Kitakaze wearing the P/G suit,  or a BF which will likely duck behind a tree so you cannot see it for long.     And of course you cannot land and look for footprints after the sighting either.    

 

When I left the military in 1989 satellite photography was good enough that if a BF was imaged you could tell what it was.      I am sure it is much better now.      I would guess that it is probably as good as the P/G film now.     So I would not be at all surprised that Russian photo analysts have seen BF around US military installations if they are in the area.     The satellites are tasked, and don't just orbit and take random pictures.     They are directed to take pictures of areas of interest.     Since most US military bases are not BF habitat there are only a few that I can think of that might be.   Ft Lewis McCord is one and I would love to have access to images of that area.    Who knows maybe the Russians would sell them?    They are really hurting for money now that oil prices are down.   

It's so good you could count hairs.

[joebeelart]

Well, we cobbled up a late winter plan.  Two of our number live near San Francisco and were biting the bit to get up here.  We "locals" said no, it's going to rain and it will be cold but they wanted to come and did and set up at about 1,750 feet about two hundred feet under the foot of snow line ... just those two and one fellow from Oregon / Washington.

 

Well, it really rained on them, but something came around, in fact two because they were exchanging calls.  Then in the dark one came near camp and made quite a stomping exhibition.

 

Steve and I went up the next day.  It wasn't raining, but rain was forecast with heavy rain the next day.  We looked things over and wandered around and decided "noooo" not quite yet.  Also the Oregonian pulled stakes that day, the "writing" so to speak was on the wall, so to speak.

 

Well, to summarize, one of Our Barefoot Friends came back and visited our steadfast California folks the next night, in the rain.  Then rain on Thursday, and rain and snow on Thursday night.  Well, guess what?  Aww, come'on guess?  Well we all had a good lunch outside of Estacada on Friday.  Even wearing their water tight boots, both of them were simply cold and wet.  I think everything owned that wasn't under the pickup canopy was wet.

 

They played my Tibetan chants DVD a lot.  I still think that brings them in, but of course, that's wishful thinking.  On a per night basis since Dear Molly sent it to me late last July we've used it with boom boxes eight nights out in three different places and have had some sort of activity seven of those nights.

 

Well, the end of April is coming faster than we want unless this accursed rain stops.  Later, Joe Hector

[joebeelart]

Back from up the hill. I went up for just Friday night. One Oregonian and two Californians spent Thur. Fri. Sat. nights up. Was at about 3K. Lots of snow banks in shaded areas, but was melting fast. A blocked road on Friday was passable in 4WD on Sunday. Deer were not up yet. I found some deer scat at about 2,500' but most was 2,000' to 1,500'.

Very quiet. Absolutely beautiful setting. The old camp I used in the area was unavailable because the USFS made up a "keep'em out" road, but the camp the Californian's found was better, just without the Mt. Hood view. Big rock fire place the road builders made with a Cat long ago. The area was clear cut maybe 20 years ago, so perfect browse when the deer come up.

We walked directional, but there was nothing to find except routes for the future. I'd never walked that area, but should have years ago.

One fellow brought along a really good drone he had rented for business use. Can tell you one thing sure -- drones make a hell of a lot of noise at altitude and will be almost worthless as a BF sighting device, I think. I can easily "see" BF diving into cover at the sound of one of those things. But drones sure are good to find routes, what's over the ridge, etc.Anyway, I might rent one for later this summer, but surely won't buy one after seeing one in action unless I can find a "real" use.

The mountain lakes are full of runoff water and the benches are flooded, so no looking for good tracks, although one of our CA friends found a good set of bear tracks coming out of the forest to a lake for probably a drink.

Nights were very quiet. Since no animals up and emerging vegetation not much yet, only saw one raven making a pass in two days. They are scavengers and were down low with the action.

When the Californians left, they made a side trip to a lake in a basin. A cougar jumped a log beside the road. They said it was "huge" and looked to be in fine shape. What a treat for them.

I left my Cabelas coffee pot at home, but Good Russ made up a second batch in his special maker and it was good. He also grilled marinated chicken thighs for supper and Ken made a super Caesar salad. {Russ says after marinating chicken thighs, freeze them and thaw them in ice chest. The freezing permeates the marinade. Very excellent.}

After building up a good fire we had some special scotch, good talk and a few laughs. It was a good night but by 12:30 everybody was tired and cold so we went to bed rolls early. I got up at 3AM and spent about 20 minutes out admiring the night, but it was cold {too cold to sleep in the back of the truck} so I went back inside.

Wish I could have spent Saturday night, but needed to get home. It was just plain wonderful up there. I can't tell you how good it made me feel. There are no better campmates than those three fellows.

Joe Beelart, West Linn, Oregon

Edited May 16, 2016 by joebeelart

[joebeelart]

Oh, I forgot to mention moon phase. It was first quarter. But moon was not a planning factor for this outing. We will be taking notice of the phases, not so much for planning, but as a part of observation when we are up the hill.

[hiflier]

Hi Joe and everyone. May I mention that there are many, many reports of Sasquatch witnessed going up and down slopes. I'll leave it to you and all to speculate on why they do this but logistically it makes good sense. Observations for the high ground of clearings and the higher traffic on main game trails comes to mind as well as the sounds and smells that can be more easily detected as far as wind direction may be concerned.

It also comes to mind the bipedal/quadrupedal abilities reported in these creatures so game and Humans would be at a disadvantage when chased uphill and also Humans would probably never be able to keep up if giving chase. I think the use of slopes to be safer and if the slope is also a ridge going down to a stream or body of water then being able to view as well as hear both sides leading up to the ridge as well as it's own stealth by staying off or crossing game trails would be another advantage.

Also keep in mind that smaller trails that parallel roads and larger game trails, especially leading to water, and for "escorting" unwanted intruders, though not a new idea, might be something to watch for. Even a few cheap plot watchers on these types of trails and some local ridge terrain. One inside a vertical stump with a hole drilled underneath the cameras angling down and out for draining rain water could prove interesting. Maybe at the edge of a known area with a lot of berry bushes. Should at least get a lot of good bear shots. How often to check them would up to you.