The Monarch and the Pipevine Swallowtail on a Thistle

There was a time when I suspected I had seen a Monarch butterfly on my property. and it flew circles around me very fast, so it was impossible to take its picture. In those days, all varieties of milkweed were flourishing on my property, and Great Spangled Fritillaries were quite common and accessible. But the Monarch was rare and elusive.

Yesterday, standing out in the field, in an area I like to call the meadow, where a variety of wildflowers bloom, I had no trouble at all spotting and filming and even taking still photos of a Monarch butterfly.

There were no Great Spangled Fritillaries in sight, and also no milkweed. In fact, the milkweed flowers this year were all eaten by deer, so that even when an expert on milkweed asked me to help him by gathering seed, I could not. The flowers were never given a chance to become seedpods. If milkweed is to continue to grow here, it will have to propagate from the root and not from seeds. This is the reality when the deer are this plentiful. But the side benefit is that there is relatively little poison ivy growing in the meadow, because the deer appear to have eaten it down, and they also left generous trails around the flowers, which allow me to walk unmolested among the flowers.

Yesterday, standing in the field and texting to a far away friend in California, I was able to see not only a Monarch, but also a Pipevine Swallowtail butterfly feeding side by side on a thistle plant.

The Pipevine Swallowtail was more flighty than the Monarch.

But when Swallowtail flew off, the friendly Monarch came and joined him, and the two continued feeding close together.

I have held Pipevine Swallowtails in my hand before. This is soon after they emerge as butterflies, when their wings are not yet dry, or after an injury. But when they are in their prime, they flutter so much that it is hard to get a good picture, because they are constantly flapping their wings.

.
They flap their wings so much even when hovering over a flower, that the closeups are a little blurry.

In any event, if there had been any doubt whatever that there are both Monarchs and Pipevine Swallowtails coexisting in my meadow, then this should set those doubts to rest. But sometimes it's not that no one believes you. Sometimes it's that they just don't care.

When I showed Bow my butterfly pictures yesterday, he quickly scrolled away from them, looking for pictures of himself, instead. In the same way, I don't actually believe any longer that if I could only "prove" that Bow can spell, it would make a big difference. Mankind is so transfixed by its own marvelous image, that most people, and especially those in the scientific community, would not look at proof that takes away from our stunning image.

But just when I thought that nobody was paying any  attention to my butterfly images, I got a comment from Scotland, about the thistle flower. "Wow! I didn't know that Scottish thistle grew in the USA!"

There was in fact another person locally who told me the thistle was an "invasive".  If so, good for it! Here is a song about the thistle that I like to listen to in my spare time.

The Elusive Monarch Butterfly and Issues of Proof

Yesterday, the Great Spangled Fritillary butterflies returned to my purple milkweed. And there was much rejoicing!

Great Spangled Fritallary Butterflies on my Purple Milkweed

They were here last year at about this time, and now they were back.

I would have liked to get closer to get a better picture, but two factors were at play to keep me from doing so: the purple milkweed is surrounded by poison ivy plants, and butterflies -- even the Great Spangled Fritillary -- are flighty. They will seldom sit around posing for pictures if you insist on getting close. Not like bumblebees, who will let you come in for a tight shot and let you film them for hours.

In this rather long video starring a bumblebee, even a dragonfly makes a brief guest appearance. But no, that was not the guest I was longing to see.

Happy as I am to be reunited with the Great Spangled Fritillary butterflies, and to see  the bumblebees and the honey bees and all the many other insects enjoying the milkweed, there was one guest that  I especially longed to have take refreshment on the milkweed. But every time I went to check what was going on there, I saw many other insects, and not that special one.

I was able to stick my head in between the fence boards to get really close to the bumblebee.

But still there was no Monarch butterfly, the guest for whom all this milkweed is supposed to serve as a special incubator. I went for  a walk after seeing the Great Spangled Fritillary butterflies, and I actually managed to locate the lost Common Milkweed that I thought had been eradicated. It was pushed up right against the fence, and its buds were looking underdeveloped.

My Common Milkweed Yesterday

Because it was surrounded by poison ivy and honeysuckle, the plant had somehow sprung up right against the wooden fence to the pasture.

The Common Milkweed is pushed up against the fence and late to bloom

But this could not account for the failure of the Monarch butterfly to show up. All these conservationists have been telling us for years: "Monarch butterflies only lay their eggs on milkweed, and the caterpillars only eat milkweed." (Source: http://www.monarch-butterfly.com/monarch-conservation.html) So whether the plant ever flowers or not should not be the issue for Monarch propagation, as long as the leaves and stems are there. Where had all the Monarch butterflies gone? Didn't they like my milkweed? I was disappointed.

