Full Version: Call blasting
Call blasting, bait, scent chips, tree knocking, etc. Are these things productive? Should all be used simultaneously or seperatly? Overkill? How could we tell? If no results are acheived either way, what does that tell us? Hopefully we will come up with something innovative enough to produce results soon.
Wood knocking for example, certainly isn't helpful if within earshot of the Woodknocking, there are other BF people out there who hear it & respond, backwards & forwards... 
Noise pollution. Please do not disturb the peacefulness of the forest.
Well as the sounds they are blasting are not for sure related to the target no one can really say.
It can be hard to see what the harm is of playing a sound, that was recorded in nature, back into that same environment. Whatever occurs naturally in the wild cannot be considered noise pollution. Call blasting is simply a stimulous to elicit a vocal response, and perhaps generate some curiosity in the local wildlife. This is at least hoped, to provide some opportunity to observe what may pay you a visit. This method combined with audio and camera traps could produce evidence.
I can't say that this method has produced what would satisfy the majority of interested people, but the results from it have been intriguing to me, at least in certain places.
I don't like to do wood knocks because I'm allways recording sounds out there, and if I or we do knocks, I wouldn't know if it was us or BF on the recordings. It would force me to keep highly detailed records on the knocks that we do, and with multiple research parties in the same area, it makes it even more complicated.
SY.
I can't say that this method has produced what would satisfy the majority of interested people, but the results from it have been intriguing to me, at least in certain places.
I don't like to do wood knocks because I'm allways recording sounds out there, and if I or we do knocks, I wouldn't know if it was us or BF on the recordings. It would force me to keep highly detailed records on the knocks that we do, and with multiple research parties in the same area, it makes it even more complicated.
SY.
I know of two BFRO reports in my area which are a result of our call blasting. Attempts to change them were ignored.
We went into an area that had a previous sighting. We call blasted occasionally all night. Almost immediately there were two 'sightings' in the BFRO database, it was obvious that they heard US!
So I think that WAY out in the woods it might have some benefits, but anywhere there might be people it just adds to the confusion.
We went into an area that had a previous sighting. We call blasted occasionally all night. Almost immediately there were two 'sightings' in the BFRO database, it was obvious that they heard US!
So I think that WAY out in the woods it might have some benefits, but anywhere there might be people it just adds to the confusion.
Well i have the same questions. I believe they are not productive. i could go on and on about the why nots but i can shorten up my thoughts and ideas on the subject.
scent... we have zero evidence that a BF would respond in any positive way to the scent of other primates, as we dont have scent provided by a BF on hand.
tree knocking... setting aside the physics of this, we cannot be sure that BF uses this activity for communication, they could be using it, if they even do this, as a means of warning, and we could be alerting them to something negative.
call blasting.. there is nothing positive or productive about this. with out knowing what message we are using, the right tone or volume, we cant be sure or this working, other then to scare away animal activity because of how it disrupts the forest.
seeing a BF is more often by accident then it is by purposeful intent and the "methods" so often used to locate BF seem to do more in allerting them then luring them into viewing range. none of these methods are very creditable. so what you ask is ? .. i dunno either . i have make several posts asking those questions.
scent... we have zero evidence that a BF would respond in any positive way to the scent of other primates, as we dont have scent provided by a BF on hand.
tree knocking... setting aside the physics of this, we cannot be sure that BF uses this activity for communication, they could be using it, if they even do this, as a means of warning, and we could be alerting them to something negative.
call blasting.. there is nothing positive or productive about this. with out knowing what message we are using, the right tone or volume, we cant be sure or this working, other then to scare away animal activity because of how it disrupts the forest.
seeing a BF is more often by accident then it is by purposeful intent and the "methods" so often used to locate BF seem to do more in allerting them then luring them into viewing range. none of these methods are very creditable. so what you ask is ? .. i dunno either . i have make several posts asking those questions.
If you can do a Tarzan yell and beat your chest at the same time--try that. The Bf may become curious of the new sounds.
Has anyone tried a small drum?
Has anyone tried a small drum?
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 21 2009, 09:42 AM) 
Well i have the same questions. I believe they are not productive. i could go on and on about the why nots but i can shorten up my thoughts and ideas on the subject.
scent... we have zero evidence that a BF would respond in any positive way to the scent of other primates, as we dont have scent provided by a BF on hand.
tree knocking... setting aside the physics of this, we cannot be sure that BF uses this activity for communication, they could be using it, if they even do this, as a means of warning, and we could be alerting them to something negative.
call blasting.. there is nothing positive or productive about this. with out knowing what message we are using, the right tone or volume, we cant be sure or this working, other then to scare away animal activity because of how it disrupts the forest.
