When is a Yowie, just not that kind of Yowie?

[cryptobotanica]

Evening all. Nice site! Many thanks to the contributors, admin and all-round cheeky buggers.

I could waffle on for hours (just try me...) but I have been thinking under the hypothesis that the "Yowie" and related phenomena is in fact multiple "Creatures".

Bear with me, this could do with more editing. I simply hope to offer some possible options that help explain both the conviction, and the variety, of "Yowie" reports from modern and Colonial times.

This is by no means my, or anyone else's, attempt at a "definitive" or "authoritarian" dissection of the field. Rather, it is the current working model I am using in my attempts to categorise and rationalise the wealth of data out there.

Warning to anyone squeamish, too thoughtful, or prone to digestive upset, this piece contains concepts you may find distressing.

First grouping - archtypical Yowie.

I believe ... for now... that sightings and encounters in this category describe typical human - ape interactions in a wild context. Foetid stench, rudimentary tool use, a "human-ness" to the experience but nevertheless, an animal level of intellect.

This category has a rudimentary understanding of "property" in terms of boundary lines or "smell territory" and is frequently more approachable by women, children and people of a diminuitive stature or a non threatening character.

"Crashing" (typical trainwreck of noise smashing through the undergrowth) is a dominant feature of these encounters, as is threatening but non lethal behaviour especially utilising sound, simple tools (sticks, stones) and "charging" behaviour.

Animal remains found suspended or wedged well up into large trees are related to this grouping - many lower primates for example baboons are ferocious carnivores, and are known to take a kill up a tree so as to be safe whilst enjoying it.

Where these creatures may be from, I can not say. Perhaps escapees or exiles from the many travelling circuses, Commonwealth research facilities and private collectors in our distant (and at times, not too distant) past. They may also be a naturalised or native Genus, originally moving into suitable terrain (typically the edges of subtropical old growth rainforest, in Northern regions) via the northern land bridge.

These creatures may appear in southern states as a distinctly less threatening, fair coloured breed. Whether these could be a distinct creature, or merely an ecotype, I cannot say. Likely, cases in this grouping are in themselves part of particular sub-groupings - possibly native animals, escapees, former experiment subjects, released pets, and so on.

All types more typically encountered slightly into the wild side of the rural - urban fringe around capital cities and large regioinal centres. Development, new trails and natural disasters in bordering regions may increase concentrations in a given area. Bushfires, floods, and large military exercises also seem to function as "herding" or "coralling" factors.

Tree-climbing, swinging, "pa-kua" style movement and grunting connected to this grouping.

It seems that Yowies in this grouping exhibit a higher rate of nocturnal behaviour than other groupings.

[cryptobotanica]

Second grouping - Naturalised Humans.

Sightings and encounters typically involve rudimentary communication, homestead interactions, "gift" taking, groups (of both "Yowies" and witnesses), rarely threatening activity unless involving motor vehicles, stony terrain offering limited escape or females in their group, displays advanced tool and material usage (tripods, trail markings, wrecking of modern technologies) in addition to some threatening but possibly misinterpreted behaviours - stick throwing, tree marking, processing of native animals and occasional people in to more useful parts, such as rough bone tools, skins, and fibre.



Tripod construction were and an some areas still are much used by Indigenous aussies for fibre-craft, cordage making and drying hides.

These sightings or encounters typically are reported as being of a humanoid appearance, in terms of facial structure, smell is typically unremarkable or otherwise described as musky, earthy or just dirty.

I believe this is the result of feeling insecure in approaching reliable water sources for fear of contact attack or removal. There would be a real possibility that if this grouping has one real "Rule" in their "culture", it is to avoid contact, or capture, at all costs. They seem to live in fear, but do not wish to cause any more than is necessary to keep themselves safe.

Some tree bark removal (as opposed to distinct "markings", uprootings and foliage damage is likely to be their attempts to utilise naturally occuring medicines and obscure foods (protein rich shoots, seeds and grubs) as well as using tannins in much the same way as many people and animals use clay, especially in a wet scrub or open rainforest environment - to "mop up" toxins from the system , taken on in a cumulative fashion by eating bushfoods, fruits etc.

