3.5 Keeping the secret
Interestingly, when Bower and Chorley described their covert operations, they tended to paint a fairly idyllic picture. Not only would the two drink together in the evening, they would wander the summer hills, seeking nature’s inspiration for their painting hobbies (Field Guide p215-6), and later when circle making - far from minimising the risk of being caught - would hang around in the fields to partake of food and drink (ITN News, 9.9.91). Chorley has several times spoken of his enjoyment of these “beautiful” settings in the “English countryside with the moon up... a few beers and a couple of cheese rolls, absolutely wonderful!” (Coast to Coast, 9.9.91). In the afore-mentioned Marlborough meeting, Bower even spoke of taking a frying pan (and camping stove, I would guess) in order to cook food out in the fields!
How seriously were they taking things, according to their story? There are the usual contradictions. In a confession of lax preparation, Bower has said that they would only decide which sort of formation they intended to make while in the pub beforehand (Clas Svahn interview). Conversely, Bower later spoke of a higher degree of advance planning, saying that he would insist on surveying circles sites in the daylight, before they were due to begin work (Countryfile, 1989), but paradoxically has also said he was prepared to go ad-hoc to some other un-pre-planned location, if he later got to his first choice field but perceived a risk of being caught (Clas Svahn interview).
In the public meeting in Marlborough in 1993, Bower stated that the two would drive to their circle-making destinations early on, and make use of a suitable layby. Later, when the risk of being caught increased, they would walk “two miles” to the field from the pub to prevent their hoax being tumbled (which presumably only applied to their Cheesefoot Head circles, although it is possible they could have stopped for drinks at other places too, with a similar scenario) - which is interesting, because one assumes they would have been carrying their stomper board, and whatever other equipment they needed, with them in both directions, in full view of anyone who happened to be around.
How seriously were they taking things, according to their story? There are the usual contradictions. In a confession of lax preparation, Bower has said that they would only decide which sort of formation they intended to make while in the pub beforehand (Clas Svahn interview). Conversely, Bower later spoke of a higher degree of advance planning, saying that he would insist on surveying circles sites in the daylight, before they were due to begin work (Countryfile, 1989), but paradoxically has also said he was prepared to go ad-hoc to some other un-pre-planned location, if he later got to his first choice field but perceived a risk of being caught (Clas Svahn interview).
In the public meeting in Marlborough in 1993, Bower stated that the two would drive to their circle-making destinations early on, and make use of a suitable layby. Later, when the risk of being caught increased, they would walk “two miles” to the field from the pub to prevent their hoax being tumbled (which presumably only applied to their Cheesefoot Head circles, although it is possible they could have stopped for drinks at other places too, with a similar scenario) - which is interesting, because one assumes they would have been carrying their stomper board, and whatever other equipment they needed, with them in both directions, in full view of anyone who happened to be around.
Above: D&D must have walked from the Percy Hobbs pub down into the Punchbowl along the busy A31 Alresford Road, with a 4-foot stomper board tucked under the arm for all to see!
The Friday factor
To begin with (for about seven summers, in fact) D&D were restricted to making circles on Friday nights, since that was the one time the two had a cover story as to why they were out and about - namely, their once-a-week drinking sessions close to Cheesefoot Head. But by the mid-1980s (they say), they felt a need to vary this, for fear of being tumbled. I quote here from Bower’s interview with Clas Svahn in 1992: “Most of our Friday evenings were taken up with circle making until someone came up with the remark that ‘It’s a very peculiar thing that most of these circles seem to be appearing on Friday nights,’ so when we got to hear of that we decided to go out [on] Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday to try and fool them.”
Even as late as 2002, in interview, Bower was still recalling, “Someone even made a remark, I don’t know whether it was Pat Delgado or not, but he said, ‘It’s very, very strange that these circles only seem to appear Saturday mornings’.” This is surprising, since it implies that for some years, long before crop circles were a widely known phenomenon, D&D’s circle making - which ranged across literally hundreds of miles - was routinely discovered within hours, and then invariably reported to the same small group of researchers by any and every farmer in the south, with the correct dates recorded each time. Otherwise, no such pattern could have been apparent.
So how much evidence is there that any such observations were being made? Take, for example, the 'first' circle at Cheesefoot Head'. This was in 1980 (we discuss it at length on one of our 'Case Study' pages). According to Bower, quoting again from his 2002 interview (although he repeats the same elsewhere),
"Dave Chorley said to me one day, he says, ‘I’ve had enough of this’ ... I said, ‘you just hang on a minute,’ I said, ‘and especially when the Punchbowl's ploughed, now that we can get down in there,’ and of course, lo-and-behold, it was on the television news the next night,"
This is flatly false. The first Cheesefoot Head circles were never on television or in the papers. A second formation, made a full year later was in the media - but one to two weeks after it was supposedly made. Bower claims the circles were made on Friday and televised on Saturday, when in fact, the news item was broadcast on a Tuesday and no-one (apart from their creator, that is) has any knowledge of when they actually appeared.
