Search at Loch Ness
The Expedition of the New York Times and the Academy of Applied Science
Author: Dennis L. Meredith
Credentials: Journalist, author
Copyright: 1977
Publisher: New York Times Book Library
Overview
'Search at Loch Ness' by Dennis Meredith chronicles the 1977 Robert Rines expedition to Loch Ness, funded in part by the New York Times.
Summary
Dennis Meredith has written a good book on a typical 'Rines Expedition'. It explains in great detail the problems associated with the technology used, the creative ways that the expedition overcame or bypassed these obstacles, and the various other aspects that one would expect from a high profile monster hunting endeavor (press, interpersonal conflict, etc…). I recommend this book to anyone with an interest in lake cryptids, Nessie, or the Robert Rines expeditions and the associated evidence gathered.
Introduction
This book report started out as a simple critique of the book and evolved to include an exploration of the marine reptile that figures so prominently in the Robert Rines data. This book presents a convincing case for the survival of the large marine reptile known in the media and in basic discussions on dinosaurs as the plesiosaur. This term from a scientific standpoint is somewhat misleading, and I felt the need to examine and present the 'true' definitions that are commonly accepted by paleontological research at this time.
Assumptions, and, Just What is a Plesiosaur, Anyway?
Considering the subject matter and my personal opinions, I feel it necessary to qualify this term. In this review I will repeatedly use the word plesiosaur. The basic explanation is that plesiosaur is actually a huge group including ALL big marine reptiles with four flippers from the Mesozoic Era, which spanned from 295 to 65 million years ago. Within this huge grouping, we have two Super Classes, the Pliosauroidea and the Plesiosauroidea. The 'pliosaurs' as they are informally known, were the big headed alligator looking ones and were all members of the Super Class Pliosauroidea. Here is the Kronosaur, a pliosaur some 50 feet long and so horrific and frightening to behold that a Hollywood special effects team would be hard-pressed to make a monster more terrifying:
Kronosaurus eating a smaller mosasaur.
Scary? Yes. Is it the Loch Ness Monster? Almost certainly not. It has a huge head and a short neck, directly opposite of the Loch Ness Monster in every detailed sighting ever given.
So what are Loch Ness Monster characteristics? Here is my take:
Long neck. But not extremely long. Rather short and stocky as long necks in marine reptiles go, actually.
Oval, wide body. As viewed from above. From straight on this body can appear triangular at times.
Four flippers. At least two of which are almost certainly the diamond shaped flipper in the famous 1972 Robert Rines photographs.
Small head. The head is almost always described as 'small in relation to the rest of the body'. Note, however, that the head in the 1975 Rines photograph appears long and reptillian. This may either indicate sexual dimorphism, a marked difference between very young and very old animals, or, as I suspect, errors in the image enhancement process and our own interpretations of the photographs.
To go through this review stating the most probable member of the Super Class Plesiosauroidea would not win any votes for prose, even if technically accurate based on my beliefs. Therefore (my this was a long-winded assumption paragraph!) I will use the word 'Plesiosaur'. What I mean is, a marine reptile that has evolved from some genus in the Super Family Plesiosauroidea.
So, in summation, when you say 'Plesiosaur' you are not being specific enough. You must either make the bold leap of declaring the specific Genus ( 'it's a Plesiosaurus!') or you state the Family ( 'it's a member of the Elasmosauroidae Family, of which the Elasmosaurus is a member). I believe the closest we can come right now is the Super Family, although I currently have a specific Genus finalist in mind.
Well, now that I've bored you completely to death, let's move on with this review, shall we? (A little wiser on one of Gavin's pet peeves).
Just what is Nessie, Anyway?
One of the great mysteries of the 20th century has to do with the identity of a strange animal splashing around in a cold Scottish lake. Life is funny, eh?
Over the years, millions of dollars and a parade of monster hunters, from complete laymen to distinguished university professors, have slapped on the thinking cap and a good pair of galoshes and tried to come up with an answer to this Sphinx like riddle. I would never presume to jump to the top of my soapbox and loudly proclaim 'I HAVE THE ANSWER! YOU MAY ALL GO HOME, AND REST IN PEACE NOW!!!'. The author of this book makes the very good point that each cryptozoologist seems to have his pet id for Nessie, and will fight tooth and nail to protect it. I am no different, but I recognize this, and when I am presented with conflicting data, I must remind myself to step back, take a breath, and drop the golden finalist back into the probables box.
