JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
The other day I heard the term, Display Bugle. Anybody ever hear that term before?
Display Bugle?
- Thread starter JohnFitzgerald
- Start date
That video on one of the recent threads?
Yep, a first for me, too.
I took it to mean a bugle used by a bull with a haram, and used mainly to corral the cows and advertise. (But I only watched the video once, and I may not have paid as close attention as I should have.)
Again, though, I think we\'re getting off into the weeds a little bit ... the intent of the bugle doesn\'t always correlate with the notes, and vice versa.
I can only identify bugles on the ends of the spectrum ... those that are \"contact\" or \"location\" bugles on one end have little emotion, and \"lip bawls\" and \"threat bugles\" have too much emotion.
If we put those on a spectrum, I can identify them ... but I\'ll be darned if I can identify the ones in the middle any better than I can gamble in Vegas.
(That is to say, the House always wins :lol: )
But otherwise -- in real-time, live hunting situations -- I\'m might as well be playing rock-paper-scissors with the bull as to interpret his noises. In fact with rock-paper-scissors, I\'d probably have a better chance of winning.
Yep, a first for me, too.
I took it to mean a bugle used by a bull with a haram, and used mainly to corral the cows and advertise. (But I only watched the video once, and I may not have paid as close attention as I should have.)
Again, though, I think we\'re getting off into the weeds a little bit ... the intent of the bugle doesn\'t always correlate with the notes, and vice versa.
I can only identify bugles on the ends of the spectrum ... those that are \"contact\" or \"location\" bugles on one end have little emotion, and \"lip bawls\" and \"threat bugles\" have too much emotion.
If we put those on a spectrum, I can identify them ... but I\'ll be darned if I can identify the ones in the middle any better than I can gamble in Vegas.
(That is to say, the House always wins :lol: )
But otherwise -- in real-time, live hunting situations -- I\'m might as well be playing rock-paper-scissors with the bull as to interpret his noises. In fact with rock-paper-scissors, I\'d probably have a better chance of winning.
I think you might be referring to a video posted by Brad. It was of Troy Niemann and he mentioned the display bugle.
Do you remember awhile back when we were talking about the nervous bark that others have called the nervous grunt or popping grunt? Well this Niemann fella calls it a show-me grunt. Just a different termination for the same sound. I think the same may go for what he is calling the display bugle. Simply his own terminology.
Now, I have no doubt that bulls do like to display in various ways to prove they are macho to the cows and also other bulls in the vacinity. But I\'ll bet if you have 10 different guys listening to bulls bugle off in the distance, there wouldn\'t be a single one of them that could pick out a display bugle from any other bugle. But I\'ll have to omit Elknut and TR Michales from the group of 10 because they are the self proclaimed elk language specialist. :haha: :haha:
Do you remember awhile back when we were talking about the nervous bark that others have called the nervous grunt or popping grunt? Well this Niemann fella calls it a show-me grunt. Just a different termination for the same sound. I think the same may go for what he is calling the display bugle. Simply his own terminology.
Now, I have no doubt that bulls do like to display in various ways to prove they are macho to the cows and also other bulls in the vacinity. But I\'ll bet if you have 10 different guys listening to bulls bugle off in the distance, there wouldn\'t be a single one of them that could pick out a display bugle from any other bugle. But I\'ll have to omit Elknut and TR Michales from the group of 10 because they are the self proclaimed elk language specialist. :haha: :haha:
\">>>---WW---->\" said:
WW, you make a good point. We sure do have a lot of names for a sound that was described in the 1982 book, ELK Of NORTH America Ecology And Management pg. 249 right column, paragraph 1 as \"the alarm bark\". That book was copyrighted well before many of these people ever heard an elk.
I believe some of the internet elk experts have way over sold their expertise, and put themselves on an elevated platform well above where they rightfully belong. Beware of anyone that professes to know it all, or to even completely understand every elk vocalization.
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
I think some out there hear a bugle and force the meaning to fit the situation. And at times read into the situation more than needs be. Example, a bull bugles while wrangling his cows tighter. So instead if saying the bull was giving a Display Bugle while wrangling, they develop a new title and call it the Wrangling Bugle. Confusing......yep!