Even as late as 2002, in interview, Bower was still recalling, “Someone even made a remark, I don’t know whether it was Pat Delgado or not, but he said, ‘It’s very, very strange that these circles only seem to appear Saturday mornings’.” This is surprising, since it implies that for some years, long before crop circles were a widely known phenomenon, D&D’s circle making - which ranged across literally hundreds of miles - was routinely discovered within hours, and then invariably reported to the same small group of researchers by any and every farmer in the south, with the correct dates recorded each time. Otherwise, no such pattern could have been apparent.
So how much evidence is there that any such observations were being made? Take, for example, the 'first' circle at Cheesefoot Head'. This was in 1980 (we discuss it at length on one of our 'Case Study' pages). According to Bower, quoting again from his 2002 interview (although he repeats the same elsewhere),
"Dave Chorley said to me one day, he says, ‘I’ve had enough of this’ ... I said, ‘you just hang on a minute,’ I said, ‘and especially when the Punchbowl's ploughed, now that we can get down in there,’ and of course, lo-and-behold, it was on the television news the next night,"
This is flatly false. The first Cheesefoot Head circles were never on television or in the papers. A second formation, made a full year later was in the media - but one to two weeks after it was supposedly made. Bower claims the circles were made on Friday and televised on Saturday, when in fact, the news item was broadcast on a Tuesday and no-one (apart from their creator, that is) has any knowledge of when they actually appeared.
Above: the 1981 triplet. No-one knows what day it appeared
This may seem trivial, but in fact is highly relevant. Bower is inventing stories, in order to make the research community look foolish. But the fact is, the circles were not being spotted and dates not being recorded at all accurately in the 1980s, not least because researchers were not working in great numbers to locate them in these early years, meaning data is scant. Looking at the pre-1985 circles in Circular Evidence, for example, the first, at Headbourne Worthy, is just dated to “the Summer of 1978”, and that is followed by two circles at Litchfield similarly vaguely dated to “Summer 1981”. The Cheesefoot Head triplet mentioned above comes next, and as stated, was being spoken about on the Wednesday although the authors don’t have a formation date. It is followed in the book by Litchfield, 1982, without a date, and then Headbourne Worthy in the same year, also without a date. The 1983 Cheesefoot Head quintuplet on p26 is believed to have appeared during the night of June 19/20, 1983 (ibid) meaning it was found on a Monday. The Corhampton formation on the next page was found “during the first week of August 1984” - and from there we move on to the 1985 circles when D&D’s Friday night routine was discontinued.
Note how vague all this data is, which is not surprising. One wouldn’t expect accurate formation dates in these years. A look at the photographic records reveals that few of the images were taken by researchers themselves, and most of these “early” circles were reported to Delgado and Andrews some years after they were seen, so could hardly have been commented on at the time. Even in later years, the situation was essentially the same. If one looks at circles on (for example) p53, p54, p78 and so on, the circle formation dates are unknown and the circles visibly aged by the time they were photographed.
Note how vague all this data is, which is not surprising. One wouldn’t expect accurate formation dates in these years. A look at the photographic records reveals that few of the images were taken by researchers themselves, and most of these “early” circles were reported to Delgado and Andrews some years after they were seen, so could hardly have been commented on at the time. Even in later years, the situation was essentially the same. If one looks at circles on (for example) p53, p54, p78 and so on, the circle formation dates are unknown and the circles visibly aged by the time they were photographed.
Above: this triplet was about five weeks old by the time it was investigated (Circular Evidence p78). Note how fallen seed heads have by now germinated in the ground, giving rise to a carpet of fresh green shoots between the flattened stems. No-one knows which day of the week it first appeared.
And as late as 1992, D&D supporter John Macnish was spending time with photographer Busty Taylor, while D&D actually were hoaxing circles, with Macnish's advance knowledge. In his book, Crop Circle Apocalypse, Macnish says: "We were able to assess how efficient Busty Taylor's aerial reconnaissance actually was. (It often took weeks for a circle to be reported.) We also knew about circles which were never discovered."
So even in these days of high surveillance, in areas well-know for crop formations, there was still no reason to think circles were being found the day after they were made. So, one has to ask, what basis was there for the claim that circles were known to keep appearing on Friday nights/Saturday mornings in the period 1978-84?
Mrs Bower
Notwithstanding their supposed wandering around in the open with stompers and camping stoves, there was a more significant issue to look at when it comes to secrecy - keeping years and years of circle-making from Doug's wife, Ilene. Their explanation of this, and how she eventually found out is filled with the now familiar contradictions - so let's see what they had to say, and we are
fortunate to have several pieces of first-hand testimony from Ilene herself.