The main contenders for positive id of the LNM currently, in my personal opinion of most votes, i.e., most people believing this is the culprit, are:
Plesiosaur. Again, more accurately, 'one of those marine reptile things with long necks and flippers that are supposed to be extinct'. This was one of the first id's for Nessie and still one of the most believed. Why? Skeptics may argue it's because people have a natural love of dinosaurs (THEY ARE NOT DINOSAURS!!!). I would contend, it's because it is, based on the current credible available evidence, the strongest contender and most probably the correct identity). The strongest case against the plesiosaur is that they were reptiles, and as we all know from our biology classes, reptiles don't like the cold. Loch Ness is cold, so how could a reptile live there?
In truth, we cannot derive possible environmental thresholds for animals that we last have a record for some 65 million years ago. There has also been a huge debate as to whether ancient reptiles, including the dinosaurs, were hot or cold blooded. If anyone has seen 'Jurassic Park' and thought those dinosaurs were the most realistic interpretations yet done, then you are squarely in the 'dinosaurs were warm-blooded' camp. All of the dinsaurs modelled in that movie were based on a warm-blooded model, which is currently on the winning side of the big debate. There is no evidence that marine reptiles were cold-blooded, and some evidence that they were
Amphibian. This explanation is for those who cannot fathom how a population of large animals can live in a lake and not be spotted more often. The amphibian theory nicely handles this, it never has to surface for it can breathe directly from the water. Amphibians also go through distinct changes in appearance while they mature, so the (in my opinion)
Some sort of giant amphibian thing. (This most closely matches the environment and lack of sightings, but does not address the problem of, we have no such animal in the fossil record, so we have a completely new creature. This is not as outlandish as one might think. We found a brand-new shark of Hawaii, didn't we?)
Giant Eel (This belief is currently 'in vogue' and is championed by people such as Dan Scott Taylor, the sub guy).
Zeuglodon (Primitive Whale. Dr. Roy Mackal's favorite).
Long-necked, or Grey Seal. (Long-necked giant seals are in vogue too right now, for some reason).
It's all a big Hoax (Championed by the recent revelation of the Surgeon's Photo being a hoax).
A Giant Worm (Or 'Orm' as the Scots like to say. This was F.W. Holiday's guess).
I will not go into detail as to why each of the other choices is not as valid in my opinion as the plesiosaur. That would be the subject of an entire document in itself. Suffice to say that this book (among many others) presents a strong case for the identity of Nessie as being that of a plesiosaur. Now back to the book and the main topics covered.
Main Topics
Below are the main topics of this book as I see them. The main topics I discuss here may be different from the main topics as presented in the book, but I am attempting to show my own personal opinion of what I think stands out in this book, making this book unique from other books on this subject, that qualifies it as a main topic.
The 'Body Shot' and the 'Gargoyle Head' Shot
Perhaps the most intriguing of all the famous underwater photos, and my personal favorite, is the photograph that appears to show the torso, fins, long neck, and dragon-like head of a large marine animal. This shot occurred at 4:32am on the morning of June 20th, 1975. The photograph was taken by the dependable 'Old Faithful' camera, in 70 feet of water. The camera was 40 feet below the boat, and the bottom was 30 feet away. It is important to note that at no time was the bottom ever visible, and shots that captured the boat's underside were only possible because of the light from above silhouetting the hull against an early morning sky. What a lot of people fail to realize, is that the shot is part of a series of connected events, that, taken together, can only mean one thing: A large unknown animal was swimming around in the loch that night and morning, interacting with the camera and associated rig, and was at several points partially captured on film. There are a couple of wildly implausible other scenarios too (basically, hoaxers or a submerged log floating around) but I am so firmly convinced that they would have been practically impossible that I refuse to even discuss them further. The events match exactly the kind of events one expects when attempting to film large, aggressive marine animals (watch any good National Geographic special on filming the Great White Shark in the wild for a perfect example of what I mean) in their natural environment.
The more controversial but almost equally famous 'Gargoyle Head' shot also occurred during this sequence of events. I have stared at this photo over and over, and I have to really stretch my brain to make any sense at all of this. If it is (as Robert Rines believes) a picture of the face of the animal, it seems a completely different animal than the head shown in the 'body shot' photo. As to what other part of the animal this may be, I have no idea, I draw a blank there, too.