seeing a BF is more often by accident then it is by purposeful intent and the "methods" so often used to locate BF seem to do more in allerting them then luring them into viewing range. none of these methods are very creditable. so what you ask is ? .. i dunno either . i have make several posts asking those questions.
scent... we have zero evidence that a BF would respond in any positive way to the scent of other primates, as we dont have scent provided by a BF on hand.
tree knocking... setting aside the physics of this, we cannot be sure that BF uses this activity for communication, they could be using it, if they even do this, as a means of warning, and we could be alerting them to something negative.
call blasting.. there is nothing positive or productive about this. with out knowing what message we are using, the right tone or volume, we cant be sure or this working, other then to scare away animal activity because of how it disrupts the forest.
seeing a BF is more often by accident then it is by purposeful intent and the "methods" so often used to locate BF seem to do more in allerting them then luring them into viewing range. none of these methods are very creditable. so what you ask is ? .. i dunno either . i have make several posts asking those questions.
So would you prefer to say that since we know nothing we should do nothing? What would be solid indicators of their presence? How would you study a creature that apparently wont let you see it? Why does certainty have to preceed the use of experimental methods? How are discoveries made without them?
SY.
If I lived in a area with more people I dont think I would bother with any of the noise producing tactics as already stated, how could you tell what the return noise was coming from human or non human?
We have laws at least on some of the land I research on that state
"do not make any noise that will bother the natural habitat" or something very close to that.
We do woodknocks because its something we always get a response to, and the people population is so low here.
I awlays yell "HEYYYYYYYY" at the top of my lungs a couple times first, my thought being IF there is another person within miles they would "probably" yell back rather than whoop or woodknock, of course I have no way of knowing for sure.
Sammy
We have laws at least on some of the land I research on that state
"do not make any noise that will bother the natural habitat" or something very close to that.
We do woodknocks because its something we always get a response to, and the people population is so low here.
I awlays yell "HEYYYYYYYY" at the top of my lungs a couple times first, my thought being IF there is another person within miles they would "probably" yell back rather than whoop or woodknock, of course I have no way of knowing for sure.
Sammy
Is it possible that call blasting might be repelling the creatures, especially if the sounds are of distressed animals (like agitated chimps etc). Perhaps a distressed call might be more attractive to a animal, particularly a predator. I don't know! In Australia, it has been reported on several occasions that Yowies have been attracted to the sound of children. I don't know what to think of call blasting.
Anything you do should have a strict protocol attached. When, where, how should all be documented and any responses or results carefully documented.
That said I don't engage in any type of call blasting involving unidentified recordings. I'm not being a detractor or proponent. It just hasn't yielded any positive results for me personally and so therefore it's a tool I don't carry in my box anymore.
I do however employ various types of electric calls of known animals as well as my own voice. If done properly it can give you a good idea of what else is in the woods with you without tipping of the locals that there are people in the neighborhood.
That said I don't engage in any type of call blasting involving unidentified recordings. I'm not being a detractor or proponent. It just hasn't yielded any positive results for me personally and so therefore it's a tool I don't carry in my box anymore.
I do however employ various types of electric calls of known animals as well as my own voice. If done properly it can give you a good idea of what else is in the woods with you without tipping of the locals that there are people in the neighborhood.
the OP asked about the effectiveness of call blasting and baiting. i have asked those same questions, and looked for scientific data to support any given answer. from what i have found, these currently used methods are not productive. can there be a harm in playing sounds ( as in call blasting ) ? possibly so, scaring away a BF, from playing the wrong sounds, sending a warning i.e. not only does this method not give satisfactory results, im personally not sure of any results. ( by accounts ive read )
no i do not think we should do nothing, we just need more scientific, proven methods ( akin to primate studies of which we spoke in another thread )
i say, having said before, i dont have the answers either, and am trying to find credible methods.
how are discoveries made without experiemental methods of study ? they are not, but i do think we can approach things in some sort of logical manner (using primate research as a guide ) sorry to keep using that as a basis, but its the closest thing i believe we have.
the people who have seen BF have moreover done so by accident or in some cases lured BF in without understanding how. luring BF in by methods that have been recorded, understood, documented and are repeatable has yet to happen. seeing how call blasting has yet to be productive tow things should, in my opinion , happen. 1 stop using recorded calls until such time when we know a BF is making the calls , then we can record and replay them. 2 try a completely new approach to calling.
but i will back step some, if a female gorilla make calls of some type during her esterus then maybe, maybe playing them during the correct time of year could be usefull in gaining the interest of a male BF...
no i do not think we should do nothing, we just need more scientific, proven methods ( akin to primate studies of which we spoke in another thread )
i say, having said before, i dont have the answers either, and am trying to find credible methods.
how are discoveries made without experiemental methods of study ? they are not, but i do think we can approach things in some sort of logical manner (using primate research as a guide ) sorry to keep using that as a basis, but its the closest thing i believe we have.
the people who have seen BF have moreover done so by accident or in some cases lured BF in without understanding how. luring BF in by methods that have been recorded, understood, documented and are repeatable has yet to happen. seeing how call blasting has yet to be productive tow things should, in my opinion , happen. 1 stop using recorded calls until such time when we know a BF is making the calls , then we can record and replay them. 2 try a completely new approach to calling.
but i will back step some, if a female gorilla make calls of some type during her esterus then maybe, maybe playing them during the correct time of year could be usefull in gaining the interest of a male BF...