And then, across the pasture, I spotted what looked remarkably like a Monarch butterfly. It flew in my direction, and I started filming it, but even though it was very close, it kept flying around, dancing circles around me at high speed, and when I looked at the video, all I could see was that I had been moving the camera erratically -- but no butterfly visible! It was as if the butterfly had been taunting me, offering evidence of its existence that only I could see! Watch the video above at normal speed, and you will probably come to the conclusion that I was imagining the whole thing!

If you stop the video at this spot, you can catch a glimpse of the Monarch butterfly

Just like the rabbits on my land, the Monarch butterfly was showing itself to me, while using highly evolved evasive maneuvers to ensure I could never catch it. To see how very fast it was going, we need to take account that in the above still from the video I had my camera pointed at an easterly angle. But a few seconds later, the Monarch appears in a shot aimed due south.

The Monarch by the ripened service berries

 Even though I was facing south now and it had just come in from the east,  already the Monarch had reversed its direction and was heading back the way it came.

A few seconds later, I caught a glimpse of it with my camera facing north, but the butterfly was already  headed east. This is what flying around in circles at high speed looks like! In between these relatively clear shots, the butterfly was moving faster than my camera could follow. If I had not thought to pause the video on my computer and take screenshots,  I would probably have ended up discarding this video, like many previous attempts to film fast moving butterflies.

So yes, there was a Monarch butterfly on my property all along, but it would not stop and pose for me on the purple milkweed, like my more cooperative guests, the Great Spangled Fritillary butterflies and the bumblebee. Sometimes the speed of a subject will prevent us from seeing what is going on right before our very eyes. We had the same problem with Bow before he started using our hands as a pointing device. Our intern Carrie Stengel discusses the problem in the video below.

I have been characterized by some people who read this blog as "an innocent" with a rich "inner life", implying that I imagine everything that goes on with Bow, and in particular his ability to spell words. But did you know that the first time Bow spelled out what he wanted, instead of pointing at lexigrams, it was not with me?

Eden and Bow
Source: http://www.pubwages.com/07/chimpanzee-developement-age-three-through-five

 It was with our new Project Bow intern, Eden Michaelov.

It was Eden who decided to put the letters up on the glass that day. And it was with Eden that Bow first spelled.

When I realized that Bow would not point on his own, and that this was going to be characterized as a Clever Hans effect by anyone who saw it, I could have given up. It would have been the smart thing to do, because there is no profit in what I am doing now. I could just pretend I did not see the pretty butterfly, and all would be well with the social world. I could maybe have gotten a job doing something else. That's what Herbert Terrace did the moment his funding ran out. But the kind of madness that I suffer from is that when I see a butterfly that no one else can see, I keep trying to think of ways to make them see it. The facts do not change, just because people cannot see.(And in fact, others have seen what I saw: everyone who worked with Bow since 2007 has seen him spell.)

It is not a crime against society to fail to fall into line with the current consensus. The greater crime is to recant under pressure, like Joan of Arc or Galileo. Rather than being an innocent who sees visions that are not there, I am a scientist who has an open mind to the existence of  uncooperative butterflies.

Negotiating Over the Future

Yesterday my daughter and I went shopping in the afternoon, and Lawrence stayed with Bow, fed him dinner and put him to bed.

This morning, when Bow woke up, he had a single dark navy blue sock on. Hmm, where did that sock come from? Was it a belated Christmas gift from Lawrence?

Anyway, Bow seemed very happy with his new article of footwear, and he kept the sock on all through breakfast, and when I cleared away breakfast, and he still had it on when he took my hand and spelled:  אני רוצה לצאת  "I want to go outside."

"Okay," I answered. "Give me the sock, and you can go outside."

He took my hand and with a bit of savage anger spelled:     ! לא    "No!"

(He didn't actually spell the exclamation mark. We don't have punctuation on the glass, but his manner when he spelled "no" was such that it proclaimed: And I really mean this!)

No means no. If I had tried to take that sock away from him by force, I had every expectation of being scratched or bitten. Bow has an absolute right to everything on his person, and nobody, but nobody messes with him. So I waited.

A few minutes later, he took my hand and again spelled out that he wanted to go outside. Again, I told him he could go, but not with the sock on.  This time he did not reply verbally. He just extended the foot with the sock out to me, and he allowed me to gently remove the sock. I placed it in my pocket and started to unlock the door. As I was doing this, Bow reached into my pocket.