The events are described below:9:45pm, June 19. Camera captures a picture of rough side of 'something' that is very close and appears to be a rough hide with possibly hairs on it.
~10:45pm, June 19. Another section of what appears to be 'skin' is captured on film.
4:32am, June 20. The famous 'Body Shot'. A single frame captures what appears to be a large marine animal approaching the camera and surprised by the strobe flash. The animal appears to have an oval torso, what appear to be two stumpy legs or fins, and a long stocky neck. What is most surprising is revealed in close study of the head. It is almost literally like a classic medieval dragon straight out of a children's story book! (personal opinion).
Almost immediately, the cameras are 'attacked', in that they are 'struck' so violently that the camera view moves upward approx. 90 degrees, (and consequently the entire metal frame assembly attached to that camera, including the strobe and cabling). This is confirmed by the next picture taken by the camera, which is of the underside of the boat above it! I do not know the exact weight of the entire camera frame assembly, but suffice to say it is several hundred pounds, and could not be moved other than a slight swaying motion, by any type of current short of a 'class 5' white water rapid.
5:40am June 20. A second 'attack' is carried out, with a corresponding photograph of the underside of the boat.
~12 noon, June 20. A third 'attack' is conducted, this the most severe, with several pictures showing the surface and the boat underside. It is in this attack that the famous 'gargoyle head' shot occurs, perhaps the most controversial of the pictures.
Shortly after this (the event went undetected by the expedition until the film was later developed). The camera rig was brought up from the water so that film could be changed by expedition members, so no further activity was recorded.
The 'Flipper' Shot
The famous 'flipper' shot is synonymous with the Rines expeditions, and the diamond shape is unmistakable and recognized by cryptozoologists and interested parties worldwide. Perhaps not so well known is the fact that the flipper is observed in two different positions in two sequential photographs, i.e., it moves. There has been debate on this fin that ranges from 'it matches no known fossil animal' to 'it matches exactly one species of plesiosaur'. My personal opinion is that it is a strong piece of evidence pointing squarely at a marine reptile of some kind. The implications of this one photo are staggering. This fin matches no known living animal that I am aware of, yet matches quite closely the fin of animals we have been digging up in fossil beds for years. You do the math.
The Flipper shot occurred on August 9th, 1972, at ~1:45am. Here is the sequence of events on that night:A large sonar contact is detected by the team, who are this time out in the boat doing a night watch over the camera.
Minutes later, salmon are spotted leaping out of the water, as if attempting to evade a predator below (expedition speculation, but good speculation none the less).
The salmon are detected on the sonar as much smaller contacts from the first, clearly identifying there is a big animal below them swimming around.
The large target appears again on the sonar.
The two 'flipper' shots are taken. After photographic enhancement to sharpen the image by increasing the contrasts, a large (estimated as six feet long) flipper is identified. It is in two different positions between the two photographs. (The camera didn't move, so…)
So, what has a diamond shaped fin? You would be hard pressed to find such an animal today. Most whales have oval paddle shaped fins, and sharks usually have triangle shaped fins.
This guy has them, though.
This is Cryptoclidius, a plesiosaur found in the fossil record near Loch Ness. He has a short stocky neck, but what is most important are the fins. We can assume that in life, with muscle and skin stretched over those long finger bones, they would go straight out in line with the general line of the arm. Super-impose some skin over that, and we have:
The fore-flippers bear a remarkable resemblance to the ones in the Robert Rines
photograph. So that's my guess of the month. The name is interesting. It actually means
'hidden clavicle', but what a strange and exciting twist of fate if the LNM should turn out
to be an animal with CRYPTO in it's name!
The Gig of the Century
It was early December, the 10th to be exact, 1975. Flushed with success and four remarkable pictures ( body, gargoyle, and a pair of flippers ), the 'Rines Crew' were ready for a public announcement. Working with David James, a respected war hero, Member of Parliament, and supporter of research at Loch Ness, they scored the big gig. A full presentation before the House of Commons, in the Palace of Westminister.
The first to rise and speak was Sir Peter Scott. A respected naturalist and artist, he presented the scientific name for Nessie:
Nessiteras rhombopteryx
"Ness wonder with the diamond shaped fin"
Sir Peter would go on to produce the finest artistic impression of Nessie ever done. I firmly believe that when the real animal is discovered, Sir Peter's painting will be judged as not too far off.