Those interested might want to read a small post I did on my website after sound blasting one night last spring.
Unusual Calls
I have posted the sounds and a short discussion about the return calls.
Unusual Calls
I have posted the sounds and a short discussion about the return calls.
BF researchers set up expensive equipment, blast primate sounds into the forest with the hopes that a BF will call back.
the biggest problems with call blasting are for me
1. we cannot be sure that a BF will respond to just any primate vocalizations
2. we just dont know what "message" we are sending
3. we cannot be sure that BF makes calls in the first place ( no verifable proof )
but the primary reason, call blasting disrupts the natural enviroment, sending sounds and vibrations at high decibel levels as to be unnatural. i feel that call blasting does more harm than any real good and any calls/ responses would need to be repeatable for any value.
now when we hear supposed BF calls, regardless of what we think about how far off the sounds originate from, unless we can seethe BF calling we cant be sure as to the distance, echo's or reverberation from the terrain and the call getting deflected all will change how it sounds to us.
so, BF may be alot closer then we think, there could be a sub audible tone of very low frequency ( say below 40 Hz ) that we cannot hear or super high freq's and we are missing alot of the message.
when we record what we think is a BF howl, but all but the highest quality equipment cannot reproduce them cleanly enough to be accurate, therefore we are sending back only certain parts of the call, possibly sounding like a deaf person trying to speak. BF may think we are a bunch of half deaf skinny primates and not want to be anywhere near us or we could be telling BF to stay clear of us. and the primary volume is another issue, if BF is 100 yards away and we "blast" a 125 db call, from 20 Hz to 15,000 Hz call, it would certainly over power him/her spooking them off, we could be preceived as a larger dominate male. most of this is assumptions on my part, of course.
so, as research time is costly and precious , i'd rather not make mistakes in call blasting, rather if i hear BF sounds, move into a downwind position and advance in the direction of the call. not just call blast "who knows what for sure" noise into the enviroment and disrupt any possible credible research or collectable data
the biggest problems with call blasting are for me
1. we cannot be sure that a BF will respond to just any primate vocalizations
2. we just dont know what "message" we are sending
3. we cannot be sure that BF makes calls in the first place ( no verifable proof )
but the primary reason, call blasting disrupts the natural enviroment, sending sounds and vibrations at high decibel levels as to be unnatural. i feel that call blasting does more harm than any real good and any calls/ responses would need to be repeatable for any value.
now when we hear supposed BF calls, regardless of what we think about how far off the sounds originate from, unless we can seethe BF calling we cant be sure as to the distance, echo's or reverberation from the terrain and the call getting deflected all will change how it sounds to us.
so, BF may be alot closer then we think, there could be a sub audible tone of very low frequency ( say below 40 Hz ) that we cannot hear or super high freq's and we are missing alot of the message.
when we record what we think is a BF howl, but all but the highest quality equipment cannot reproduce them cleanly enough to be accurate, therefore we are sending back only certain parts of the call, possibly sounding like a deaf person trying to speak. BF may think we are a bunch of half deaf skinny primates and not want to be anywhere near us or we could be telling BF to stay clear of us. and the primary volume is another issue, if BF is 100 yards away and we "blast" a 125 db call, from 20 Hz to 15,000 Hz call, it would certainly over power him/her spooking them off, we could be preceived as a larger dominate male. most of this is assumptions on my part, of course.
so, as research time is costly and precious , i'd rather not make mistakes in call blasting, rather if i hear BF sounds, move into a downwind position and advance in the direction of the call. not just call blast "who knows what for sure" noise into the enviroment and disrupt any possible credible research or collectable data
Found this article about vocalizations and acoustic studies.
http://www.wii.gov.in/publications/newslet...2/article11.htm
Here's an excerpt from the article, bolding mine
If bigfoot is out there, It more than likely makes sounds that are unique to it's own species and you may not hear them unless you give them a reason to make the vocalizations. This is why we put so much effort into recording sounds, because it will help find them one day.