"Bow!"

He withdrew his hand. With chimpanzees, possession is nine tenths of the law. Since I had the sock, he realized he would be violating my space if he took it by force. If he did that, I would be perfectly within my rights to lash out at him with my claws and my powerful jaw! (This would not, however, prevent him from taking it by stealth, if I did not notice, because Bow is not the most honest or upright person I know.)

After he was done playing outside, Bow asked to have the sock back, and I gave it to him. It is. after all. his sock! I just didn't want him to get it wet and dirty outside.

Bow and I are civilized enough to negotiate over the things we want. We are capable of  verbalizing our conflicting positions and coming to a compromise. In some ways, that is just as remarkable as the fact that Bow can spell out words. We don't have to physically fight over an object. We can talk about it.

But here's the thing: I desperately want to have proof of his literacy, because to me it would mean:

• professional vindication
• the possibility of getting funding
• a way to contribute to the body of scientific knowledge accumulated by my species and culture

Now those might seem like greedy, selfish  motives on my part, but there you are. I'm being honest about it. That's what I want. The reason this would be a good thing for Bow, too, and why he ought to support my efforts is this:

• He is dependent on my money for his food and shelter.
• If we had funding, he could have a mate and friends of his own species.
• His social status would be greatly improved if people knew how smart he is. It might even be a triumph of sorts for his entire species.

However, I am having trouble convincing Bow that he has something to gain from helping me prove it. It would not actually take Bow free-form spelling to make a dent in the resistance to my claims. Even a multiple choice computerized test where Bow was asked to match spoken words with their written equivalent would do it. But Bow is resistant to this idea, and I kind of understand how he feels.

I have always hated multiple choice tests, because they are not about expressing what I really think. It is more like validating the preconceived opinions of the test writer. It is a little like this conversation that I have actually  had with someone recently:

"Do you think my outfit is pretty?"

"I think it's charming."

"No, I didn't ask you that. Is it pretty? The only possible answers are: it's pretty or it's not pretty."

"Oh. Well, in that case, I think it's pretty."

"Thanks."

The multiple choice test is not about self expression. It's not about providing the test giver with new information.  It's about showing that you know the right answer according to the person formulating the test. And Bow, so far, has been completely unwilling to play that game. 

Now, if only I could figure out a way to negotiate with him so that he will be willing to play the game for the sake of both our futures!

Understanding and Choices

One of the questions that people often ask is: do you tell Bow what to do or is that just what he chooses to do? For instance, when he is eating oatmeal, did I tell him to use the spoon?

No, I didn't tell him to use the spoon. I provided the spoon, and I told him to eat "nice". What does that mean? Mostly it means, don't make a mess. Be considerate of the fact that I have to clean up after you. But it does not mean you have to use Emily Post etiquette. It's the way I was raised. I didn't have to be perfect in my decorum, but I understood that I should not cause others more work than was necessary.

Everything with Bow is give and take. He does not always do exactly what I ask of him, but he takes reasonable suggestions under consideration. 

In trying to help me think of ways that I might prove what Bow knows, a colleague recently asked me if Bow would respond well to being rewarded for answering a question. We tried that more than once. He intentionally gave the wrong answer, every single time. It was not a random thing. It was better than chance! He was being obstructive because he resented the test,

So what was the reward we offered? It was chocolate. And he loves chocolate and does not get it all the time. But he wants to be given it as a treat, not a reward. He will do all sorts of nice and surprisingly considerate things, but not for a reward.

Bow is well fed. He has more than enough to eat. Yes, he does tell us what he wants to eat and when he is full. But he is not talking to us for a reward, and he would stop talking altogether, if he thought we were playing some kind of manipulative trick on him in our language use.

Well, why don't we just stop feeding him? He would probably be more cooperative then. Some people have suggested that. 

I would never do that. Withholding food is not ethical. It's wrong. And it would destroy the relationship of trust that I have built up with Bow. So all our language use remains in context. And as long as it's in context, then it's not a double blind test and will not pass muster for scientific purposes.

Well, how about if he were holding the hand of someone who did not speak his language? Then what he wrote would have to be coming from him, right? Remember, he only holds the hands of people he trusts. But, yes, something like that did happen once. The intern's name was Katie Thurston, And Bow did not entirely trust her, because she had a British accent. And he played a trick on her, by using a pun in Hebrew, and then just a spelled out Hebrew word, before he agreed to tell her in English that he was full. 

