Hiding cameras

A Think Tank of Techniques and Technology.
Post Reply
User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:07 pm

Gday

I've heard different theories on why trail cams and time lapse cams seem to yield little results.

Some say our hairy mate can smell the plastic and human scent - plausible, as electrical equipment does emit an odour, especially when hot. As do humans.

Another theory is they have watched the cameras being placed, and are clever enough to avoid them until they are removed. Again, plausible for an intelligent creature familiar with its environment.

They also say he can hear the electro magnetic field of equipment - possible, but unlikely. Reports suggest their ear pinnae sits flat against the head, as opposed to bat or dog like ears, so there is nothing to suggest they can hear much above the 23Mhz restriction of other primates. The fact they communicate in an audible range to humans also suggests they have similar hearing.

I have also heard that they may have developed an infra-red sensory organ, similar to the pit viper, which effectively sees just the same as a FLIR. Again, possible, but no other mammals have developed this sense, and no reports of sightings ever suggest the existence of anterior openings in the face for such an organ.

So with this in mind, I can only deduct that the two main reasons are scent, and observation. Rustys videos often show tampering of audio recorders, suggesting the creatures are curious enough to look and touch, but smart enough to avoid the range of the camera.

In one of Rustys videos, he comes across a small pool in a creek, where he finds several tracks. and this got me thinking. Why not place a well disguised time lapse camera under water? It would mask any odour, and effectively any electro magnetic waves. If you were subtle enough in placing it, and it was disguised as a rock (for example), it may just work.

I have seen under water footage of tadpoles, and the bank is clearly visible (in fact you can see wildlife coming to drink) Wind is an issue, as it can distort the surface, but its not a deal breaker. Ideally, the pool would have to be shallow (so the camera is very close to the surface), calm (surface should be naturally smooth, without current), and in an area likely to be visited.

Sounds like a long shot, but whats your thoughts?

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 1:48 pm

If IR is used, we think it emits sounds they may be able to detect and it hurts their eyes. You avoid what hurts you. Also, we at Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies think they have electrical sensitivities and possibly capabilities. We don't believe so much in infrasound, but electricity as their secret extra sense. We have a loud hum recorded on many occasions like your standing under a power line, fried equipment and have felt sensations similar to electric shock therapy in the field, especially in your chest that is an electrically ran muscle. We think this is why they defeat them for the most part.

User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:01 pm

Interesting. Can I ask what your theories are based on?

I have only heard of marine animals that have the ability to use electrical impulses. The generating and discharge of an electrical wave in open air would require huge amounts of energy.

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:11 pm

300 nights in the woods that last 5 years and 22 years getting to know Sasquatches. I am co founder of Sasquatch Investigations of the Rockies and Dean H's long range friend. I am tired of all the BS in the BF world and just trying to show the truth as they show it to me little by little.

User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:35 pm

Cool. It seems biologically impossible. The amount of energy required to create an electrical wave in open air over any kind of distance would seem impossible for an animal to produce. How do you think they store, control and deliver the energy?

Ants77
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 426
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:07 pm
Position: Unsure

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Ants77 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:58 pm

I'm not sold on the EMP type discharge. In these creatures anyway, but let's not forget, nothing is definitive. And I would love to hear more on your findings to why your equipment received damaged.
As for the research on this it could be cordoned for, electric eels store and discharge electricity. At will mind you. Why not Sasquatch. Not my call. It is biologically possible, in nature today. Jmo.


Cheers

Ants
Sorry I'm back.

User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:17 pm

Electric eels are a great example, but the problem I see is firstly, 80% of their body is made up of an organ that consists of internal electrical plates that each produce a small voltage, and are combined to create a short burst of electricity. Secondly, its in water, where electrical resistance is far less than air.

The eels 'shock' is only effective for about its body length in any direction, and it has dedicated most of its body to generating the charge, and its underwater. To create a charge that can travel large distances, in open air, takes immense amounts of power. That is why cattle prods, tasers and such require direct contact - they cant jump an air gap.

