Tracking Blood Trails

[ozstriker22]

You know that blue light they use on CSI to find spots of bodily fluids...

I saw an ad for a flashlight that had a blue LED for $15. They claimed the blue light is the same light Forensic scientists use to highlight blood; and that in low light or darkness their flashlight is far supperior to any regular white/yellow beam light for finding small drops, smatterings, and smudges of blood trail.

Has anyone tried this?

Jesse

 

[Mel Carter]

I don't think that blood can be highlighted unless Luminol is used, I think that's how you spell it. It may be the same light, but blood has to have something sprayed on it to make it luminate, I don't think it can do it by itself.

 

[Speckmisser]

In my experience, the best light for tracking blood trails is a bright, white light. I've heard that lights in the blue spectrum are good for tracking blood, but most of those things you're seeing advertised are playing on the popularity of shows like CSI and the pseudo-science that's being passed as fact. In other words... hype.

If you want a tracking light, get a good powerful headlamp or flashlight. A Coleman lantern works great, but most people don't have one of those in their fanny pack.

 

[F350]

Stream light makes a light called the twin tasker.
It's an L.E.D./Xenon combo that'll go up to 160 hours on 3 C's.
Very lightweight and very bright.

And Mel's right, Luminol is needed to make the protiens in the blood glow and even then, it has to be very dark (no other lights).

 

[BDB]

I hear that a spray bottle with hydrogen peroxide in it works well but have never tried it.

The best method I have found to date is to pick up Arrowslinger and point him at the first drop of blood. Next thing you know your chasing him through the woods in the dark like he's a beagle on a rabbit

 

[Shot]

I agree with Speck, a regular flashlight works best. If you can't see it with a regular light and need a LED or some fancy tool to track blood, and also since were talking about pigs, I have two words..........Long gone. If a regular flashlight can't spot the blood then most probably is wasn't a fatal shot. With that said there are always excpetions, for example, I have shot pigs in vital areas and they produced very little blood drops because the fat covered the wound.

 

[F350]

No, No, No...I wasn't being all scientific about the L.E.D.'s.
They're just very bright and last a long freakin' time. Wish I had a pic of this light. It's the only thing I hunt or Camp with now.

 

[Arrowslinger]

Hey BDB, thanks for the kind words....but there's no technology that makes up for hard work, determination, & a knowledge of how animals travel. Well, that and Chopper's dog Dolly.....she just makes things a bit easier & gets ya home to the beer quicker.

Arrowslinger.

 

[opsoclonus]

Theoretically, it would work. Whenever I examine a patient's eye, I use a green filter (close to the blue wavelength...remember ROYGBIV?) on my opthalmoscope. This allows me to the the red blood vessels with much more ease in contrast to the yellowish retinal background. However, there are three major problems:

1) Red objects preferentially absorb red light and reflect it back to the viewer's eye. With blue (ie red-deficient) light, there is little for the blood to reflect back and it appears much darker, even black. This is what I see though my opthalmoscope. In a night time setting with multiple shadows, it may be difficult to differentiate the "black" color of blood from a shadow.

2) In order to differentiate an object from background, the object must, of course, contrast with the background. For those of us who hunt in the fall, this means the blood is often on red-brown foliage. A red-on-red color difference is going to be difficult to see regardless. There is hope for the "green-time" (spring, summer) hunter when the blood is on green foliage. In this case the green grass will selectively absorb and reflect the more blue light and appear lighter, while the red will absorb and reflect this much less, appearing darker. If I were a spring-time hunter, I might consider this.

3) Filters of any sort are filters. This means that some of the total lumens emitted by your bulb will be absorbed by the filter and not utilized. The same light with no filter is going to have less total lumen output than the light without the filter. This should be minimized with a high-output bulb which is bright regardless of the filter.

Personally, I don't think all the gadgetry is worth it. If I were to attempt it (and I have toyed around with the idea multiple times), this is what I would do: 1) Get a high lumen output flashlight/torch (I swear by Surefires using a P61 or P91 bulb, but I have heard good things about Streamlights). Buy a blue filter which snaps on the face. This is easily flipped up AND protects your precious glass from scratching in transport...allowing you to protect and use your white light while rapidly switching back and forth to the blue. 2) On the other hand, there is something to be said about using an LED. Although these cost less in terms of battery usage (less energy transferred into heat); in general, they cannot produce as much sheer lumens. LED lights, however, are "colder" in that they present light more in the blue as opposed to the red spectrum. In essence, this is "sort-of" a blue filter. I haven't fooled around much with these lights because they just aren't as strong (yet). Personally, I use a Surefire D2 with a P61 bulb (sometimes adjusted to the equivalent of a D3 with a P91 bulb via use of an adapter) and a beamsplitter which also protects the lens and allows for a wider beam. I've never had any problems with this (as long as I bring extra batteries). Buy a Surefire and you'll never want another.

RR-

 

[opsoclonus]

By the way, its been some time since I did what little forensics work I did do, but seem to recall that those using spray additives like Luminol, did NOT use a blue filter. For the most part, this was done using an ultraviolet (ie Woods) light. Either way, you're not going to want to spray down the forest.

 

[Speckmisser]

The best use of peroxide, in my opinion, is to verify that the brown spot you want to follow is blood and not lichen or simply browned vegetation. I think some of the ideas about using it to track are getting a little overblown, leading to a mental image of some guy with a backpack sprayer and 20-30 gallons of peroxide, bleaching the forest floor. You can't spray the whole trail.

Get a good, powerful light. I've recently started using an LED head lamp, but I keep a mini-maglight loaded with a halogen bulb in my pack as well.

Learn animal habits. As Arrowslinger mentions above, that can make all the difference. If you know how an animal reacts when wounded, you can begin to predict likely trails and direction of travel... the difference between success and failure when the blood gets spotty.

It's good practice, by the way, to try tracking UNWOUNDED critters whenever you get a chance. You'd be amazed at how much you can learn to spot if you just practice a bit.

 

[MNHNTR]

Blue light = dark or black looking blood..........just like Opso said.......

 

[spectr17]

The best things for blood tracking I've found is ONE person on blood trail who knows what he is doing. Any more and they just muck up the trail.

Hydrogen peroxide in a spray bottle when you get down to the pin drops of blood. Night time a white gas Coleman lantern shines up blood the best. Not propane, white gas with a reflector on it. Found many a deer with them.

You also need to learn how to track as many times you won't have any blood to work with. Learning how to tell where you hit the animal but the hair you find where you shot the animal or by the blood/tissue you find.

If your state allows it, a dog is the best blood trailer. There is an organization of Deer recovery dogs that works in many states called Deersearch. http://www.deersearch.org/

 

[hicntry]

Glad you mentioned dogs Jesse. I have never even thought of what it is like not being able to find a wounded animal. It is a done deal with dogs....I think......never wounded anything so can't say for sure.....just kidding.

 

[ozstriker22]

I have the StreamLight green LED already. I use it because supposedly it's outside the range of vision of animals. It also doesn't kill my night vision. I can hike in the dark and see just fine when the light's off. Your eyes take a couple seconds to adjust not a couple minutes! I totally recomend it.

I carry it on every camping/hiking trip I go on. Sounds like the Blue LED would have a similar visual effect on blood as the Green LED. I'm buying a Headlamp too. Was looking at a really nice 3 LED/ 1 Halogen combo for $40

Thank you guys so much for getting back to me on this.

Jesse