In Hebrew, the number seven is spelled שבע. But that is also how you spell the word for sated, meaning full.  He was being very tricky when he pointed at the 7, and of course Katie did not know what he meant. The next thing Bow spelled after the  7 to let Katie know he was full was מלא, which literally means full. But she did not know that Hebrew word.  Then, when she did not understand that, he spelled "because I am full," in answer to her question about why he did not want to eat.

Above is the transcript of that exchange.  It is not replicable, meaning that we can't get Bow to do that over and over again on command. It was something that he chose to do at the time, and like all real language use, it was a once in a lifetime exchange. You can't tell him: "Say that again." He won't.

Does Bow understand what we say to him? Yes. Does he obey commands? No, but he sometimes follows suggestions, when he himself decides it is a good idea. In all those cases, there is nothing context-free about it.

Real language use never is context free. It's a matter of give and take, a little cooperation and a little bargaining and making do with less than perfect results. 

Using Words When Gestures would do.

Today started with a stormy, overcast morning. I watched from the front door as the bus picked my daughter up for school.

Bow napped a little after breakfast, and then he got up and called to me to come and talk to him. When I asked him what he wanted, he started to take my hand to spell it out, then changed his mind and pointed at the lock of the door that leads to the corridor that leads to the outer pens. Only after he had signaled what he wanted in this non-verbal way did he spell out what he wanted: לצאת -- To go out.

I opened and shut all the intervening doors, but when he got out there, he hesitated, because it was cold and wet. Then he gingerly stepped over the wet concrete to assume his typical posture, perched on top of the bench and with his index finger balancing against the grid.

This type of incident involves communication that does not require language. Bow didn't have to spell out what he wanted, because I already knew the moment he had pointed at the lock. But Bow is not the only person who is prompted by caretakers to use language when he has already made himself perfectly clear.I know of autistic children who have the same experiences. They can tell you what they want without using language, and yet people keep pressuring them to use language, in the hopes that the practice will one day make them say something unexpected -- something that conveys information that only they know and expresses opinions and desires that are complex enough so that a mere gesture would not be enough to convey them.

When people see a video such as the one above, they are quite within their rights to assume that it is Clever Hans syndrome: I know what  Bow wants to say, and Bow can read my body language about what letters to use in order to say it.

But we have had other conversations in which the communication was unexpected and only Bow knew the information. Conversations about mice, for instance, that Bow knew about, and I did not. Or the time he told one of our volunteers the Chinese name of a girl she had never met and did not know.

It is in these unexpected moments that Bow proves that he can use language. But most of the time, language is superfluous for Bow. as it is for many parents with their kids: you don't need him to say it before you know what he wants.

Language isn't such a great thing in everyday life. But on that rare occasion when you cannot read another person's mind through posture and gesture, it can be a powerful tool.

The End of An Era: Orchard House Rented Out

Yesterday I signed a lease and rented Orchard House out. It is the end of an era. There will be no  more interns staying at our guest house, and Bow and I need the income from the rental to keep going.

Orchard House was originally purchased to give interns a place to stay while they volunteered with Project Bow. At one time, Bow would commute from our current home to Orchard House several days a week, to have floortime sessions in a different learning environment. We had a playroom with a swing, a different set of toys, and there was even a real child's toilet that flushed, very low to the ground, like the ones they sometimes have in preschools, for him to use. We had a little school house set up in an outbuilding, with a real chalkboard and school desks. Hopefully, the children of our tenants will now enjoy those facilities.

Bow's visits to Orchard House ended in the Spring of 2007 when he and I became confined to the pens here. But for several years after that, interns would stay at Orchard House and make the drive over to this house to work with Bow.

Does Bow need floortime sessions anymore to learn language? No. He already has picked up two languages and literacy. He does not seem interested in learning any other subjects in a formal way, and I'm not going to force him to try. He pays attention to day to day events. When I read a book, he looks at it. If I read it out loud, he will listen. When I watch a video, he watches along. He will sometimes make sweeping pronouncements as a comment on something we watched: "I heard. It is not good for a son not to let a father win." At other times, his concerns are entirely practical. "The hour is three," he will tell me. I have no watch on, but when I go to check, sure enough, it is 3:03. This is important, because between three and three-thirty, I go to the kitchen to put dinner in the oven, and Bow gets a snack when I get back, if he's been good. But he doesn't always tell me that he wants the snack or that I should put dinner in the oven. Sometimes he just tells me what time it is.

It would be good to get some sort of independent confirmation that this is happening, so that I can say that I have proved it. But sometimes proof is not the most important thing. Sometimes just letting it be is okay, too.