I think most bugles we hear are of the displaying type. Although I wouldn\'t necessarily call it a Display Bugle. What does everyone else call it? Advertising Bugle?
I think most bugles we hear are of the displaying type. Although I wouldn\'t necessarily call it a Display Bugle. What does everyone else call it? Advertising Bugle?
Well, here we go again.
We all (including me) want to name vocalizations.
Why?
Of course, it\'s because we want to use what we hear to predict what will happen, and how we can manipulate it to our ends.
In so doing, though ... in giving \"names\" to vocalizations ... we attach a \"permanence\" to the sound that is not really there.
I know some have used \"names\" of vocalizations to teach the various sounds ... some folks have made some money that way. I, for one, have contributed to a couple of those guys\' \"fortunes\" ... and I think in their way, they have helped me.
Sure, when we name vocalizations with \"permanence\" it makes us sound a little smarter than we really are. In the mountains, there is not \"a\" location bugle, but many different ones. Likewise, there isn\'t a just \"a\" bugle that a bull uses to tell a raghorn to hit the road, but many different ones.
But when you and I are in the woods and you say \"That sounded like a tending bugle\" -- even though I\'ve never heard that term before, at least I understand what you are thinking. Of course, part of me knows you are just guessing, but it\'s still useful. What else do we have to communicate?
We all (including me) want to name vocalizations.
Why?
Of course, it\'s because we want to use what we hear to predict what will happen, and how we can manipulate it to our ends.
In so doing, though ... in giving \"names\" to vocalizations ... we attach a \"permanence\" to the sound that is not really there.
I know some have used \"names\" of vocalizations to teach the various sounds ... some folks have made some money that way. I, for one, have contributed to a couple of those guys\' \"fortunes\" ... and I think in their way, they have helped me.
Sure, when we name vocalizations with \"permanence\" it makes us sound a little smarter than we really are. In the mountains, there is not \"a\" location bugle, but many different ones. Likewise, there isn\'t a just \"a\" bugle that a bull uses to tell a raghorn to hit the road, but many different ones.
But when you and I are in the woods and you say \"That sounded like a tending bugle\" -- even though I\'ve never heard that term before, at least I understand what you are thinking. Of course, part of me knows you are just guessing, but it\'s still useful. What else do we have to communicate?
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
I agree Tick but naming sounds is a necessary evil if you\'re a \"caller\". Naming a bugle based on a perceived assumption is what guides people in the wrong direction. That type of branding is an evil we can do without.
JF ... yes, I agree, a necessary evil.
In fact, I think the \"evil\" part is overblown ... you just have to take people with a grain of salt when they talk about vocalizations they\'ve named.
There have been some high-profile figures out there who have made some money by explaining their elk vocalization nomenclature ... and they\'ve taken some criticism here and elsewhere for perhaps acting a bit more \"authoritative\" than they should have.
But I\'ll say this: I\'ve learned from them. Oh, that\'s not to say that I have been \"drinking their Kool-Aid\" or that I say \"Amen\" or \"Preach it, Brother\" after every word they\'ve said. No, I\'m afraid they\'d be disappointed to hear that I think at times they are like the Wizard of Oz hiding behind a thin curtain.
But I think it\'s useful to hear their interpretations, and have them explain how they think vocalizations should be classified and cataloged. (I also think it\'s perfectly fine for them to charge money, but that\'s a political discussion more fit for the \"Off Topic\" forum.)
So ... let\'s say that each of us has our own Elk Vocalization Classification System (EVCS) ... sometimes when I\'m in the woods, everything seems to \"fit\" in MY system just fine. But sometimes, an elk does or says something that doesn\'t \"fit\" into MY EVCS. If I know a little more about how YOU classify elk sounds, I might have the thought that \"Maybe this is what JF was talking about ...\" and -- Eureka! -- my EVCS just got a little better.
