Explained: Mysterious lights over Milwaukee [Seagulls, Night Exposure Trails]

[Mick West]

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=si7JAZgc4iI

[Thread Summary Post, original post is now #2]

Mystery Solved by Fox 6 News in a later video, lights at the courthouse illuminating a flock of seagulls.

The original video is set for night exposure, which creates trails behind the brightly lit seagulls. The cars in the video have similar trails

If you apply a persistent image filter to the seagulls you get:

Some people still insist the traffic camera video shows something a lot higher and larger than seagulls, but in this next video I compare them to the courthouse seagulls in size, which makes them only a few hundred feet away.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hDRbrVJeT8

 

[Radapox]

Sooo... what's this then?


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mkRgPGncn0

EDIT: Video clip in this article, http://fox6now.com/2018/02/28/what-...e-over-downtown-milwaukee-captured-on-camera/ , claiming it's seagulls. But how does that account for the "vapor trails"?

Another suggestion is that it might be a fish tank reflected in a window. Meh.

 

[deirdre]

it might be a fish tank reflected in a window. Meh.

if you read the link to your fox6news article, then you know its not a fish tank reflection.

and this is how you follow the No Click Policy:

One theory involves seagulls. FOX6's Amy DuPont (see video below) was in the downtown area that hour -- and captured video of a big flock of seagulls flying around by the Milwaukee County Courthouse.

http://fox6now.com/2018/02/28/what-...e-over-downtown-milwaukee-captured-on-camera/

"vapor trails"?

they are just movement blurs

 

[Radapox]

Sorry about that, wasn't aware of the policy. Yes, I have read my own link, just not overly convinced by the seagull hypothesis (nor by the fish tank one). Movement blurs, might be.

 

[deirdre]

just not overly convinced by the seagull hypothesis

she says in the video

"about 30 minute later, we're sitting in our truck here outside the Milwaukee County courthouse"

here is the original tower cam view.. what I mark as 'towers' are the things with red lights on them. the courthouse is near there and based on the courthouse video, they are filming from the right side of my pic in the general direction of the arrow. You can play with the map views here. https://www.google.com/maps/search/....905365,164a,35y,218.38h,76.57t/data=!3m1!1e3

my arrow is a bit off, so basically they are pointing at the lower circle of birds on my pic. (lower is my non artistic way of indicating closer to the viewer)

Would be a bit too coincidental for aliens to be flying around but half an hour later an "Alfred Hitchcock" type flock of seagulls (as she describes it) is filmed in the exact same area.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

Look closely at the cars zipping along the freeway in the lower right left of the frame. Several of them leave the same light trails as the things up in the sky. Seagull theory looks good to me.

 

[tairstrike]

It looks like you're suggesting the tower camera is on one of Juneau Village Towers (JVT). I don't know that it's there for certain, but I wouldn't argue it. Based on a quick Google Earth measure, it looks like the 'twin lights' 8 seconds into the video going right to left in the middle of the screen are about the quickest objects I can see. The appear about 1/2 way between the single tower light and double tower light. ~4 seconds later, they end at about the double tower light.

The courthouse is ~1 mile away from JVT as the crow (pigeon) flys. If we measure the above movement ~1 mile away from JVT, it looks to be about 0.1 miles.

That suggests they travelled 0.1 miles in 4 seconds (~90 mph). Top speed of a pigeon could be ~90 mph I guess?

 

[deirdre]

Several of them leave the same light trails as the things up in the sky

here's one of their live streaming cameras from a slightly different location. its hard to grab horizontal traveling cars, but got one lower left. the red is the taillights motion blur.

http://fox6now.com/on-air/live-streaming-sc-2/

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

Ah, they are live stream cameras, as in crappy cameras. No wonder there is "video burn" on the images.

 

[Radapox]

Would be a bit too coincidental for aliens to be flying around

If I suspected aliens, I would have posted this under UFOs, Aliens, Monsters and the Paranormal instead. Thanks for the research!

 

[deirdre]

If I suspected aliens, I would have posted this under UFOs, Aliens, Monsters and the Paranormal instead.

Just getting a jump on the inevitable

 

[JFDee]

Ah, they are live stream cameras, as in crappy cameras

I think the issue is rather the night situation and the exposure of the camera.