Each of the Expedition members had their chance to present the evidence from their perspective and specialty:
Robert Rines
Presented the photographs, explaining the history of Nessie and the attempts to prove her. The Tim Dinsdale film was shown. Various sightings were explained, with some actual witnesses present to re-tell their version. Perhaps the most 'chilling' was the account of the R.H. Lowrie 1960 sighting. Mr. Lowrie recounted how he was sailing with his family to the locks of the Caledonian Canal near Fort Augustus, when they observed a large animal overtaking their yatch from astern. The animal passed them, then turned around and they narrowly avoided a collision. They were clearly able to observe the animal's body below the water at certain times, and described the large fins that it used to paddle with, besides the large oval body and long neck with small head reported so often by other witnesses. The chilling part of the account was what happened next, however, when they finally reached the lock. They were immediately approached by the lock staff:
"When we got into the canal lock, someone very kindly came along and said, 'We have seen you seeing what is known as the Loch Ness Monster. If you'll take my advice you'll forget about it'. And we did, and if it hadn't been for the fact that Sir Peter Scott happened to know and ran the trace because of the number on our sail, we still never would have been found out." - R.H. Lowrie, testifying before the House of Commons, December 10th, 1975.
Say what? Pardon my alarm at this statement, but I feel it speaks volumes of the LNM mystery and the problems associated with proving it. Let us examine each part of this report, from the standpoint that yes, the captain and crew of this ship did indeed see the Loch Ness Monster.
An entire family watches a large animal swimming around their boat, an animal that appears to have just materialized from the late Cretaceous. They are then approached by an official, and told to keep quiet.
Who was this official? Was he acting alone? Was he just offering good advice to perhaps avoid the obviously well off gentleman some ridicule in the local press?
Or is there an active program at the loch designed to discourage sightings and keep the mystery of the LNM alive? We may never know, and this story may be one of the few tangible clues we may ever have that something strange is going on at Loch Ness, and it isn't just a plesiosaur swimming around…
Conspiracy Theory tangent now comes to an end, you can all breathe a sign of relief.
Now, this gentleman takes this advice! This is the most amazing part of the story. I am afraid that he is just a typical member of the general public. Most do not want their picture in the paper. Someone might make fun of them! And hey, it's just an animal, right? Who cares that it was supposed to be dead 65 million years ago. That is the typical opinion of a typical witness, in my opinion. Most sightings are not even reported. The clearest lake cryptid photograph in history, the one taken by Sandra Mansi of the Lake Champlain monster, was only revealed to the world after a friend spied it in a family album !!!
Unbelievable! It makes the dedicated monster hunters want to cry into their hands and retire with a bottle of scotch. Shame on them. Shame on those who observe the incredible, who see the mystery revealed, and say nothing. Shame.
'Doc' Edgerton
I appreciate that this man has a nifty nickname that everyone refers to him by, but to not mention his first name ONCE in this entire book was a bit annoying. I hunted high and low for it, without success. He is also known as 'Papa Flash' by the crew of the Calypso, after helping them out with underwater photography.
Doc is the brainchild (or is that brain grampa?) of the photographic technology deployed by the Rines expeditions. He is the inventor of the strobe light. He is a miracle worker, and a highly respected scientist who worked out of M.I.T. from the 50's to the 70's. If you have ever seen those famous photographs of the splash of milk forming a crown, or the bullet turning an apple into mist, he is the guy behind those photographs. His technology made it possible. Doc got up and explained his technology to the House, even taking their picture with a strobe flash.
Martin Kein
Martin was the sonar man on the expedition. He explained to the crowd how sonar works, and how his readouts positively identified a large animal in the loch. He was the brilliance behind setting up a static sonar observation post. He did this for one reason only - this would allow him to prove the contacts were moving rapidly past, i.e., they were swimming, they were alive, they were animals. He did just that.
Charlie Wyckoff
Charlie was another camera expert who was invaluable to maintaining the complex system of lights and cameras and gizmos and whatcha-ma-callits the expedition relied on daily. He would go on to recover cameras from the loch bottom and build new working ones.