Let\'s use an analogy. Quarterbacking. If you wanted to learn to be a quarterback, you could pay to go to a camp, and you could befriend some experienced quarterbacks, and you\'d hear all kinds of interpretations on how to attack a defense. \"When they do X, you do Y\" ... that kind of thing. How is that not the same as what we do with elk? The thing is, elk hunting, like football, is never as simple as following that kind of advice, but we can\'t help but seek it out. And we can\'t help but frame our advice to others like that, too.
In fact, I think the \"evil\" part is overblown ... you just have to take people with a grain of salt when they talk about vocalizations they\'ve named.
There have been some high-profile figures out there who have made some money by explaining their elk vocalization nomenclature ... and they\'ve taken some criticism here and elsewhere for perhaps acting a bit more \"authoritative\" than they should have.
But I\'ll say this: I\'ve learned from them. Oh, that\'s not to say that I have been \"drinking their Kool-Aid\" or that I say \"Amen\" or \"Preach it, Brother\" after every word they\'ve said. No, I\'m afraid they\'d be disappointed to hear that I think at times they are like the Wizard of Oz hiding behind a thin curtain.
But I think it\'s useful to hear their interpretations, and have them explain how they think vocalizations should be classified and cataloged. (I also think it\'s perfectly fine for them to charge money, but that\'s a political discussion more fit for the \"Off Topic\" forum.)
So ... let\'s say that each of us has our own Elk Vocalization Classification System (EVCS) ... sometimes when I\'m in the woods, everything seems to \"fit\" in MY system just fine. But sometimes, an elk does or says something that doesn\'t \"fit\" into MY EVCS. If I know a little more about how YOU classify elk sounds, I might have the thought that \"Maybe this is what JF was talking about ...\" and -- Eureka! -- my EVCS just got a little better.
Let\'s use an analogy. Quarterbacking. If you wanted to learn to be a quarterback, you could pay to go to a camp, and you could befriend some experienced quarterbacks, and you\'d hear all kinds of interpretations on how to attack a defense. \"When they do X, you do Y\" ... that kind of thing. How is that not the same as what we do with elk? The thing is, elk hunting, like football, is never as simple as following that kind of advice, but we can\'t help but seek it out. And we can\'t help but frame our advice to others like that, too.
Deertick
Another good analogy with the football aspect.
I will take it a step further.
Reading a bugling bull elk for a hunter is like reading a defense to quarterback.
One play they do it this way, the next play they do it different.
Same with elk. One day you can be in a bugling frenzy and the bulls will resond and come to to your bugles.
The next day, mums the word.
If it was the same day after day in the elk woods, don\'t you think it would be a whole lot easier?
Another good analogy with the football aspect.
I will take it a step further.
Reading a bugling bull elk for a hunter is like reading a defense to quarterback.
One play they do it this way, the next play they do it different.
Same with elk. One day you can be in a bugling frenzy and the bulls will resond and come to to your bugles.
The next day, mums the word.
If it was the same day after day in the elk woods, don\'t you think it would be a whole lot easier?
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
It\'s an evil because so many apply different names to the same sound.
I too have learned from commercialized products. But like you I have pull back the curtain and seen the Wizard is just a regular man.
The hard part about commercialization is if one publishes something that is incorrect, one can never publicly announce the mistake.
I too have learned from commercialized products. But like you I have pull back the curtain and seen the Wizard is just a regular man.
The hard part about commercialization is if one publishes something that is incorrect, one can never publicly announce the mistake.
I\'ll take it even one step further ...
A QB might say \"I remember when we played them last year\" and call his audibles at the line with those assumptions.
But this is college ball ... and last year\'s team graduated, and there is a whole new defensive crew on the other side of the line. Same game -- different players.
Last year\'s game might have been at the beginning of the season, while this year\'s game might be after the defense has been \"seasoned\" with experience from other teams, and they might be on to your tactics.
But ... that shouldn\'t stop us from trying to understand them, and trying to put some \"method\" to their \"madness\" ... the challenge is doing it within the confines of four quarters of football.
A QB might say \"I remember when we played them last year\" and call his audibles at the line with those assumptions.
But this is college ball ... and last year\'s team graduated, and there is a whole new defensive crew on the other side of the line. Same game -- different players.