The brightness level in that stream is 'unnaturally' high. A still with that setting would need a long-time exposure, and indeed the excerpt in question looks like a movie sequence of long-exposure images (as seen in @deirdre's frame with the moving car).

Strong hypothesis:

1. With a 'normal' night setting of the camera, the birds wouldn't even be visible.

2. The 'trails' are a consequence of the high exposure setting, as seen with other moving objects.

 

[Mick West]

In the actual "UFO" video the cars are leaving the same trails, just harder to see because of the cluttered background.

Birds, persistent image from night exposure.

 

[Radapox]

In the actual "UFO" video the cars are leaving the same trails, just harder to see because of the cluttered background.

Good catch! I still had some doubts towards the camera artefact solution because of the lack of "fuzziness" of the trail left by the car in the picture Deirdre posted earlier, but these seem to match those in the sky quite accurately. Case pretty much closed, I'd say. Aliens seagulls it is, then.

Thanks all y'all for your contributions!

 

[pony]

If it is birds, has this phenomenon been captured before?

How long has the camera been pointing in that direction?

Or is this the first time seagulls fly around that specific area?

 

[Mick West]

If it is birds, has this phenomenon been captured before?

How long has the camera been pointing in that direction?

Or is this the first time seagulls fly around that specific area?

It clearly is birds, as there's close up video of them at the same time and place.

So the question of if it has happened before is not relevant.

 

[Mick West]

Look closely at the cars zipping along the freeway in the lower right left of the frame. Several of them leave the same light trails as the things up in the sky. Seagull theory looks good to me.

Sorry I didn't notice this before I posted the same observation. You were first!

 

[Joeman]

Im leaning on the Seagull theory myself, but there's one thing that gets me. In the original video, the seagulls are flying sky high above all the buildings in Milwaukee. It clearly shows the birds are flying way above all these buildings.

Based on research, the average flying height for the bird is 50 feet, 124 maximum or the record height better yet.
https://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/seagull-research-high-fly

It's about 10 feet per story of a building and there's many that are much much higher than that. 200 feet, 300, 400....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storey

So are all the birds breaking a world record together by flying 200+ feet?

 

[Mick West]

Based on research, the average flying height for the bird is 50 feet, 124 maximum or the record height better yet.
https://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/seagull-research-high-fly

That was just one set of a local observations on one type of gull. I've seen seagulls fly several hundred feet high.

I doubt they are more than 500 feet high in the "trails" video. They are probably less than 500 feet from the camera.

 

[deirdre]

the camera changes in my above link.. here is yet a different camera that is live now and there are seagulls flying around. my photo doesn't capture them well but ive marked the height of one
http://fox6now.com/on-air/live-streaming-sc-2/

and even in the daylight, some of them when flying horizontal past the dark building are leaving blur marks behind them.

 

[Mick West]

Some people still insist the traffic camera video shows something a lot higher and larger than seagulls, but in this next video I compare them to the courthouse seagulls in size, which makes them only a few hundred feet away.


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hDRbrVJeT8


I was actually a bit surprised the so many people still want to believe these are UFOs.

 

[Mick West]

The fact that the camera is creating the trails is indisputable, as it happens to the cars. It even happens to seagulls in daytime!

While precise reason is not crucial to the explanation, it would be interesting. Why would there be trails in a normal sunny image?

Two possibilities spring to mind:

1) The camera's bitrate is set for static images, so it's transmitting a high quality image with low quality movement information.

2) The type of camera has a sensor designed for static images and prevents burn-in by being less sensitive to light, hence the image builds up slowly in the sensor pixels (and hence decays slowly).

 

[deirdre]

Two possibilities spring to mind:

i'm not sure what either of your possibilities mean. But yesterday (which was a different cam.. I'm thinking tomorrow's live stream might be the UFO cam again) that camera had a large flag on the building and the way the flag moved was not fluid. even the cars going vertical were more jumping along the highway like little frogs.

The article said there are 3 Fox cams. so if they rotate them each day.. well you can do the date math

 

[Ravi]

The fact that the camera is creating the trails is indisputable, as it happens to the cars. It even happens to seagulls in daytime!