I believe these sightings (increasingly rare) are the result of isolated pockets of Indigenous Australians secreting their children in the bush when expecting "intervention" from ruling colonial officials and pastoralists, between 1800 and 1960.

e They seem to have a very highly developed sense of property, personal space, respect and living harmoniously but are, in some areas, simply a Lord of the Flies culture - ruled by people who have never advanced, or been initiated, to anything beyond being children, apeing adults they can barely remember.

Limited number of these types since the mid 1980s, common in those days in very isolated and remote areas (Cape York, western Ranges areas in QLD and NSW) and becoming much less common thereafter... assuming most of those areas were settled out, cleared and the like by the 1930s, this provides time for the breeding up of at least 3 generations of "wild" progeny... unschooled in the ways of their own people, or the newcomers.

They seem to have some rudimentary aspects of local culture intact, such as plant usage, rough building and stalking / concealment, but would seem to have lost much of their capacity for complex language, negotiation and openly approaching anyone unlike themselves.

Tree marking and rock stacking are , I suspect, remnants of am uch more sophisticated use of tree-glyphs and earth-forming to denote tribal bounaries, sacred and burial sights, etc.

I belive most "super-stealth" encounters, for example "there one minute, gone the next" and "no idea how he got behind me" are related to this grouping.

This phenomena, if it happened in one locale, is more than likely to have happened in another, irrelevant of state or climate.

Experiences of this group seem to overlap in terms of territory with "Queensland Cat" sightings, frequently more of an alpine area versus the damp lowlands for the "Ape-Yowies" expect in times of drought or the local dry season.

I suspect some earlier sightnings that exhibit signs of both groups 1 and 2 are in fact involving grouping 2 "yowies" still wearing traditional possum/wallaby skin cloaks, coupled with a lack of personal hygiene due to being raised by, essentially, other children and a lack of access to decent water sources due to most regular supplies being "comandeered" by local graziers and producers.

In genuinely wild areas, no particular odour is mentioned in connection with reports of this type. Assuming in very large tracts of NP and SF, cockies and farmers are not dominating the water supply.

Some tendency towards "show battles" of rock and stick pelting, from elevated or concealed positons, especially in areas involving more human contact than more remote regions, buttypically more prone to simply frightening people unintentionally and then withdrawing to safer ground, possibly using underground networks of clefts and caverns where available. Using local concealment, for example partially burying self in leaf litter / earth, hollow logs, lightning split trees and wearing natural hides may assist with this.

I belieeve instances of neatly dismembered native animals, or unclothed but unmolested dead humans, or "missing from the waist, up" cases are related to this grouping , especially leading up to winter when the need for warmth is paramount, especially if they are still breeding in some areas. Their seeming lack of hostility towards children or women seems to indicate some aspect of the maternal relationship is still happening within their tiny, scattered groups.

In many tribal groups, traditional systems of "taboo" dictated that the rump and leg meat was reserved for the older initiated hunters regardless of who brought it down. It could be these "proto-children" have some rememberance of that, and without knowing why, leave the hindquarters of a kill behind.

Missing upper sections of the occasional human being may be attempts to create "sheep skins" for their wolves clothings... enough of a common appearance to pass unnoticed by casual observers while on nocturnal raids into isolated homesteads and water sources.

May also be possible that one large kill is too heavy for one lone "hunter" to carry back to their quiet nook or gully, so they opt for the less-offensive, more nutrient rich sections. Simple even for the unskilled to bisect on the horizontal,above the pelvis, tie off the opened abdomen with entrail or sinew and use the arms / forelegs as straps for packing the kill back to their "home".

This avoids the need to process bowel tissue which despite being prized in some central Desert tribes, is generally discarded by coastal mobs and kids are instructed about this from a very early age in some cases.

Some cases of remains found in trees may be related to this grouping having a dim, out of context "memory" of arborial burial by their ancestors.

This grouping is often encountered in clear light conditions in very remote locations by people quietly walking, or camping, or otherwise encountered at dawn, dusk and on rainy or misty days with much reduced visibility.

This grouping may also in some cases be suffering from hypertrichosis or physical deformities, multi-generational malnutrition leading to reduced stature and altered appearance.

Which leads us on to...

[cryptobotanica]

Grouping Three - Feral Humans.

Abandoned children during colonial times, up until the present. Dumpings of covert research facilities or programs, overflow of the mental health industry and in some cases perhaps the result of experimentation of a diabological nature (Australia does lead the world in military precision, sports science and stock genetics) .