Last year\'s game might have been at the beginning of the season, while this year\'s game might be after the defense has been \"seasoned\" with experience from other teams, and they might be on to your tactics.
But ... that shouldn\'t stop us from trying to understand them, and trying to put some \"method\" to their \"madness\" ... the challenge is doing it within the confines of four quarters of football.
\"JohnFitzgerald\" said:The hard part about commercialization is if one publishes something that is incorrect, one can never publicly announce the mistake.
Well, I guess I view things differently. In Medicine, we publish things all the time that we believe are true only to find in a year or two or three that they are false.
So, a lifesaving operation or drug in 2005 is found to be too dangerous to consider in 2010. This confuses people, but only if they think of the authors as infallible. I\'ve come to learn that the authors of those papers are not infallible. Most are good-intentioned, and some are warped by a drive to make money or create empires. But it doesn\'t matter ... all papers need to be read with a \"grain of salt\" and ADDED TO what we already know, not SUBSTITUTED FOR what we already know.
It\'s the ability to see things in the perspective of CUMMULITATIVE KNOWLEDGE, not revelation from on-high, that advances our understanding.
When an expert suggests a new concept that is a paradigm-shift and it erases what we have spent years working on, he has a pretty high burden of proof in my book. But when he is saying \"This is how I understand things, and here\'s a bit of evidence as to why I think this way\", I can add that to my understanding.
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
So, let\'s use our football analogy. If \'we\' quarterbacks must learn and read the defense, why do so many say it\'s not important to understand what the defensive\'s intent is? I\'ve repeatedly heard on here that it doesn\'t matter what the bulls intent is by his vocalizations. That\'s like say it doesn\'t matter if the defense is covering deep or blitzing!
I just thought of an example and it happens to use two \"commercialized\" concepts of elk vocalizations.
Years ago, I heard Paul Medel use the term \"Location Bugle\". He might not have been the first to use it, but it was the first time I had heard about that. And I put that concept into my vocabulary.
Then, years later, I heard Chris Roe use the term \"Contact Bugle\" ... referring to basically the same noise.
But that change in name added a bit to how I understood the elk behavior going on here. I personally prefer the term \"Contact Bugle\" but I\'m working on my own term now: \"Ping\". You know, like a computer hacker might use.
Anyway, another hunter might say that \"Location Bugle\" and \"Contact Bugle\" make sense, but, they might know more about computer hacking than I do and think \"Ping\" is crazy. It doesn\'t matter. Each step along the way we get a little better idea of what we are hearing and what we are saying -- even with the crazy ideas thrown out from time to time. And even with the commercialized ones.
So ... what do you think? Ping? I like the sound of it.
Years ago, I heard Paul Medel use the term \"Location Bugle\". He might not have been the first to use it, but it was the first time I had heard about that. And I put that concept into my vocabulary.
Then, years later, I heard Chris Roe use the term \"Contact Bugle\" ... referring to basically the same noise.
But that change in name added a bit to how I understood the elk behavior going on here. I personally prefer the term \"Contact Bugle\" but I\'m working on my own term now: \"Ping\". You know, like a computer hacker might use.
Anyway, another hunter might say that \"Location Bugle\" and \"Contact Bugle\" make sense, but, they might know more about computer hacking than I do and think \"Ping\" is crazy. It doesn\'t matter. Each step along the way we get a little better idea of what we are hearing and what we are saying -- even with the crazy ideas thrown out from time to time. And even with the commercialized ones.
So ... what do you think? Ping? I like the sound of it.
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
\"Deertick\" said:\"JohnFitzgerald\" said:The hard part about commercialization is if one publishes something that is incorrect, one can never publicly announce the mistake.
Well, I guess I view things differently. In Medicine, we publish things all the time that we believe are true only to find in a year or two or three that they are false.
So, a lifesaving operation or drug in 2005 is found to be too dangerous to consider in 2010. This confuses people, but only if they think of the authors as infallible. I\'ve come to learn that the authors of those papers are not infallible. Most are good-intentioned, and some are warped by a drive to make money or create empires. But it doesn\'t matter ... all papers need to be read with a \"grain of salt\" and ADDED TO what we already know, not SUBSTITUTED FOR what we already know.