While precise reason is not crucial to the explanation, it would be interesting. Why would there be trails in a normal sunny image?

Two possibilities spring to mind:

1) The camera's bitrate is set for static images, so it's transmitting a high quality image with low quality movement information.

2) The type of camera has a sensor designed for static images and prevents burn-in by being less sensitive to light, hence the image builds up slowly in the sensor pixels (and hence decays slowly).

Perhaps:

3) compression video stream algorithm

or even

4) applied image processing filter from the broadcaster to "enhance" or for whatever reason?

 

[Mick West]

I was recording a bit of their live camera yesterday when they moved it to look at the moon. This showed the image persistence quite clearly when they tilted up.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWOgeB4FnIU

It also shows the huge overexposure, they adjust the exposure until the moon is not glaring (but still overexposed) and the city lights are nearly gone. Moved the slider to see:

[compare]

[/compare]

 

[Tedsson]

Im leaning on the Seagull theory myself, but there's one thing that gets me. In the original video, the seagulls are flying sky high above all the buildings in Milwaukee. It clearly shows the birds are flying way above all these buildings.

Based on research, the average flying height for the bird is 50 feet, 124 maximum or the record height better yet.
https://www.mdislander.com/maine-news/seagull-research-high-fly

It's about 10 feet per story of a building and there's many that are much much higher than that. 200 feet, 300, 400....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storey

So are all the birds breaking a world record together by flying 200+ feet?

I read that study. It is specific to what those gulls did in that specific environment.

Gulls can fly much higher than 124'. They have been observed at 8,000'. If they couldn't exceed 124' they would crash into the White Cliffs of Dover. They don't.

They probably don't bother flying at height except when they are migrating. Why waste the energy. They also hawk and there are more flying insects at lower levels.

As they are large powerful birds I can see no reason why they couldn't get up to 10-20,000', cloud base permitting.

Any of the resident pilots seen gulls at altitude?

I can't help but think the big giveaway lies in the fact that in the very first video they actually look like gulls in one of their typical circling behaviours.

 

[Whitebeard]

Based on research, the average flying height for the bird is 50 feet, 124 maximum or the record height better yet.

I live in a high rise, 14 floors (plus a ground level - this is the UK). My flat is on floor 12 and gulls, mainly Herring, Greater Black Backed and Black Headed are always flying past my windows, what more they nest on the building roof, and thats, including the utility penthouse, is around 180ft up. What is more its comman to see them a lot higher that that, add in thhe fact that the building is already 50ft above sea level and round here the gulls are getting up to around 600ft on occassions.

Whats more the 124ft study you quoted was based on a study of only eight monitored birds living near a refuse tip in Maine, an area where they have no need to fly higher than the data returned and based on the very small sample size, and the very small geographical area, should in no way be used as flight performance data for gulls anywhere else.

 

[Mick West]

Some similar things:

AT&T Park, San Francisco.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancis..._exposure_of_seagulls_flying_around_att_park/

Birds above a church in Bulgaria:

Source: http://don.komarechka.com/2012/09/bulgaria-a-twilight-walk-gone-wrong/

 

[Starflint]

if you read the link to your fox6news article, then you know its not a fish tank reflection.

and this is how you follow the No Click Policy:

One theory involves seagulls. FOX6's Amy DuPont (see video below) was in the downtown area that hour -- and captured video of a big flock of seagulls flying around by the Milwaukee County Courthouse.
View attachment 32050
http://fox6now.com/2018/02/28/what-...e-over-downtown-milwaukee-captured-on-camera/

they are just movement blurs

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4Ioi8lp754&t=58s

 

[elvenwear]

When my eyes were better, I liked to take photographs of birds in flight. While they are gliding it's not too bad, but while they are flapping, it is truly difficult to get them in focus and not motion blurred and at or about the right level of exposure all at once. This is especially true for smaller birds. With butterflies, it is nearly impossible.

 

[John J.]

Based on research, the average flying height for the bird is 50 feet, 124 maximum...

So are all the birds breaking a world record together by flying 200+ feet?