George Zug
Mr. Zug was a zoologist and supporter of the theory that something big and alive was in Loch Ness. He stood before the House and announced:
"I believe these data indicate the presence of large animals in Loch Ness but are insufficient to identify them. This new evidence on the existence of a population of large animals in Loch Ness should serve to encourage research on the natural history of Loch Ness and its plant and animal inhabitants, and remove the stigma of 'crackpot' from any scientist or group of scientists who wish to investigate the biological and limnological phenomena of Loch Ness".
It was a rallying cry to the scientific community that fell on deaf ears. His challenge would go unanswered, and he would be labeled a crackpot like all the others.
Additional Supporters
Christopher McGowan
Christopher McGowan was associate curator of Vertebrate Paleontology at the Canadian Royal Ontario Museum. He would go on to attempt to locate the bones of dead Nessies on the 1976 expedition, obtaining some tantalizing sonar images, some of which would not be investigated.
Roy Mackal
Roy Mackal was from the University of Chicago and a firm believer in the LNM. He maintains to this day that the animal is a Zeuglodon, a primitive type of whale.
A.W. Crompton
A Harvard zoologist and supporter of Nessie.
Alexander Campbell
Perhaps the most convincing testimony at the presentation was given by Alexander Campbell, the Loch water bailiff, responsible for salmon protection. His account is repeated below:
"I saw it about 100 yards beyond a red pole and near the [Fort Augustus] Abbey boathouse. This thing caught my attention early in the morning, bright sunny morning, flat calm. It had a long neck, like a serpentine neck, huge humped body, and a small head, and it seemed to be very timid and it kept turning its head this way and that. Well, it was swimming on the surface for several minutes, I should think, and I estimated the length at anything up to 30 feet from one end of the hump to the other; and the length of the neck above water level, I should say, was fully six feet."
British Loch Ness Investigation Bureau
A volunteer organization that conducted a 10 year effort from 1961 to 1971 to record the animals on film by using camera stations positioned around the shore. They were unable to capture any convincing evidence. There were some reports that the volunteer college students were less than enthusiastic about their job after a few hours on duty, and there were reports of catching them sleeping and engaged in other pursuits not conductive to good observation.
Torquil Macleod
Much of the dedicated observation in the early years of the mystery was done by this
man, who was present at the time of the R.H. Lowrie sighting and confirmed it out in
Dores Bay off Tor point. Sadly, he died soon after from a rare blood disorder.
Tim Dinsdale
As equally famous as Robert Rines in the Loch Ness mystery is the name Dinsdale, a dedicated monster hunter who has maintained a presence at the loch for some 40 years. In 1960 he captured on film something out on the loch moving away from him. By a typical cruel twist of fate, any number of factors could have combined that day to have solved the mystery immediately, such as the animal being closer and swimming towards him, or of him having a slightly better long distance movie camera. Even with the shortcomings of this film, it was analyzed by the JARIC (Joint Air Reconnaissance Intelligence Center) a military organization that spends their time studying pictures and film for intelligence purposes. They concluded that the object was not a boat or a submarine, and was probably alive. Again, this would fall on deaf ears and the world would take little notice that by this analysis, JARIC had all but declared the LNM as real.
The Loonie down by the Lake
Frank Searle has lived near Foyers in his tiny blue shack by the lake for years. He holds the largest collection of fake Nessie photographs ever assembled. Sadly for poor old Frank, he probably has really seen the animal for real on several occasions, but like the boy who cried wolf once too often, he will never be taken seriously because of the many fake photographs he as produced over the years. Every one who visits the loch owes old Frank a visit and a smile. Frank may even possess several good photographs of the LNM, but his photography will never be believed.
The Elasmosaur Speculation
The author draws a conclusion at some point in the book that Nessie may very well be an Elasmosaur. The more correct Elasmosaurus was a member of the Family Elasmosauroidae, perhaps the most successful marine reptile family in history, containing some 19 distinct species. For some reason, the Elasmosaur name comes up almost as often as the Plesiosaur name in LNM discussion circles. I am not sure why this is, perhaps it is due in large part to this book, which contains as it's last picture a sketch of an Elasmosaur chasing a fish, perhaps to leave that as the reader's last tantalizing thought before closing the book.