Some cases would be dumped or "bushwhacked" as a result of unseemly appearance, congenital defects or spontaneous abnormality brought about by the dismal nutritional intake of most of our early settlers, and many of our dispossessed Aboriginal peoples.

Hypertrichosis (wolf-man-syndrome) can be triggered by certain deficiencies, easily brought about by a "Tea, Flour and Tobacco" diet, which many Australian people at the time of colonisation and well into recent times subsisted upon.

Researchers into the Tasmanian scene would be familiar with the "Black Bobs" - I believe this is an example of the grouping. In regional areas of QLD with a static population base you can easily find residents with polydactylism (too many fingers, or thumbs), reduced limb length and increased hair growth (monobrows, etc).

This condition can also be caused by ingesting teragenic plant compounds, from the Colchicum spp. , for example, and many native species as well. Not showing up in the person eating it, they can however have disastrous effects on formation of healthy infants.

In a bush setting, many of these species can seem similar to perhaps nearly-forgotten domestic crops or wild foods, and be eaten unknowingly, exacerbating the problem from one generation to the next.

Combing any and all of the above factors, in addition to the no doubt rife Foetal Alcohol Syndrome of the times, and it is easy to end up with some very savage and inhuman, human beings indeed. With flattened features, terrifying demeanour and noxious scent to boot.

There is some chance that beings in this grouping would make contact with grouping 2, or be adopted by grouping 1 in infancy, leading to some very odd behaviours and tendencies indeed. Persistant homestead attacks, cannabalism and stock abuse cases where the cadaver is not removed far from the scene are perhaps related to this grouping.

Also impossible to rule out is the likelihood of full blown "mexican" style Hypertrichosis being introduced into the Australian gene pool thanks to labourers and workers from South America frequently being brought over to handle shipments of stock (cattle, etc) from South America in the post - Colonial era. 80 percent of weeds in some pastoral areas are direct descendants of the seeds from the guts of these animals, it is not too outlandlish to suggest that the basic genetic makeup of their handlers would not have arrived here too.

Perhaps, long ago, some stockmans wife entertained a cheeky young Mexican cow-poke... with some frightening, hairy results. the resulting offspring (perhaps multiple birth) were promptly dealt with in the time honoured Aussie tradition (dump em in the scrub) and may have interbred for the last one hundred or more years.

Possibly, this was ONE case, but the fatal beating/drowning/shooting of the offspring was less than successful and the outcast ended up surviving long enough to breed with others of a similar situation.

Experiences in this grouping seem to be based around typical human mealtimes, or shortly before dawn / shortly after dusk.

Last, but certainly not least, is...

[cryptobotanica]

Grouping 4 - Paranormal Entities.

A person of the opinion that a living being can leave behind, at the time of its death, psychic "impressions" of its life and times upon its surroundings must consider that any and all of the above groupings could readily materialise in these forms, post mortem, for hundreds of years to come.

"Dweomer" phenomena is well documented in believing circles, and especially well documented in circumstances of abuse, trauma, imprisonment, exile, the profoundly mentally ill and so on. Grouping 2 would have had original "members" who witnessed terrible, terrible things from their hiding spots in the scrub.

Grouping 3 could be some of the most exceptionally deranged human beings ever encountered and surely, if anyone could leave their mark on an area, they would.

Grouping 1 (apes, etc) also cannot be excluded from this category of experiences as the phenomena of animal hauntings is quite well documented too .

there is also to be taken into consideration the distinct possibility of entirely normal human beings manifesting in this way, by choice, purely for effectiveness or that now - extinct but once again entirely "natural" animals could also be responsible for the same.

Of course, what you believe is up to you.

I hope this helps stimulate the consideration of alternate views in the "Yowie" field, and goes some way towards making sense of a sea of at times quite disparate experiences from credible sources.

>edited for spelling - because I can't.

[cryptobotanica]

Enjoy, if you will... and please do not flog this for your latest book

[Dion]

Hey Cryptobotanica

First of all welcome to the forums, glad to have you on board.

Secondly that was an interesting read thanks for sharing, although in your efforts I’m a little confused as to the direction you’re trying to take us?