SY.
http://www.wii.gov.in/publications/newslet...2/article11.htm
Here's an excerpt from the article, bolding mine
QUOTE
Study of sounds produced by animals is generally referred under the bioacoustics. It includes acoustic communication, sound production mechanisms, auditory anatomy and function, sonar, acoustic tracking and the effect of human-made and environmental noise on animals. It attempts to understand relationships and the nature of environment in which signals are used and the functions they are designed to serve. During last few decades this field has emerged a most attracting discipline for behavioural biologist. Their findings revealed that the vocalizations play most significant role in the sociobiology of animals such as mate acquisition, reproductive synchronization, cohesion, spacing, individual recognition and coordination of activities of daily life namely foraging, alarming and group maintaining. Study of animal communication has made significant contribution to the ethology, evolutionary biology and neurobiology. These studies are useful in the discovery of new species, assessment of taxonomic rank, species identification and census.
If bigfoot is out there, It more than likely makes sounds that are unique to it's own species and you may not hear them unless you give them a reason to make the vocalizations. This is why we put so much effort into recording sounds, because it will help find them one day.
SY.
southernyahoo,
Thanks for the link to the article!
I really like the following quote from DB Donlon, The Blogsquatcher
Thanks for the link to the article!
I really like the following quote from DB Donlon, The Blogsquatcher
QUOTE
Sound skeptics will object that you can’t tell what animal made a sound if you didn’t see the animal make it. I think this is true in the broadest sense. After all, I can play a file of a coyote and if you heard it in the distance, you’d think it was an actual coyote, and not a recording.
But an important point I want to stress is that these same sound skeptics are the first to say, “you’ve recorded a coyote,” or “you’ve recorded a hog” when they hear the sounds we get. They don’t say they don’t know what it is, they almost always define it as something known, and they get to that identification from the sound alone. If you can’t tell what made a sound without visually i.d.ing the sound maker, how do they know we’ve recorded coyotes and hogs?
I’m not just making that point to rub someone’s nose in it, I’m saying you can’t have it both ways. If it really is possible to id creatures by their vocalizations (and we do this all the time, don’t we? When we hear an owl call, we don’t say, “I’ll never know what that is..” we say, “oh, an owl!” The plain fact of the matter is that the calls we’ve recorded don’t sound like coyotes, and they certainly don’t look like coyote calls when you look at them in the software. They do sometimes sound coyote-ish, but they don’t sound like the coyote calls I’ve found on the net. (I’m being strict about definitions here — like serving as an = sign, rather than an approximation.) Nor does the East Central Ohio chatter sound like a hog, rather, occasionally hog-ish.
So when the skeptics tell you that we can’t tell what made the sound because we didn’t see the animal making it, you insist that they stick to that. They are right, we can’t really tell. So let’s stop calling these things misidentifications out of hand in an attempt to quell all interest in sounds. It’s a legitimate area of research. Who knows what advances will come in the future that will make this kind of research easier?
But an important point I want to stress is that these same sound skeptics are the first to say, “you’ve recorded a coyote,” or “you’ve recorded a hog” when they hear the sounds we get. They don’t say they don’t know what it is, they almost always define it as something known, and they get to that identification from the sound alone. If you can’t tell what made a sound without visually i.d.ing the sound maker, how do they know we’ve recorded coyotes and hogs?
I’m not just making that point to rub someone’s nose in it, I’m saying you can’t have it both ways. If it really is possible to id creatures by their vocalizations (and we do this all the time, don’t we? When we hear an owl call, we don’t say, “I’ll never know what that is..” we say, “oh, an owl!” The plain fact of the matter is that the calls we’ve recorded don’t sound like coyotes, and they certainly don’t look like coyote calls when you look at them in the software. They do sometimes sound coyote-ish, but they don’t sound like the coyote calls I’ve found on the net. (I’m being strict about definitions here — like serving as an = sign, rather than an approximation.) Nor does the East Central Ohio chatter sound like a hog, rather, occasionally hog-ish.
So when the skeptics tell you that we can’t tell what made the sound because we didn’t see the animal making it, you insist that they stick to that. They are right, we can’t really tell. So let’s stop calling these things misidentifications out of hand in an attempt to quell all interest in sounds. It’s a legitimate area of research. Who knows what advances will come in the future that will make this kind of research easier?
QUOTE(sasquatchin @ Jan 21 2009, 10:25 AM)
I know of two BFRO reports in my area which are a result of our call blasting. Attempts to change them were ignored.
We went into an area that had a previous sighting. We call blasted occasionally all night. Almost immediately there were two 'sightings' in the BFRO database, it was obvious that they heard US!
So I think that WAY out in the woods it might have some benefits, but anywhere there might be people it just adds to the confusion.
We went into an area that had a previous sighting. We call blasted occasionally all night. Almost immediately there were two 'sightings' in the BFRO database, it was obvious that they heard US!
So I think that WAY out in the woods it might have some benefits, but anywhere there might be people it just adds to the confusion.
I remember you saying about that before sasquatchin ( quite sure it was you ) & think it's pathetic really ( on their part, not yours )...