A homonid obviously doesn't have this dedicated organ, as their body is too similar to ours, so my question is how do they generate such a charge, and how can they create a charge large enough to overcome the resistance of air?

Ants77
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 426
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:07 pm
Position: Unsure

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Ants77 » Sun Dec 23, 2012 4:04 pm

Hey,

Let's not forget that the Eel also needs full contact to pass the defence on. And water as mentioned. I can't see a Sasquatch emitting a pulse of energy. Physically or telepathically it's a big call. But like I said, nothing is definitive. Interesting topic. Stranger has happened out there.


Ants
Sorry I'm back.

User avatar
AustralopithecineOz
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:16 am
Position: Nature Lover
Location: Riverena NSW
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by AustralopithecineOz » Sun Dec 23, 2012 5:55 pm

I have stopped using IR light at night. My theory is a) they watch you set up. b) they are so attuned to their environment that no matter how well hidden they stick out like dog's balls (also they don't come close enough to trigger the camera). c) and I'm not convinced they can't see IR light. I think this because I watched a video recording with IR Light recording another IR Light camera. The beam coming from the first camera looked like a WW2 searchlight. Whatever the reason, and watching Rusty's videos, I think they can't avoid a plot watcher. No IR. It is interesting to note they don't seem afraid of Voice recorders , they in fact seem to contest them, running past very close to the equipment. My final thought still rests with a). If they are in the area you have little chance of getting in or out un-noticed. Of course I could be completely wrong.

glenmore79

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by glenmore79 » Mon Dec 24, 2012 11:32 am

I've always had an issue with "they avoid the cameras" as it would require them understanding what a photo is and a lense and knowing the angle of vision + distance range + process needed to acquire a photo from that camera. And as far as I know, noone has ever gotten close enough to hand them a copy of "the idiot's guide to photography"


Avoidance due to scent is just a silly notion. They have no issue going through eskys, messing with voice recorders, sticky baits or food baits and other manmade/handled objects.

Avoidance due to IR, ok, fair enough, plausable although it's only Coincidental Evidence that they avoid it. Plenty of photos from hand held cameras and other devices that use IR.


IMO, it's just been plain unlucky and needle in the haystack.
If you had the budget to setup 200-300 cameras in a larger area, undisturbed, then you'd have a higher chance.

FM80
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 256
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:38 pm
Position: Field Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by FM80 » Tue Dec 25, 2012 6:16 pm

glenmore79 wrote:I've always had an issue with "they avoid the cameras" as it would require them understanding what a photo is and a lense and knowing the angle of vision + distance range + process needed to acquire a photo from that camera. And as far as I know, noone has ever gotten close enough to hand them a copy of "the idiot's guide to photography"


Avoidance due to scent is just a silly notion. They have no issue going through eskys, messing with voice recorders, sticky baits or food baits and other manmade/handled objects.

Avoidance due to IR, ok, fair enough, plausable although it's only Coincidental Evidence that they avoid it. Plenty of photos from hand held cameras and other devices that use IR.


IMO, it's just been plain unlucky and needle in the haystack.
If you had the budget to setup 200-300 cameras in a larger area, undisturbed, then you'd have a higher chance.


Yeah I totally agree. They can't know what photographic equipment is. It wasn't that long ago that I would have walked up to a game camera to see what it was.

Perhaps two or three groups of people setting up gear in the same area would confuse them.

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Wed Dec 26, 2012 5:10 am

I think if you look at Ron's BF photo focus on what appears or could be a face in white above the y in the trees above the female with the black skull cap. It could be an anomaly, but we don't think so. Then focus on our stealth cam white out sequence. Plus, if you listen to some of our recordings they contain an unknown static. It comes and goes with them. We don't think all of them have this capability. Plus, then the eye glow, its a glow not a shine. Thats quite of bit of stuff that points in favor of our theory.