Following on from the comments by @Tedsson and @Whitebeard, I see seagulls most days, sometimes in large numbers.
Many gulls can clearly fly, regularly, at much higher altitudes than 124 feet /37.8 m

The paper "A review of flight heights and avoidance rates of birds in relation to offshore wind farms", 2012,
Cook, A.S.C.P., Johnston, A., Lucy J., Wright, L.J., Burton, N.H.K.; British Trust for Ornithology, gives these figures for maximum observed flying heights (citing Walls et al. 2004; Parnell et al. 2005; Sadoti et al. 2005 as sources):

Link to paper
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/docum...&doi=f4808900f40a04d5f702c7a74c2d9c90b9026193

To be honest, I'm surprised at how low these figures are; I haven't read through the paper so perhaps there are contextual reasons for this. Some gull species migrate over substantial bodies of water, and many migratory species fly at higher altitudes during migration than they often do at other times.

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

Following on from the comments by @Tedsson and @Whitebeard, I see seagulls most days, sometimes in large numbers.
Many gulls can clearly fly, regularly, at much higher altitudes than 124 feet /37.8 m

The paper "A review of flight heights and avoidance rates of birds in relation to offshore wind farms", 2012,
Cook, A.S.C.P., Johnston, A., Lucy J., Wright, L.J., Burton, N.H.K.; British Trust for Ornithology, gives these figures for maximum observed flying heights (citing Walls et al. 2004; Parnell et al. 2005; Sadoti et al. 2005 as sources):
View attachment 79609
Link to paper
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/docum...&doi=f4808900f40a04d5f702c7a74c2d9c90b9026193

To be honest, I'm surprised at how low these figures are; I haven't read through the paper so perhaps there are contextual reasons for this. Some gull species migrate over substantial bodies of water, and many migratory species fly at higher altitudes during migration than they often do at other times.

Reading the discussion section, it sounds like much of the data is visual identifications and visual height estimates, not using sensors designed for that, so it may be that if a small percentage of the birds were farther away/higher up, they were not noticed or recorded. Which may not be a big problem for the use case of this study, as they only cared about analyzing what percentage of birds were within the 20-150m altitudes.

These models are based on the best available data for a wide range of species. There is a reliance on
estimated heights as directly recorded flight heights were only available from two radar studies, one
focussing on Common Eider in Alaska (Day et al. 2004) and a second considering migrating Blackheaded and Lesser Black-backed Gulls in in the Netherlands (Shamoun-Baranes & van Loon 2006).
Whilst some recently developed tags have the capability to record the altitude at which birds are
flying, the sample sizes involved in these studies are presently too small to make generalizations
about species flight behaviour (Thaxter et al. 2011).
Data considered within this study were typically collected during "snapshot" counts, when birds are
at their closest to the boat, with height bands related to easily visible fixed objects such as the ships
mast. There may be a danger that surveys of this type may over-represent the numbers of birds
flying at low levels, particularly in the case of wary species, such as the Red-throated Diver, as birds
are flushed from the sea-surface by approaching vessels. For the same reason, however, boat-based
surveys might over-estimate the proportions of all birds that are recorded in flight and thus at risk
from collision.

As an example using made-up numbers, if 1% of herring were flying around or above 400m and the rest were down around or below 300m, this might just not be noticed by the observer, and this 1% being outliers not recorded in the results wouldn't greatly impact the conclusions you can infer about wind turbines, so is not a significant methodological problem for the study.

 

[Mendel]

Article:

The analysis used radar data from 143 weather-monitoring stations across the U.S. to measure bird flight altitudes above the earth's surface. In the East, average flight heights in autumn for migratory birds in New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia were about 400 to 500 meters (or about 1,300 to 1,600 feet) above ground. Fall migration altitudes were lowest in New England, Michigan, and Florida. In the West, fall migratory bird flights in Washington, Oregon, and California averaged around 800 meters (or about 2,600 feet) high, but many birds flew even higher—with the highest flights reaching 5,000 to 6,000 feet in altitude.

The eastern half of the United States—where birds tend to fly at lower altitudes on migration—is a risky area for bird mortalities from building collisions.

Source: https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/new-birdcast-analysis-shows-how-high-migrating-birds-fly/

Migratory bird altitude is determined by mountains, and by where the tailwinds are.

For other birds, I would expect them to be where the insects they eat are, which can be surprisingly high as well.