QUOTE(StanCourtney @ Jan 21 2009, 09:13 PM)
southernyahoo,
Thanks for the link to the article!
I really like the following quote from DB Donlon, The Blogsquatcher
Thanks for the link to the article!
I really like the following quote from DB Donlon, The Blogsquatcher
I agree Stan, misidentification can go both ways, and I suspect a few of the known animals are getting a little too much credit for some of the sounds that occur out there.
SY.
Ok, i took the time to look at the links. i have to say that both sites make valid and interesting points. Stan Courtneys site, had some very interesting vocalizations. there were commonly known animals like coyotes but also there were some very odd calls. the vocalizations that sounded like high pitched talking, squeaking type of chatter just floored me.
i played them over and over and could not pick out what they were or even if an animal was making them... spooky puts it best.
having re-read the quotes from the article i will concede that recording sounds and playing them back has some merit.
i will back step on this issue, and take some time to rethink the call blasting techniques for locating BF. but naming it "blasting" has to go...
i played them over and over and could not pick out what they were or even if an animal was making them... spooky puts it best.
having re-read the quotes from the article i will concede that recording sounds and playing them back has some merit.
i will back step on this issue, and take some time to rethink the call blasting techniques for locating BF. but naming it "blasting" has to go...
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 22 2009, 08:51 AM)
'i will back step on this issue, and take some time to rethink the call blasting techniques for locating BF. but naming it "blasting" has to go...
I agree, I hate the term "blasting". I have had dramatic results from very low volume sounds. There are reports of squatches approaching children at play in the woods. Curiosity is what's important.
Not to hijack, but I dont think its worth startng a whole thread over and has to do with sounds.
This last fall my wife and I had been driving the logging roads for hours, hadent seen anybody and when we got down off a 5000+ mountain top pulled into a meadow probably 20 or so acres, road (such as it was) going right throught the middle.
We both had to pee so I veered off to the right and drove up to within about 15 or 20 feet of the treeline so we could posistion ourselves between the truck and "road". I know I know, we hadent seen anybody all day but you know how women are
I had just got out and I was walking around the front of my truck when I heard what sounded like a little kid humming! It sound like a child humming in a little sing song voice maybe 50' into the heavy brush.
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
EDIT cause I spell like a drunk kitten
This last fall my wife and I had been driving the logging roads for hours, hadent seen anybody and when we got down off a 5000+ mountain top pulled into a meadow probably 20 or so acres, road (such as it was) going right throught the middle.
We both had to pee so I veered off to the right and drove up to within about 15 or 20 feet of the treeline so we could posistion ourselves between the truck and "road". I know I know, we hadent seen anybody all day but you know how women are
I had just got out and I was walking around the front of my truck when I heard what sounded like a little kid humming! It sound like a child humming in a little sing song voice maybe 50' into the heavy brush.
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
EDIT cause I spell like a drunk kitten
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 22 2009, 08:51 AM)
but naming it "blasting" has to go...
I'll go along with that, the term blasting makes it sound like we are just blowing out the sounds as loud as they will go but thats not exactly the case. They call it "play backs" in the articles I've read. I've read reports that some BF screams are quite loud at close range, but I do agree that certain systems could probably play back the sounds louder than they originally were.
SY.
Stan, some of the sounds you've recorded are, well very interesting. i've been looking over your site and your story of the BF flipping the latch on your car, grunting and clicking the ( glass ? ) was freaking me out, 
your site offers alot and the equipement reviews is nice too. you seem to put alot of effort into your work regarding the BF recordings. i wonder, if i could record a possible BF doing such things, or walking the creek bed by my house, why couldnt i video, use a game cam or palm corder, in conjunction with the audio ? i would park, set up a game cam 50 feet or so away but facing my car then set up the audio equip as usual. i guess the reason i ask is, because when i read about audio recordings, or game cam pics, or whatever, it seems as thought no one does both or all three, just the video or audio or stills. thats bugs me as much as the term
'blasting". call " broadcasting" sounds much better and it addresses the volume aspect of the issue, as broadcasting does not denote a blast of sound or noise that is more likely to disrupt the natural enviroment.
file #4, of 7/9/05 is just crazy. it sounds like a womans voice, very distorted and almost playing backwards. in ghost hunting, EVP's are recorded that sometimes sound just like this. at, first i thought maybe you inadvertently made such a recording and assumed it was an live animal of some type. i dunno. the same with file #5.
i hear a definate pattern there. my 10 year old daughter heard it, said, " that poor cat who is hurting it ?"