It is my personal opinion, based on my research into marine reptiles, that the Elasmosaurus is a poor candidate for the LNM. I say this because of the fact that the Elasmosaurus was a bit of an 'extreme machine' as far as marine reptiles in the Plesiosauridae gang went. It had the longest neck in marine reptile history, with the most vertebrae. It was, for all practical purposes of description, a 'great big long snake with a small body assembly at the back'. Here is a typical Elasmosaurus:
Notice the great long skinny neck. From most sightings, the LNM has a short, stocky neck. Many other marine reptiles in the Super Family Plesiosauridae have short stocky necks, including the Cryptoclidius I have shown earlier in this report. Why would we choose the one with the most extreme characteristics?
Again, I (and the underwater photo, and all the witnesses) may be wrong, but I am of the opinion that the Elasmosaurus is a poor choice for the genus finalist.
Here is my choice:
This is Cryptoclidius as he may have appeared hunting primitive salmon at the end of the Cretaceous, just before the cataclysmic K-T extinction. Notice the longer skull in this artistic depiction from the skeletal photo earlier. This skull closely matches the one shown in the Rines body shot. And the odd person has reported those teeth! (Though some wish they had not noticed that particular part of the animal).
It is nice to think that Cryptoclidius may have had a lovely aquamarine camouflage scheme, but rather silly, imo. Superimpose a dull straw-grey and you have Nessie.
Then again, this is only my pick of the month, so stay tuned!
The Strange Archeology Under the Water
Perhaps the most surprising information that was confirmed by the 1976 expedition to Loch Ness was the presence of ancient fire pits and stone circles under the lake. The location and position of some appear to indicate that the early settlers of the valley were in the habit of marking the water level, perhaps annually. It appears that Loch Ness was once much shallower, but that it gradually filled with rainwater. This progression of water levels is marked by a series of stone circles that sit in 70 to 100 feet of water at the North East end of the lake.
Sadly, the sensational nature of the lake means that no respectable archeological expedition will ever risk its reputation to investigate these formations for some time. They shall remain a second mystery of Loch Ness, locked beneath the surface until the first, primary mystery is solved.
Sonar Evidence
Perhaps the most disappointing part of the 1976 expedition was that there was no method in place to investigate suspicious sonar readings outside of recreational diver limits. For this reason the expedition concentrated their efforts in water less than 200 feet deep. Even when doing this, they failed to fully investigate a mysterious 'hump' formation discovered on one dive. The diver hastily touched the formation and brought up a piece after it crumbled inwards, but no follow up dive was mounted. This is heartbreaking when we learn later that this could have been a structure formed by the decomposition and fossilization of a large marine animal's skeleton. A full paleontological investigation and dig should have been mounted, but there was no provision for this on the expedition.
In another case, an even more tantalizing image was taken of an object lying on the bottom in 300 feet of water. The image bears the striking resemblance of what we would expect of a large plesiosaur stretched out in the mud with flippers perhaps waving gently in the current and splayed out. The image was so provocative that Klein, the senior sonar expert, labeled it 'your average plesiosaur' on the chart! As stated above, though, the expedition had no plan or method in place to investigate such a contact (such as immediately pinpointing the image and dropping a live camera with lights down on it while maintaining sonar contact). The image was never found nor apparently even searched for again, an example of poor follow-up that would seem to plague this expedition.
Conclusions
At the end of this book, one is left with a feeling that must have been common on the Rines Expeditions and at the debriefings after each was over. A sense of missed opportunity, of clues just barely within grasp, of undeniable evidence just out of reach. The team would never again come as close as they were that summer of 1975, when a large unknown predator came out of the dark to 'rattle their cage'. The animal would seem to taunt them, perhaps even staring full into the camera, as if daring it to prove its existence. The dark loch, however, would keep its secrets just out of reach. Just enough to keep the full weight of the world away. Perhaps we were never meant to find her.
Epilogue
She sleeps still, below the peat stained waters, 700 feet down in a pitch-black abyss.
Perhaps she tends her young; perhaps she does not care. She has survived a world that has continually reinvented itself above her through the centuries. She has adapted with it. The mud is warm, the fish and eels enough to get by on. The noisy boats of this time are an annoyance, but she keeps her distance.
Then came the explosions, and the avalanches of rock. Then came the tiny men splashing about on the surface, searching in vain for her. Sometimes a broken camera fell to the mud. Sometimes a noisy yellow intruder came down to hunt blindly in the darkness. She and her kind were not so blind. The intruder was easily avoided. What will be the next intrusion? She does not know.
She sleeps still.
But every so often she lifts her head slightly, she looks upward, and listens to a new noise, or perhaps smells a new smell.
And she smiles.