Going by your thread topic “When is a Yowie, just not that kind of Yowie?” and then your 4 groupings which are archetypical Yowie, Naturalised Humans, Feral Humans and Paranormal Entities implies to me that you are referring to the Yowie to be (quite often) misidentified as being Human or humanly based or am I reading it wrong?

You say the “yowie” may be multiple “creatures” can you go into a bit more depth here, are you saying that the Yowie is those 4 groupings?

Some clarification as to your posts would be greatly appreciated.

Again thanks for sharing

[cryptobotanica]

Thanks Chewy, and apologies for any confusion

My thinking-out-loud there is just my own attempt to create or at least clarify something of a mental framework, for my own use while studying the available data and experiences. By the time you have read or heard more than a couple of dozen pieces of "Yowie" lore, it becomes evident there is some inconsistencies in the reports and experiences, yet many credible witnesses with very little to gain from their sharing are equally convinced by their own senses.

These interactions or witnessing of sign/trace are "consistently inconsistent" - they may differ, but there are only so many differences in appearance or behaviours . This I believe is reflecting what may be quite different creatures, beings or groups, but the whole spectrum is typically labelled "Yowie" phenomena, with the exception of course where the person in question has some background in the field, or a cultural context for classifying it.

By "Archetypical" Yowie, I refer to the Yowie of classic folklore - the famous ape-man, powerfully built, with heavy brows and a rank smell. Whether ALL sightings or sign in this type of report are of the same kind of creature, or whether some are genuinely yet to be described by science and others are simply a form of ape, is obviously open to debate.

Obviously, a very well built, or tall and hide-clad representative of Grouping 2, seen in half light or at a distance, could easily be mistaken, by the unsuspecting, as a distinctly Grouping 1 kind of experience. Anyone that has seen me before my third morning coffee could make the same assumption, hah.

A group of more modestly built or diminutive beings from Grouping 2 could very easily account for the "Hairy Little Men" category of reports. Representatives of Grouping 3 are the wildcards here, they would include perhaps the descendants of the disabled, or congenitally deformed as well as people exiled from their original tribal groups due to despicable conducts, profound mental illness or the like. Also the recent "dumpings" and "overflow" of children and possibly intellectually disabled teenagers and young adults (recent, as in post Colonisation until the present day), and there is a strong chance some enounters in this group are simply modern human adults who of their own free will, are living a more or less primitive existance. Chance sightings or hearing of this last type could easily seem to be something that they are not.

There is more than one reason to find yourself looking hairy, acting furtively in dense scrub and isolated areas

My personal belief is that all "Yowie" phenomena can be categorised along the above lines, at least in a rough sense and it goes some way (for me, at least) towards explaining how reports of something called just ONE name (Yowies) can describe creatures or humanoids of such different appearances, behaviours and tendencies.

Theoretically, these examples of each grouping could and probably would end up having to compete or compromise on land, resources and the like. More ferocious kinds of grouping 1, and 3, could be just as threatening to grouping 2 beings as to any other human being and I suspect in some cases "rock stacks" and trail sign are designed to define dangerous territories, and safe havens / corridors in regards to staying concealed from "us", and safe from "them".

Interestingly, trail sign (tripods usually featuring quite elaborate additional pieces, lean-to structures, etc) are used in the jungles of Malaysia/Borneo by the locals to indicate travel plans, safe routes, blocked trails and the like. "Rock stacks" used to be used by some aussie tribes for marking underground caches of grass and wattle seed, nuts, tools and materials. This was also done to prevent animals digging up the deep, narrow caches. Tree marking of an oval / elongated shape is also a feature of some marked trees used as burial markers and sacred site markers by Aboriginal Australians.

I notice that the classic 6 and 7 foot tree marking seems , in photographs and the rare examples I have seen for myself, seem to fall into two categories. There are quite vicious looking marks made up of a few large "incision" marks as if from tooth, claw or very crude stone pebble choppers (stone axes) , and then there are quite restrained, usually elliptical examples where the damage to the bark layer appears done with careful and patient work with a fine, sharp blade such as a better class of stone chopper, or tools made of teeth or bone.

Markings of the second kind (the "restrained") ones seem to heal up very quickly, despite being usually down to the heartwood. Some seem to be periodically "retouched". The "vicious" category of markings seems much more prone to introducing disease or fungal infection to the tree eventually becoming quite an ugly wound, taking a long time to heal.

So... one word... perhaps many different realities behind it.