It\'s the ability to see things in the perspective of CUMMULITATIVE KNOWLEDGE, not revelation from on-high, that advances our understanding.
When an expert suggests a new concept that is a paradigm-shift and it erases what we have spent years working on, he has a pretty high burden of proof in my book. But when he is saying \"This is how I understand things, and here\'s a bit of evidence as to why I think this way\", I can add that to my understanding.
Yep, and that\'s exactly why the only thing I preach is that hunters need \'think\' for themselves and think outside the box. Talking about it as a community is my true intent. When I tried this elsewhere, I was seen as denouncing the gospels and I officially quote \'hated\'.
JohnFitzgerald
New member
- Mar 31, 2014
- 1,108
\"Deertick\" said:
:lol: :lol: I\'m a Technology Specialist in my day job and I use that term daily. But, I\'m not a hacker but do work to keep them out.
. Completely understand your point about different names for the same bugle. It really is a opportunity to understand the bugle better. And the term \'Ping\' really does define the intent of the bugle.
But we must be careful not to over label. It\'s not a Wrangling Bugle just because he used it while herding his cows. It\'s an Advertising Bugle used while herding his cows.
Very interesting discussion. What I think I can take from it is, that we can learn from the \"experts\", but be careful not to get to dogmatic about what they preach. It may not be true, or the preacher may just be a cult leader, only building a congregation of worshippers to increase his followers. Many, I think have significant skills and knowledge. Just don\'t let their sermons replace what you learned through experience.
Come to think of it, not letting someone\'s sermons replace your experience should apply to the book about tree stand hunting elk. In fact, I appreciate Brad and others who will argue with me on the points I have tried to preach. If I ever get down to Colorado I would enjoy very much going out with him and seeing his tree stand locations and further discussing why he does things differently. I know John Fitzgerald\'s hunting area is different than mine. I will need to expand on my experience if I hunt anywhere around that area. Maybe that is just how we need to approach what we take from the gurus.
Come to think of it, not letting someone\'s sermons replace your experience should apply to the book about tree stand hunting elk. In fact, I appreciate Brad and others who will argue with me on the points I have tried to preach. If I ever get down to Colorado I would enjoy very much going out with him and seeing his tree stand locations and further discussing why he does things differently. I know John Fitzgerald\'s hunting area is different than mine. I will need to expand on my experience if I hunt anywhere around that area. Maybe that is just how we need to approach what we take from the gurus.
elkmtngear
New member
- Aug 9, 2017
- 1,152
It\'s taken me many years of elk hunting, but I can honestly say I feel I can react accordingly in most vocal situations with a bugling bull.
I took 4 years of German in High School. I was considered \"fluent\". Until I lived there for a year, and found out I really didn\'t respond accordingly in many situations. I had to live among those that spoke the language to become truly fluent.
Point is, you can classify sounds and study all you want...but, until you actually get out into the elk woods and experience the frenzy that is the rut, you are just making guesses.
Learn all you can every Season...tuck those encounters away in your memory banks, and re-play them in your head over and over. Think about what happened, and what could have happened \"if\".
On the other side of the coin, the advent of You Tube has greatly increased the learning curve. You have the opportunity now to review literally hundreds of elk encounters, and to assess what went right and/or wrong, and what the motivation seemed to be for both bull and hunter! :upthumb:
I took 4 years of German in High School. I was considered \"fluent\". Until I lived there for a year, and found out I really didn\'t respond accordingly in many situations. I had to live among those that spoke the language to become truly fluent.
Point is, you can classify sounds and study all you want...but, until you actually get out into the elk woods and experience the frenzy that is the rut, you are just making guesses.
Learn all you can every Season...tuck those encounters away in your memory banks, and re-play them in your head over and over. Think about what happened, and what could have happened \"if\".
On the other side of the coin, the advent of You Tube has greatly increased the learning curve. You have the opportunity now to review literally hundreds of elk encounters, and to assess what went right and/or wrong, and what the motivation seemed to be for both bull and hunter! :upthumb:
