Memo from SIRU Director Krohn to all field operatives:
Cadborosaurus
Most cryptids remain undiscovered due to a critically small population size, being active at times that humans are not, inhabiting remote areas, and being wary of a human presence. Because of this most sightings are accidental and brief, causing many of the observations to be tainted by fear and misinterpretation. Despite these issues, eye-witness testimony remains the best evidence we have of many cryptids and should not be rejected as many have suggested, but rather as an investigator you will need to learn how to listen and properly interpret what the witness is telling you.
Firstly, when reconstructing the event, do not be swayed by adjectives. The witness will use loaded words that are appropriate from the witness’ point of view, indicating his or her interpretation of the event. For example, a person who feels fearful during their experience may interpret a cryptid’s vocalizations as menacing or posture as aggressive, when in fact the animal is simply alarmed by the unexpected arrival of a human. This obvious discrepancy between reality and perception, if not properly recognized by the agent, may taint future expeditions. The duty of the SIRU investigator is to try to reconstruct the event and place it within the context of the behavior of other known animals.
Secondly, while reconstructing the event you would do well to note the nature of the encounter, the duration, and the disposition of the witness. For example, a city dweller who stumbles across a North American bipedal ape rummaging through his/her garbage late one night is more likely to have a brief, seemingly aggressive encounter. A hunter, however, usually encounters a cryptid in their natural habitat and often goes unnoticed by the animal. Due to the longer duration of the encounters and the less hostile setting, the witness will tend to be more accurate in his/her observations.
Many witnesses will try to relate their observations to you through drawings, and the primary mistake that most investigators make is in assuming the witness has the skill and training to accurately represent what they have seen. Art is one of mankind’s oldest forms of communication. It is a language that is full of hyperbole, interpretation, and anthropromorphization. Above is a drawing collected by our investigators with the corresponding image that we have generated. If you look at the drawing of the Cadborosaurus, the humps are overly undulated, while the face and “mane” are exaggerated. This does not invalidate the image; in fact these exaggerations are clues for your investigation. The witness is trying to describe motion with a flat image; over exaggerating the undulation is the most common way the serpentine motion is represented. Also, the viewer is trying to convey the concept of the “mane” by drawing a stereotypical horse’s mane. This is akin to quoting a line from a movie or Shakespeare, the quote has larger meaning due to its original context. In the same way, the witness is attempting to convey a larger concept on the look and movement of the “mane” by visually “quoting” a horse.
In conclusion, eye-witness testimony is crucial to understanding these animals, classifying these animals, and finding these animals. However, eye-witness testimony must be properly interpreted to be useful. My suggestion is to spend your free time looking at Egyptian hieroglyphics, primitive art from various cultures, and comics produced by Jack Kirby in the late sixties and early seventies to better understand how humans “read” images on a primal level.