[deadpool]

I may be able to "simplify" this for some. If I may.

Grouping 1:
Yowie/Bigfoot/Yeti, etc - surviving and/or slightly evolved forms of the Gigantopithecus, that existed from roughly one million years to as recently as three-hundred thousand years ago.

Grouping 2:
Pretty much sums up like that recently discovered tribe of pygmies. There's a bit of a back-story I have regarding this. It happened to my Dad back in 1975 when he was in the Royal British Navy. He was on a survey ship (HMS Hydra) measuring the tides in the New Hebridies (now Vanuatu). Him & another guy off the boat was dropped off on a random island for 2 days to check tides, etc. Not long after they were dropped off, this "man" appeared out of the jungle. Had a spear, bow & arrow. Looked like he hadn't had a bath in his life. He had a permanent "aggressive" stance about him. Kind of like fight or flight kinda thing. He was very curious about my father & his ship-mate, constantly staring at them, eventually hunched down on his feet for about half an hour. When my father tried to go closer, he'd jump back, stand up for a bit, then hunch back down. After awhile this native person got bored or whatever you'd want to call it & left. A few months later Dad happened to be watching TV & saw one of those David Attenborough documentaries & turns out that same island he visited contained the last stone age tribe in the pacific.

Grouping 3:
There's quite a few cases of feral humans. Probably the most famous one is about Zana, the feral female that was "captured" in the 1850's. I don't remember much about the entire story. All I know is it was in Russia.. where apparently the Almas live. The Almas are thought to be the surviving members of the Neanderthals. Zana apparently gave birth to several children and they survived. From what I remember they were a-lot stronger than the average man, more prominent brow ridge & brown skin.

Grouping 4:
The whole "paranormal" aspect of this always gets me. I never know what to think about this, so i'll just say this: i'm still on the fence about this one.

[Dion]

Hey Cryptobotanica

Thanks for that clarification it’s cleared up a few questions for me. I appreciate the fact that you have given this some heavy thinking “When is a Yowie, just not that kind of Yowie” Implies to me that the thread and groupings is about misidentification, apart from your first grouping “Archetypical Yowie”. Am I right?

The “consistent inconsistences” that you speak of are there but in my opinion they are the result of different experiences, as we all see things at differing angles we will always see things differently. I’ll give you a true example I know of, a couple of friends spot a yowie in their backyard one describes the Yowie as having smooth hair like a bear the other describes the Yowie as having matted hair like a goat, they have both had the same sighting of the same Yowie but differing opinions as to the hair. How is one supposed to catalogue the underlying facts of an encounter when there is such a variation? You can only catalogue what you are given and learn from your own experiences.

The “consistent inconsistences” could also be a result of people sighting differing species, people’s description of Yowies being more human than ape, then more ape than human, different colour hair, matted and smooth, eye colour, and 3,4,5,6 toes?? The small Junjudee, the giant Doolagarl, just from these discrepancies alone we are looking at probably 4+ species across Australia if not more.

Maybe you can go into detail as to what you think the inconsistences are? That would give us a better base as to where you’re coming from?

I understand that for someone who has never had a sighting or an encounter it’s easy to flog it off as folklore, I am not too sure as to your own experiences maybe you can share that with us if you have the time?

As much as I admire your efforts in trying to categorise the Yowie into 4 main groups I think you’re Naturalised Humans, and Feral Humans encounters would be very low to say the least, where not talking about the tribes of Amazonia here but modernised Australia where credible witnesses spot a hairy man usually more often than not the characteristics are close to seven foot tall, very wide shoulders, hair all over, etc. and that doesn’t sound to me like Naturalised Humans, and or Feral Humans. I understand that there could be some Yowie encounters that could be passed off as Groups 2 and 3 those being when an entity is not seen but heard but again a very low probability. Having said that I’m not saying it doesn’t happen.

If I was going to categorise the Yowie into any groupings it would be these two.

1. Flesh and Blood
2. Paranormal

I understand that this does not address your groupings for misidentification being naturalised Humans or Feral Humans. It only addresses the core of the Yowie Phenomenon, many have had both experiences with them being Flesh and Blood and also Paranormal and I believe they are a bit of both.

It’s clear you have thought about this and gone into some great detail, I think you’re on the right track if your thread is about misidentification, but again I think the likely hood of encounters being Naturalised Humans and or Feral Humans is very low.