your site offers alot and the equipement reviews is nice too. you seem to put alot of effort into your work regarding the BF recordings. i wonder, if i could record a possible BF doing such things, or walking the creek bed by my house, why couldnt i video, use a game cam or palm corder, in conjunction with the audio ? i would park, set up a game cam 50 feet or so away but facing my car then set up the audio equip as usual. i guess the reason i ask is, because when i read about audio recordings, or game cam pics, or whatever, it seems as thought no one does both or all three, just the video or audio or stills. thats bugs me as much as the term'blasting". call " broadcasting" sounds much better and it addresses the volume aspect of the issue, as broadcasting does not denote a blast of sound or noise that is more likely to disrupt the natural enviroment.
file #4, of 7/9/05 is just crazy. it sounds like a womans voice, very distorted and almost playing backwards. in ghost hunting, EVP's are recorded that sometimes sound just like this. at, first i thought maybe you inadvertently made such a recording and assumed it was an live animal of some type. i dunno. the same with file #5.
i hear a definate pattern there. my 10 year old daughter heard it, said, " that poor cat who is hurting it ?"
QUOTE(SSLeithead @ Jan 22 2009, 11:48 AM)
I had just got out and I was walking around the front of my truck when I heard what sounded like a little kid humming! It sound like a child humming in a little sing song voice maybe 50' into the heavy brush.
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
I have heard something similar to what you've described. It wasn't in the States, but over 30 yrs ago in Asia. It sounded child like... a melodic mixture of humming and whining, and faded out with an odd, almost laughter... that I'll never forget. The sounds eventually got drowned out by the louder forest sounds of insects and frogs . I have no idea what is was, and thought at the time, I was dreaming. Others confirmed hearing the sounds in the morning, and mentioned it before I said anything. Conditions were cloudy (several hours after a downpour) calm, and very humid. A few other strange things happened also... but another time, for another topic.
Bill R.
QUOTE(StanCourtney @ Jan 21 2009, 06:44 PM)
Those interested might want to read a small post I did on my website after sound blasting one night last spring.
Unusual Calls
I have posted the sounds and a short discussion about the return calls.
Unusual Calls
I have posted the sounds and a short discussion about the return calls.
Stan,
Thanks for posting the link. I found it interesting that something (or someone ?) responded to , and could mimic the tone of your voice like that. I am considering doing some limited (megaphone assisted) nocturnal call blasting this season, in addition to my usual wood knocks and whooops. I've been kicking around the thoughts of whether some call blasting could be useful, for my audio research. I know by visiting your website, that you travel around quite a bit doing this. Just was wondering.... what single sound had worked the best for you ?...as far as getting responses, in your travels to the Northeast.
Yes, the technique does need another name. Something a little kinder, maybe.
Thanks,
Bill R.
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 22 2009, 08:51 AM)
...i will concede that recording sounds and playing them back has some merit.
i will back step on this issue, and take some time to rethink the call blasting techniques for locating BF. but naming it "blasting" has to go...
i will back step on this issue, and take some time to rethink the call blasting techniques for locating BF. but naming it "blasting" has to go...
The TBRC uses the phrase "vocalization playback experiments" on their "Methodologies" page.
QUOTE(imonacan @ Jan 22 2009, 01:03 PM)
Stan,
Thanks for posting the link. I found it interesting that something (or someone ?) responded to , and could mimic the tone of your voice like that. I am considering doing some limited (megaphone assisted) nocturnal call blasting this season, in addition to my usual wood knocks and whooops. I've been kicking around the thoughts of whether some call blasting could be useful, for my audio research. I know by visiting your website, that you travel around quite a bit doing this. Just was wondering.... what single sound had worked the best for you ?...as far as getting responses, in your travels to the Northeast.
Yes, the technique does need another name. Something a little kinder, maybe.
Thanks,
Bill R.
Thanks for posting the link. I found it interesting that something (or someone ?) responded to , and could mimic the tone of your voice like that. I am considering doing some limited (megaphone assisted) nocturnal call blasting this season, in addition to my usual wood knocks and whooops. I've been kicking around the thoughts of whether some call blasting could be useful, for my audio research. I know by visiting your website, that you travel around quite a bit doing this. Just was wondering.... what single sound had worked the best for you ?...as far as getting responses, in your travels to the Northeast.
Yes, the technique does need another name. Something a little kinder, maybe.
Thanks,
Bill R.
I and several other researchers have gotten results using the Illinois Howl.. I also use my own voice.
I will second the suggestion of renaming this technique. "Call Blasting" as a term is immediately offensive to me.
QUOTE(SSLeithead @ Jan 22 2009, 10:48 AM)
Not to hijack, but I dont think its worth startng a whole thread over and has to do with sounds.
This last fall my wife and I had been driving the logging roads for hours, hadent seen anybody and when we got down off a 5000+ mountain top pulled into a meadow probably 20 or so acres, road (such as it was) going right throught the middle.
We both had to pee so I veered off to the right and drove up to within about 15 or 20 feet of the treeline so we could posistion ourselves between the truck and "road". I know I know, we hadent seen anybody all day but you know how women are
I had just got out and I was walking around the front of my truck when I heard what sounded like a little kid humming! It sound like a child humming in a little sing song voice maybe 50' into the heavy brush.
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
EDIT cause I spell like a drunk kitten
This last fall my wife and I had been driving the logging roads for hours, hadent seen anybody and when we got down off a 5000+ mountain top pulled into a meadow probably 20 or so acres, road (such as it was) going right throught the middle.
We both had to pee so I veered off to the right and drove up to within about 15 or 20 feet of the treeline so we could posistion ourselves between the truck and "road". I know I know, we hadent seen anybody all day but you know how women are
I had just got out and I was walking around the front of my truck when I heard what sounded like a little kid humming! It sound like a child humming in a little sing song voice maybe 50' into the heavy brush.
Jen (my wife) looked at me puzzled and said "ya, I heard it" we finished what we stopped for and I poked my head into the brush maybe 10 feet, didnt see anything or hear anything else. We collected some fire wood for about 5 minutes and took off.
I dont know why but it gave me the willies and still does talking about it.
Calm day, no wind, sunny about 65 degrees I guess. Humming happend twice for maybe a total of 10 or 15 seconds.
Ever hear that while out and about?
Sammy
EDIT cause I spell like a drunk kitten
Very interesting! And yes I did happen to record something last year that reminds me of humming.
Here is a link to the sound I recorded - Southern Illinois Sound
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 22 2009, 12:03 PM)
Stan, some of the sounds you've recorded are, well very interesting. i've been looking over your site and your story of the BF flipping the latch on your car, grunting and clicking the ( glass ? ) was freaking me out, your site offers alot and the equipement reviews is nice too. you seem to put alot of effort into your work regarding the BF recordings. i wonder, if i could record a possible BF doing such things, or walking the creek bed by my house, why couldnt i video, use a game cam or palm corder, in conjunction with the audio ? i would park, set up a game cam 50 feet or so away but facing my car then set up the audio equip as usual. i guess the reason i ask is, because when i read about audio recordings, or game cam pics, or whatever, it seems as thought no one does both or all three, just the video or audio or stills. thats bugs me as much as the term
'blasting". call " broadcasting" sounds much better and it addresses the volume aspect of the issue, as broadcasting does not denote a blast of sound or noise that is more likely to disrupt the natural enviroment.
file #4, of 7/9/05 is just crazy. it sounds like a womans voice, very distorted and almost playing backwards. in ghost hunting, EVP's are recorded that sometimes sound just like this. at, first i thought maybe you inadvertently made such a recording and assumed it was an live animal of some type. i dunno. the same with file #5.
i hear a definate pattern there. my 10 year old daughter heard it, said, " that poor cat who is hurting it ?"
your site offers alot and the equipement reviews is nice too. you seem to put alot of effort into your work regarding the BF recordings. i wonder, if i could record a possible BF doing such things, or walking the creek bed by my house, why couldnt i video, use a game cam or palm corder, in conjunction with the audio ? i would park, set up a game cam 50 feet or so away but facing my car then set up the audio equip as usual. i guess the reason i ask is, because when i read about audio recordings, or game cam pics, or whatever, it seems as thought no one does both or all three, just the video or audio or stills. thats bugs me as much as the term'blasting". call " broadcasting" sounds much better and it addresses the volume aspect of the issue, as broadcasting does not denote a blast of sound or noise that is more likely to disrupt the natural enviroment.
file #4, of 7/9/05 is just crazy. it sounds like a womans voice, very distorted and almost playing backwards. in ghost hunting, EVP's are recorded that sometimes sound just like this. at, first i thought maybe you inadvertently made such a recording and assumed it was an live animal of some type. i dunno. the same with file #5.
i hear a definate pattern there. my 10 year old daughter heard it, said, " that poor cat who is hurting it ?"
I have set up gamecams and I did an intensive nighttime video setup. I took my 3rd gen NV, strapped it to a Sony night camcorder and ran it through my VCR. I recorded 8 hrs every night for about 8 weeks. I set up a feeding station and it really drew the animals in. During that time I recorded fox, coyote, bobcat, raccoon, deer and rabbit either coming to the food and just passing through.
I think bigfoot (if they are even in the area) are just too wary of gamecams. With my audio recorders I can hide the equipment in the brush and nothing notices.
renaming call blasting, i can come up with call locating, call playback, call broadcasting, and call could be replaced with vocalizations or game. i'm in favor in using something short and simple, not to wordy.
i have a gen 1 nv monocular and a sony handycam, with super night shot. i've dont nothing more then play around, run video all nite , taping the deer near my house.
but maybe its time i try my hand at something more myself.
i have a gen 1 nv monocular and a sony handycam, with super night shot. i've dont nothing more then play around, run video all nite , taping the deer near my house.
but maybe its time i try my hand at something more myself.
QUOTE(scibaer @ Jan 23 2009, 02:44 PM)
renaming call blasting, i can come up with call locating, call playback, call broadcasting... i'm in favor in using something short and simple, not to wordy.
Why not just vocasting (vocal + broadcasting)?Dudlow
I simply have to share.
I read the Colorado expadition notes from the BFRO....I had to sit and laugh. The expadition took place on the flattops and by way of very bad directions very near to my home.
I read about the sound blasting and thought OH MY WORD. I envision that the blasting would really torque the big guy off. Then there are people out in groups in the dark screaching and screaming into the night. From my impression of the events they really seemed to not make the community of local BF very happy. I was really waiting to hear that someone had been killed.
The story is a good read if you venture over there......but I have to say that I would not want to be in the woods if they were blasting calls, not like that anyway.
The ones that presumable showed up began to throw rocks at them too.
I think that the best lure is the human voice and a whistle......it keeps them a lot calmer and it also does not induce them to throw rocks.
I read the Colorado expadition notes from the BFRO....I had to sit and laugh. The expadition took place on the flattops and by way of very bad directions very near to my home.
I read about the sound blasting and thought OH MY WORD. I envision that the blasting would really torque the big guy off. Then there are people out in groups in the dark screaching and screaming into the night. From my impression of the events they really seemed to not make the community of local BF very happy. I was really waiting to hear that someone had been killed.
The story is a good read if you venture over there......but I have to say that I would not want to be in the woods if they were blasting calls, not like that anyway.
The ones that presumable showed up began to throw rocks at them too.
I think that the best lure is the human voice and a whistle......it keeps them a lot calmer and it also does not induce them to throw rocks.
I wish to preface this by saying that I'm not saying I'm right, but rather what I believe. To those who think differently, I respect that and you may well be right and I may be wrong.
I don't believe anyone that says he/she is an expert on BF and I see no correlation between field time spent "offroad" and wisdom or common sense when it comes to theories on BF.
Back when TLC was more an interesting science channel, they first ran a program titled bigfoot (no capital b ) in 1997 where a BF hunter liked to take his drums into the woods and practice, hoping the racket would intrigue BF and lure one into his line of sight. I was very amused, but I hope it works for him someday, assuming he hasn't given up the tactic in the 12 yrs since. I feel the same about call blasters that insist BF are compelled to investigate giggling children or wounded critters or recorded noises that the blaster claims is a BF call itself. My feeling is that it's fun to play with toys and hope, but it probably drives any and all wildlife further out of listening range. I feel the same with all the theories about wood knocking and whooping also. One person theorizes it must be BF making that wood knocking noise (where was this going on prior to 1990 or '95?), then another adds this must be how they communicate, and yet another says this is how they can be compelled to respond or even be drawn in...pretty soon it's an accepted method when goin' critter huntin'.
Personally, if I struck it rich or was given a grant to be lucky enuf to devote serious time to the pursuit, I'd try to be as discreet as possible and hope I'm downwind of any strolling biped headed my way. This would include attempting to not make unnecessary noise.
To those who utilize these audible methods, I hope I'm wrong, I hope you are right, are successful and that you bring home proof of your encounter. I would be as happy as you would be. Good luck to anyone attempting any way they think best.
I don't believe anyone that says he/she is an expert on BF and I see no correlation between field time spent "offroad" and wisdom or common sense when it comes to theories on BF.
Back when TLC was more an interesting science channel, they first ran a program titled bigfoot (no capital b ) in 1997 where a BF hunter liked to take his drums into the woods and practice, hoping the racket would intrigue BF and lure one into his line of sight. I was very amused, but I hope it works for him someday, assuming he hasn't given up the tactic in the 12 yrs since. I feel the same about call blasters that insist BF are compelled to investigate giggling children or wounded critters or recorded noises that the blaster claims is a BF call itself. My feeling is that it's fun to play with toys and hope, but it probably drives any and all wildlife further out of listening range. I feel the same with all the theories about wood knocking and whooping also. One person theorizes it must be BF making that wood knocking noise (where was this going on prior to 1990 or '95?), then another adds this must be how they communicate, and yet another says this is how they can be compelled to respond or even be drawn in...pretty soon it's an accepted method when goin' critter huntin'.
Personally, if I struck it rich or was given a grant to be lucky enuf to devote serious time to the pursuit, I'd try to be as discreet as possible and hope I'm downwind of any strolling biped headed my way. This would include attempting to not make unnecessary noise.
To those who utilize these audible methods, I hope I'm wrong, I hope you are right, are successful and that you bring home proof of your encounter. I would be as happy as you would be. Good luck to anyone attempting any way they think best.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.