Smokeyr67
Silver Status
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:14 am

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Smokeyr67 » Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:13 am

angryman wrote:Gday

In one of Rustys videos, he comes across a small pool in a creek, where he finds several tracks. and this got me thinking. Why not place a well disguised time lapse camera under water? It would mask any odour, and effectively any electro magnetic waves. If you were subtle enough in placing it, and it was disguised as a rock (for example), it may just work.

I have seen under water footage of tadpoles, and the bank is clearly visible (in fact you can see wildlife coming to drink) Wind is an issue, as it can distort the surface, but its not a deal breaker. Ideally, the pool would have to be shallow (so the camera is very close to the surface), calm (surface should be naturally smooth, without current), and in an area likely to be visited.

Sounds like a long shot, but whats your thoughts?
Water is a great carrier of scent. I train tracking dogs, and one of the worst things you can do when trying to evade us is to cross still or slow moving water, it just gives us a better trail to follow.

We have to remember that what we are hunting are animals, intelligent animals, but they will not logically have any senses other than those we have observed in other land mammals, specifically primates. Unless our hairy brother is mating with bats, they'll have the same senses as we do, just hightened to suit there environment. Our noses are burnt by car fumes, our ears dulled by the cacophony of modern life, our eyes are more suited to reading a book than reading the land.

I think the problem with getting a shot of a crypto hominid is the fact that (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) the bush is big, really really big, and cameras are few. Perhaps if the professional researchers could find a sponsor like Canon or Nikon and saturate an area with trail cams we would get some results, but to convince the big boys would require evidence, not supposition. It's a vicious circle.

User avatar
AustralopithecineOz
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:16 am
Position: Nature Lover
Location: Riverena NSW
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by AustralopithecineOz » Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:38 am

Smokeyr67 wrote: I think the problem with getting a shot of a crypto hominid is the fact that (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) the bush is big, really really big, and cameras are few. Perhaps if the professional researchers could find a sponsor like Canon or Nikon and saturate an area with trail cams we would get some results, but to convince the big boys would require evidence, not supposition. It's a vicious circle.
+1

User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Wed Dec 26, 2012 10:33 am

Smokeyr67 wrote:I think the problem with getting a shot of a crypto hominid is the fact that (to paraphrase Douglas Adams) the bush is big, really really big, and cameras are few. Perhaps if the professional researchers could find a sponsor like Canon or Nikon and saturate an area with trail cams we would get some results, but to convince the big boys would require evidence, not supposition. It's a vicious circle.

I personally doubt it would be enough either way.

The best HD video would be hailed a hoax - science needs a body. Unfortunately, through either elaborate hoaxes or supposed "men in black" interference, bodies that are reported seem to disappear unexpectedly. The Discovery channel has the means to flood any area with equipment, but instead they choose to drop a crew in to spend 10 minutes hollering in the bush, and then leave. They call this an episode.

On a side note - has anyone noticed that the Finding Bigfoot crew always seem to make mistakes whenever they have something interesting?

Something creeps around on a thermal cam, Bobo trips and falls. They see another walking through the bush, Moneymaker chases it. They see one from a chopper, but instead of going lower to track it, the pull away and call in a land party.

Ants77
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 426
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:07 pm
Position: Unsure

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Ants77 » Wed Dec 26, 2012 3:49 pm

G'day,


Program's have producers, if they can leave you hanging they will. They want you to tune in next wk. Matt, nor any cast members have the last word. It's all for the show, why do you think they do all that noise before going into their areas, howls, screams, knocks etc, fireworks gimme a break. A ploy to continue the show which I don't mind because it's tv, that's how tv rolls. Expecting to much from television can be a bad thing, constant disappointment.

Ants
Sorry I'm back.

User avatar
Ray Doherty
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 770
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:26 am
Position: Researcher
Facebook Profile Page: www.facebook.com/theaustralianyowieproject
Location: North Brisbane

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Ray Doherty » Wed Dec 26, 2012 8:55 pm

Smokey - Right on!

Angry Man - I could not disaggree more. a body would be nice however let give you a recent example. The Bili ape was discovered near the African village of Bili in 2004. It was classified after and 18 month investigation. They classified the ape and its species on the following

Foot Prints - We have that

Photos of food - we have that too

Photos of nests - We have that

Photos of Scat - We have that and samples

Hundred of witness reports - we got that as well

DNA taken from nests - we are working on it

28 seconds of close up HD video - dont have that yet but are working on it.

As you can see its the last two items. There was no detailed study on them that work is only really beginning now. the Bili ape is related to the chimpanzee and stands on average 6ft and wieghs in around 150kg , they 50 - 50 terrestrial v Aboreal and sleeps on the ground. They are one of the most reclusive apes in Africa, sighted only twice since

Heres a link

http://www.wasmoethwildlife.org/folder2006-2007/

My point is, you dont always need a body, just strong research, incredible evidence and good methedology and to have the work recognised by a respectable authority.

IR Camera's - They can see night vision. We have two feeding stations, both had trail cameras on it for weeks and no food was touched, the moment we took the cameras away - BOOM food started going. Now we put ood out it is lucky to last 4 hours. There is a video on youtube about seeing trail cams in infra red and show how much they stand out. We do know that during the day the hairy man is vulnerable to the same fields of vision as we are, thats why thier hearing is so perfect during the day.

Thats why I cant wait until we buy some plot watchers. I dont buy into the electrical field theory. I just think enough people are out there looking. Its only at night when they have the advantage, not the day by learning thier habits of methedology is how we will get close, learning thier habbits and nuances. However the rule is that they know the area like the back of thier hand so they take short cuts and know the hide holes.

Ray
'I want to believe'

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:15 am

We have pictures of Black Holes, but we don't have or want one, science says they exist and all they have is theory and photos. Its fear alone thats blocks the scientific community and the masses from accepting the abundant evidence that exists. Sirs photo of the face and group, our hand print, our hair and recordings would be enough to try you in a court of law and put you away forever on a criminal charge. Its a lack of back bone, plain and simple. Maybe some greedy, financial motives might be in the way as well.

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:20 am

Olympic Project has millions of dollars of trail cams in the field in Washington at all times and has produced little. They are loosely tied to Meldrum, Erickson Project. etc. They are the group with Justin Smega in it. They are using state of the art Reconix trail cams. They are ran by Derek Randle, who found Skookum cast with Meldrum in Washington. Sasquatches plain and simple want nothing to do with these folks is their major problem. They just avoid them and their equipment, peroid.

Smokeyr67
Silver Status
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:14 am

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Smokeyr67 » Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:24 am

I have serious doubts about any large bipedal mammal being able to see in the ir spectrum. Even if they could, all the nvg's I've been using for damn near 30 years have been passive, only emitting any IR light on command (why would I want to advertise my presence to the bad guys when I'm trying to be all sneaky pete and creep up on them?). What they all do is emit an almost inaudible high pitched whine. This is what I theorise puts animals off. That, our odour , the noise we make and the way we disturb the bush.

sapere aude
Silver Status
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 8:27 pm

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by sapere aude » Tue Jan 01, 2013 1:52 am

mlj1mlj1 wrote:We have pictures of Black Holes, but we don't have or want one, science says they exist and all they have is theory and photos. Its fear alone thats blocks the scientific community and the masses from accepting the abundant evidence that exists.
I have doubt fear has much to do with it. There are no real pictures of black holes themselves, they can only be inferred by studying the space/stars around them. Anyway, Yowies and Bigfoot are not (largely) mathematically derived theories of astrophysics. We are talking about terrestrial biology, specifically a supposedly 8-10' tall undiscovered Ape existing on several continents. I can understand that you have found enough to believe, possibly for good personal reasons, though it might not to the standards a scientist would accept.

The Bili Ape is a good example. Apparently they have had skulls from this area dating back over 100 years, giving a good indication something was there. When modern researchers looked, they also found skulls, amongst many other obvious (physical) signs. They might be hard to find, yet they have been found. The natives obviously weren't just telling stories either, as they have also since found these Apes being sold as "bush meat". They definitely physically exist.

Yet an 8-10' tall Ape regularly seen right across the US and also along the mountain ranges of Aus, leaves no genuine trace of its existence? This doesn't mean science says they cannot exist, just that they have no genuine reason to suppose they do, as yet.

User avatar
angryman
Approved Member
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 3:39 am
Position: Spiritual
Facebook Profile Page: https://www.facebook.com/angrymanphotography
Location: Tassie
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by angryman » Tue Jan 01, 2013 2:05 am

Some believe black holes exist, where as some scientists dispute that they could ever exist, and the idea of them is ludicrous.

There is evidence of black holes, but it can be discounted and explained away with other theories, often just as wild and crazy as the original claim it is a black hole, but the element of doubt is planted anyway.

The scientific community in general quietly believes there may be black holes, but until there is indisputable evidence for something, it will never be exclaimed as existing.

Now replace the word BLACK HOLE with BIGFOOT, or UFOS, or GHOSTS, and you get the same story. I know certain things exist, I have seen them, but until I can explain them without the element of doubt, even I am not sure what i saw.

sapere aude
Silver Status
Posts: 188
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 8:27 pm

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by sapere aude » Tue Jan 01, 2013 11:59 am

The work of this man seems intriguing. A great shame is that the "creationists" in the US have latched on to his work in an effort to champion their religious cause, which probably doesn't help him much. As a sort of "friend of a friend" his only interest is (what he feels) are genuine scientific reasons that throw some doubt on black holes and the big bang (at least the current models) as being inconsistent with physics. Whether right or wrong, it's good in my opinion to have people who see things differently, challenge accepted science. In fact science usually welcomes it, if it can be backed up. Though they don't seem to have embraced his ideas, in this instance.

http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/papers.html

Yowies and bigfoot are a vastly different thing IMO. We definitely could and should be able to find physical reasons to support their existence.

User avatar
Rusty2
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:30 pm
Position: Believer
Location: East Coast

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Rusty2 » Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:26 am

Hey angryman , in your original post on this thread you pondered why were not getting anything on the cams .

Its now my belief that they can smell the gear although I originally thought it was "hear the gear". We all know how some new piece of electronics smells when you pull it out of the bag .

Its not rocket science , they would have to have developed a hightened sense of smell for hunting and staying alive .

This means that when they smell the gear , their curiousity draws them to come in for a peek . Our trail cameras arent sensitive enough to detect them because their low to the ground and their smart , their not gonna run past the camera .
They will also come in to look from the furtherest distance to see what you've left behind , making it almost impossible to detect with a trail camera .

The other thing , which I was reminded of by a friend ( he was reading a book on primate bevavior ) the other day is , the lense's on the cameras look like eye's . Look , see , watch , they dont wanna be seen and avoid the gear . They do the same for the recorders , smell them , come in for a look , see that there's no eye's and arent afraid to play with the recorders or at least approach them .

http://yowiehunters.net/viewtopic.php?f ... 27s#p18902 I mentioned this before .

The other point is we only have 1 or 2 cameras , its gonna be near impossible to catch anything if you have your camera facing 1 way but their coming to look from another direction .

So , this means that they are around , they do come in to see , but our gear is limited by sensitivity and we havent covered the area completely with our surveillance .

Just a couple of thoughts ...................

Smokeyr67
Silver Status
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:14 am

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Smokeyr67 » Sun Jan 06, 2013 1:38 am

Rusty2 wrote:Hey angryman , in your original post on this thread you pondered why were not getting anything on the cams .

Its now my belief that they can smell the gear although I originally thought it was "hear the gear". We all know how some new piece of electronics smells when you pull it out of the bag .

Its not rocket science , they would have to have developed a hightened sense of smell for hunting and staying alive .