Take Naturalised Humans and or Feral Humans at night for example when most encounters happen. I mean to be realistic about it who walks around the bush at night when basically Humans have very poor night vision if it was Naturalised Humans and or Feral Humans they would be tucked up in bed sleeping under a tree or cave and so forth as walking around at night in the bush is dangerous, you don’t know what you’re walking on; you don’t know when a stick is going to hit you in the face and or poke your eye out so forth and so forth. I am just categorising Naturalised Humans and or Feral Humans at night in this instance if it was a daylight encounter then yes we could say it was possibly group 2 or 3.

Generally speaking people know when something isn’t right and there judgements are usually correct. To hear something walking around at night and then crash and RUN through the bush means something has a good understanding of the terrain and good night vision. People’s perception of Yowie is usually a good one.

Again thanks for sharing, hope to hear more from you.

[AL Pitman]

Or maybe their just " YOWIES "



I AM NOT LOST I AM WHERE I WANT TO BE ...........

[sapere aude]

Not sure if my thoughts are worth a lot.

From what little I have in the way of experience. Definately exist, definately not human, definately perplexing. Out of the realms of what is considered evolutionary or perhaps even zooligically possible, unlikely to be explained "scientifically" in any satisfactory way. A complete enigma.

I also don't base my thoughts on a very large portfolio.

[rickrocket2010]

Or maybe their just " YOWIES "



I AM NOT LOST I AM WHERE I WANT TO BE ...........

Im with you AL.....

[cryptobotanica]

Thanks for the replies fellas. And Chewy, thanks for the very considerate PM... actually I was not offended in the least, the only reason I bothered posting here in the first place was the evident standard of respect and open debate.Persoanlly I believe 99 percent of Orb photos are just dust, bugs, pollen and hopeful photographers, but I do still enjoy looking at a nice one But you must be one of nature's gentleman to be concerned I will address your night-travel point later in the piece.

For Al and Rick (I have greatly enjoyed posts from you guys in my browsing around here, btw) I completely agree. Sometimes, it seems it is "just" a Yowie. It's one of those things that people either have no real firm thoughts about, or entirely believe.Personally, I believe. But, just as someone who "believes" in alien contacts has to accept that some sightings are simply aircraft, natural phenomena or the twilight state of human awareness playing hell with perception, someone who believes in Yowies must surely be aware that a lot of these "sightings" or "experiences" simply do not tally with others despite being fairly believable in and of themselves. I am simply trying to help myself make sense of when a case is the former, and when it is the latter.


I guess I should simply explain that my post was about , as Chewy stated, misidentification but largely just misreporting. My (current... sure to change!) Groupings approach is strictly something I apply to the available literature, and reports I pick up in personal comms. here and there. I have picked up tales and had personal experience of all kinds of less-than-usual things from one end of the state to the other, not all are "the Yowie" but I often enounter people using the term to describe, for example, a sensation of being stared at . Uh, what? I remember feeling a stare on a train once, but it sure as heck was not our Hairy Mate.

Apologies if anyone thought I meant "there are no yowies, it's just crazed humans with extra digits". What I meant was "this helps me sort reports into those about Yowies, and those just about crazed humans with extra digits"

My point (if I had one at all. was just thinking out loud, mostly) is that unfortunately I have noticed a fairly common tendency in the available reports (and new reports) to lump ANY strange occurence in out of the way places a "Yowie" activity. A reasonable proportion use terms such as "child-like", "like a chimpanzee" etc but are regrettably lumped under the same heading, which just obscures any hopes we have of making anything like a clear picture of what is really going on here. I do have a background in applied sci, was a lab assistant at a certain large forensic facility based at Macgregor, QLD before moving over into horticulture and natural history. Any and all of those fields require in depth analysis of available data, and an understanding that no matter how firm you are on your original suspicion, nature can and will surprise you.

There is also something of a "ready and willing" attitude evident with some researchers - having found something unusual, they will simply redefine the Big Fella , rather than looking at more pedestrian and lets face it, often more probably causes. Something runs in front of a car in an isolated area, at 1am... well. It may well turn up as a "yowie" report despite the descriptives of the witness being very much inconsistent with the generally accepted notion of what a Yowie should look like.

Some tree marks, for instance, are remarkable things. Consistent in placement, species and appearance. Others, especially the really photogenic ones, often look consistent with a .303 round belting through the scrub and taking a chunk out of some regrowth. Others again, are entirely not like "bites" and look much more like carefully created things, using tools, or at least leaving impressions inconsistent with the dental characteristics of any known mammal.

I guess what I was trying to do, largely for my own benefit but I thought someone else may find it useful, is to have a framework - a mesh screen, if you will - through which to pass any and all reports as they become available to determine what is genuine Yowie action, and what is ... something else.

I collect native seeds, have been walking around south east qld for quite a while now , and have seen one (20?200?) too many strange things to not be fairly convinced myself. But, I am not about to think that anything with "yowie" written in the title is a completely true, accurate and forensically analysed report. I love a good read , or a good yarn, but many are unfortunately not a lot more than that. Others are very much compelling. It's as good rule of thumb that if you wish it wasn't true, it probably is

I am personally "nearly seven feet tall" at 6 foot 4 out of my boots. My freakish combination of DNA (Aboriginal and Norse) has given me some serious brow-ridges, and if I shift my bare feet on wet ground a few times I leave size 15 prints with 8 toes, too Just press, wriggle, lift, repeat. As is, I leave size 13 with five toes, which would be enough to freak ME out if I found some other big hairy bastard had left them outside my bedroom window overnight.

My shoulders are nearly a metre wide, versus my hips at barely two thirds that. I reckon if I suddenly appeared a few feet above you in the scrub, you'd tell your mates I was "nearly seven feet tall!" I am not a really hairy person, but I do have long hair and a beard you could lose a mob of shorthorns in. I collect native seed, and spend a lot of my spare time bushwalking, travelling light. My family has often called me "monkeyman" for my whacky habit of picking things up with my toes to save bending over

I have often scared the absolute kapookies out of a mob of weekend warriors for daring to not barge around the scrub like a herd of wild horses. thankfully, I do not have rampant hairgrowth problems on my body, not of inbred stock, I don't wear animal fur clothes and I get to have a tub pretty often, so that negates the stench. If I leave my hair loose, and hunch my shoulders, or crouch, my neck disappears too.

As it is, I have been jokingly accused by my well travelled old farmboy neighbours of being "the yowie we saw up the mountain the other day". For that matter, they spent a month driving around my block looking for the "dingo" they'd all "seen for certain - definitely a Dingo! and pure at that!"

Evnetually, I set em straight on the fact that it was my ridgeback mastiff x, of course easily twice as meaty and double or triple the weight of most of the local dingos or hybrids, who likes to follow me around the hills, cleared things up a little for them. Though I could see em looking a little bit disappointed. Of course, most of these old boys would be described as "experienced, credible witnesses of good standing"... whether they can tell a domestic dog weighing 50 kilos from a dingo weighing 30 thru a rifle scrope or not. Good blokes, solid gold, but like most people they let their expectations, their hopes, colour their perception.

So I need some process of categorising their often fairly elaborate tales and experiences.

Interestingly, I tend to dress in natural colours and materials, and most of em did not mention seeing me anywhere near him. Which is pretty funny, given I was hardly in "stealth" mode. I guess they know how to look, but maybe not how to see.

[cryptobotanica]

I live around 20k out of Kilcoy, Qld, edging on to some very wild and wooly country indeed. We get the odd satnav nomad come up my way, lose their bottle,turn around the leave really fast (I guess, before we cook and eat them!) . And I can't pick up some fuel without passing that hideously crude sculpture of the Big Man Himself. I have found a few decidedly odd things around here, admittedly not as odd as that around the D'Aguilar ranges themselves, but still enough to make even the most straightlaced person wonder.I have only been looking around this region for a couple of years, most of my experience is in and beyond the bush fringe of north Brisbane. Lots of large parks, and development, seems to help concentrate phenomena. I've found some great signs, and had some serious cases of the willies in response to noises, smells and the like. But then, I've also seen my daughter almost instinctively stack loose stones, big to small, just to pass the time while I took photos or whatever.

Mates and family in anything from the military, firies (I think you're CFS, Al? ) , Indigenous affairs and on to Parks and Wildlife, volunteer bush regen people and bushies in general have all had their own little piece of the puzzle to add. But many of em use the term "Yowie" to describe anything from a weird sound, to a sensation of being looked at ,and that probably isn't entirely logical.

In addition to having genuine polydactals (that's people having extra fingers and or toes. wiki it, some interesting photos and xrays!), my current region has a rich base of Yowie lore and I am completely capable of sorting what is a lost calf, what is a bar tail wallaby and what is something much harder to explain. I can hear inhuman screams and ominous thuds as I type... but it's the fella from down the hill's cows eating my sad excuse for a lawn. One too many "compelling" photos of a cow on a hillside looking into some torchlight, out there. I am simply trying to make sense of it all for myself. I heard plenty off odd tales and have seen many, many strange things myself having lived up and down most of the east cost , up to the Straits. Many great stories... unfortunately, many great storytellers!

Re: the night vision thing... I find once you are away from a light-polluted sky and assuming no serious cloud cover, it's pretty easy to move cross country in the dark, moonlight being very helpful but a clear sky full of stars works wonders too.

I personally enjoy nightwalking. It makes spotlighting native wildlife easier, lets me enjoy the stars and whatever else is up there, and I've yet to do any damage to myself that I would not have managed in daylight. Some people are genetically advantaged in terms of the ratio of rods to cones in their vision. Personally I believe a little pratice helps a lot, and a little confidence goes a long way. But I know for a fact that I know my own patch of ground (10 acres, not a lot at all, but it's mostly vertical and many large rocks and dead trees) better in the black of night than anyone else would know it at midday.

Many indigenous mobs used to travel by night to avoid the stress and water use of travelling at midday, in the blazing sun (mad dogs and englishmen, anyone?) and far too many military leaders have proven the worth of a predawn attack, and often long before the advent of passive IR and other forms of NV technology. Many bushrangers in our early Colonial history used the same technique to move from region to region, and the great majority of animals of nocturnal habits in Australia actually have fairly lacklustre nightsight, they are simply relying on touch, smell, hearing and local knowledge. A stick in the eye certainly is not anyone's idea of a good time but it may be better than being captured, examined or integrated.

Now, having gotten all of that out of the way it occured to me today that many, many reports of a (in my own parlance) genuine Grouping 1 "Yowie" mention this all over body hair which is variously described as ranging from a light tan to a deep rich brown or black. It has been reported, as Chewy points out, as being smooth and glossy AND wirey, a litle mangy. Apart from the fact that all mammals have different kinds of fur or hair at different points on your body (forensically, you have three different kinds of hair on your head alone...) it occurs to me that NO native Australian animal has hair. Not one. The only candidate is the Dingo, which only trotted on down the landbridge up north a few thousand years ago. All have a short, sometimes wooly pelt of semi-stiff fur, often banded along it's length to aid concealment but mainly it's texture is perfect for slipping through the scrub without getting caught up on vines, timber and what have you.

The fact that a typical and seemingly genuine "Yowie" report often mentions this "long straggly hair" to me excludes the likelihood of those sightings being of anything like a "native" creature. Which means it probably occurs in other bioregions. Assuming that our animal life is distributed in much the same way as our plant life, I am currently thinking along the lines of the "myths" of South American, South Asian and African cultures.

Does anyone else have any ideas on this facet of Yowie lore? Human-style longer hair rather than bristly fur would imply there is some kind of grooming behaviour, which almost certainly implies a social animal. Unless the stench is down to them living in such low numbers in such isolated spots that they no longer engage in proper grooming... ideas?

Obviously a supernatural phenomena showing us creatures from long ago, or from times to come, or just a "thoughtform" to use the Farrar's term, an entity designed to keep you out of a certain area, is not subject to the same laws as others things. But that whole question may be a little bit beyond my current scope of inquiry.

He is certainly out there... but like any celebrity, is obscured by hordes of act-a-likes. I simply try to categorise one, from the other, so that he can get the press he deserves without being confounded with a few other possibilities..

Once again, thanks for the replies and PM's, and for all the great reads on here! I'll put a picture or two up in a moment... let me know if you think one of these fellas legging it thru the scrub in the half-light, seen by some drunken cocky would not pass for the Big Man himself, at least for the purposes of earning free beers at the local in exchange for your tale.

edit> distances

[cryptobotanica]

Some relevant images. Please do not reproduce for commercial use.Comments, questions welcome!