This means that when they smell the gear , their curiousity draws them to come in for a peek . Our trail cameras arent sensitive enough to detect them because their low to the ground and their smart , their not gonna run past the camera .
They will also come in to look from the furtherest distance to see what you've left behind , making it almost impossible to detect with a trail camera .

The other thing , which I was reminded of by a friend ( he was reading a book on primate bevavior ) the other day is , the lense's on the cameras look like eye's . Look , see , watch , they dont wanna be seen and avoid the gear . They do the same for the recorders , smell them , come in for a look , see that there's no eye's and arent afraid to play with the recorders or at least approach them .

http://yowiehunters.net/viewtopic.php?f ... 27s#p18902 I mentioned this before .

The other point is we only have 1 or 2 cameras , its gonna be near impossible to catch anything if you have your camera facing 1 way but their coming to look from another direction .

So , this means that they are around , they do come in to see , but our gear is limited by sensitivity and we havent covered the area completely with our surveillance .

Just a couple of thoughts ...................

Lots of good points there Rusty, including one I'd barely given consideration, the smell of outgassing plastic!

If anyone else likes building plastic models, one of the joys of opening a new kit (for me) is the smell of the styrene. I let the sprues air for a few days before I wash them to remove the mould release agent. Perhaps we should do something similar to our trail cams. I mean;

Dissassemble, wash, perhaps coat them with a natural oil, reassemble then deploy?

forestguy
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 846
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:29 pm
Position: Researcher
Location: Brisbane, Queensland

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by forestguy » Sun Jan 06, 2013 11:07 am

Smokeyr67 wrote:Perhaps we should do something similar to our trail cams. I mean;

Dissassemble, wash, perhaps coat them with a natural oil, reassemble then deploy?
Yeah, probably a good idea. Although, I'm still a strong supporter of the idea that we need to try and capitalise on their curiosity, and smell has got to be one of their major senses.

The only snare I've had torn down is the one I'd recently spray-painted, and AustOz had the VOR torn down when it was attached via strongly smelling glued-tube.

I'm still pondering the idea of the lens as an eye (as well as the IR issues, etc).
"What is reported is different to what is remembered which is different to what was seen which is different to what was present."

User avatar
AustralopithecineOz
Long Time Contributor
Posts: 536
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:16 am
Position: Nature Lover
Location: Riverena NSW
Contact:

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by AustralopithecineOz » Sun Jan 06, 2013 12:08 pm

forestguy wrote:
Smokeyr67 wrote:Perhaps we should do something similar to our trail cams. I mean;

Dissassemble, wash, perhaps coat them with a natural oil, reassemble then deploy?
Yeah, probably a good idea. Although, I'm still a strong supporter of the idea that we need to try and capitalise on their curiosity, and smell has got to be one of their major senses.

The only snare I've had torn down is the one I'd recently spray-painted, and AustOz had the VOR torn down when it was attached via strongly smelling glued-tube.

I'm still pondering the idea of the lens as an eye (as well as the IR issues, etc).
Thats the perplexing thing. I think the glue on the recorder tube not only attracted them but evoked a serious response. It was a piece of ag pipe industrial glued to a webbing strap. Very strong bond... very fresh... very smelly. The tube was removed from the area. The recorder left dangling.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Smokeyr67
Silver Status
Posts: 154
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:14 am

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by Smokeyr67 » Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:37 am

What about waterproofing the cams with fish oil? Cats and dogs may be an issue, but the odour is different and very foody

User avatar
mlj1mlj1
Gold Status - Frequent Poster
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:14 am
Position: Arm-Chair Researcher

Re: Hiding cameras

Unread post by mlj1mlj1 » Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:33 am

Nature always finds a way, we are proof of that...Plus, they are part something else no one knows anything about. Anything, thus, is possible...You are going to have to think out side the box just like if an Alien landed tommorrow. All your preconceived notions of life and what you have been taught in school would go out the window in one day...

Post Reply