Let's begin with the first version of events, as told through the journalist's pen in the original TODAY story:
Let's begin with the first version of events, as told through the journalist's pen in the original TODAY story:
Before beginning the hoax, Doug and Bachelor Dave swore to tell no one – even Doug’s wife Ilene. But after six years of his nightly disappearances, she had grown suspicious. “It started to cross my mind that he might be seeing another woman,” she said. “Dave is one for the ladies and I thought the company you keep sometimes rubs off. “I started checking the mileage of the car, like I had seen in a television play at the time – it was jumping up 400 miles a week.” Doug said: “Eventually, she confronted me about it. I realised I was cornered so I grabbed all the scrapbooks full of all the pictures we had taken of the circles and threw them down on the table with such a thud.” But it was not easy to convince his wife that he was responsible for the baffling circles. Ilene added: “I wasn’t convinced till I said to him ‘all right tell me where the next one will be then’. “When he was able to do that, tell me exactly when and where, that’s when I couldn’t doubt any more.” |
So, the story goes that Mrs Bower noticed high mileage readings after making it her business to check up on Doug, suspecting he might be having an affair. Why did she think she should check the mileage in the car, of all things, knowing full well that Doug was driving it away every Friday night? She needed to know where he was going, not whether he was going! “…like I had seen in a television play at the time,” she explains.
The following year, Bower in interview with Clas Svahn told it slightly differently: “One day my wife said to me, ‘the car needs servicing very regularly, I notice with all this mileage that’s going on the clock’.” The story is somewhat altered, in that the car mileage was noticed because of its servicing schedule, not because Mrs Bower was suspecting an affair.
When we read Macnish's book, Crop Circle Apocalypse, we get some interesting background on the so-called 'Healey's Comet' quintuplet of 1984. Macnish says (p228): "Doug went on holiday to Sussex and while there made a quintuplet near Alfreston [sic]." This is not particularly important until we get back to the issue of Mrs Bower and the car mileage.
At the London meeting in 1993, according to Paul Fuller’s summary, Ilene herself invoked the Alfriston circles of 1984 as a contributing factor in the mileage being high, and now added that she “noticed [the resulting high mileage] because she did the books for her husband's picture-framing business” - in other words, nothing to do with actively checking up on him because she suspected infidelity, and not because the car kept needing to be serviced. Moreover, if, as Macnish says, they had been on holiday there, Mrs Bower would have had in her mind a perfectly valid reason for there being higher than usual mileage that week - so why invoke the journey and mileage at all?
The plot thickens yet further in the 2005 interview which appeared in the book The Field Guide. This version has Mrs Bower journeying from Southampton to Alfriston with Doug, but not for a holiday - in fact, to view the circle he’d just made (without her knowledge). So, they were apparently not on holiday there at the time, and in any case, there was still a reason known to her for why the car mileage would have been high that specific week - their sight-seeing trip.
Also in The Field Guide (p225) Bower says: "I used to tell [Mrs Bower] every time the car needed servicing. One time I approached her about it and she said 'But the darned thing was only serviced a few weeks ago'." So, another twist. Now, it is Bower flagging the mileage up to her. Incidentally, we should note that even cars with high mileages need servicing rather infrequently, certainly not every "few weeks".
Clearly not all of this can be true. Which parts are legitimate is anyone’s guess, and to compound matters, there are several other worrying factors in Mrs Bower's testimony. For example, after recounting how she initially disbelieved her husband’s story about making all the circles, she challenged him: “I said to him ‘all right tell me where the next one will be then’” (TODAY 10.9.91). But come 1998, and the interviews for the 1999 Countryfile programme, her story was, “I said [to Doug], ‘I’ll select a design, I’ll select a field - and you can do it the next evening, and then you can take me and show me that you’ve done it.’ And this is what he had to do,” - which is a different story from merely asking him where it would be.
According to D&D’s testimony, they had made around 200 circles since starting in 1978 – an average of around 15 per summer. According to the testimony, Mrs Bower only confronted her husband “after six years of his nightly disappearances” – which is to say, after the 90th or so absence. That means that on 90 occasions, Doug Bower was out of the house during the night, with journeys as far afield from his Southampton home as Warminster in west Wiltshire – and these are considerable journeys to keep making. Such journeys would entail driving times of logically an hour-plus, and the fact that the circles were started after dark (in summer, after, say 10pm at the earliest), and considering that it takes time to make a circle, then he would not have returned home until into the early hours. This is supported by statements elsewhere, in which the two mention being out at 2pm and so on – and Bower says he did this up to 90 times.
Mrs Bower supposedly thought her husband was out drinking with Chorley all this time, despite the fact that pubs stopped serving by law at 11pm in those days. Of course it was not unknown for “lock-ins” to occur, and it is possible the two could have retired to Dave’s house before Doug went home. Nevertheless, one would have thought that indulging in prolonged drinking sessions like these would mean Doug got home somewhat under the influence. Yet by his account, he would have been sober enough to make the circles with accuracy, then drive a car home. He would hardly have staggered in the door drunk.
Moreover, it is baffling that Mrs Bower would not have realised if he really were out in farm fields. As someone who has hoaxed circles myself, I can say that a regular hoaxer would have left plenty of tell-tale signs – muddy boots, muddy trouser bottoms, damp clothing generally, fragments of plant material in his clothes and in the car, dirt on his person, muddy traces in the car – and so on.
Besides keeping files of photos (no digital cameras in those days, just physical photographs), Doug would buy newspapers and store files of cuttings. He also surreptitiously created (and kept) crop design paintings and diagrams, and was the proud owner of a stomper board, a bizarre cap with a sighting device and sundry other equipment. None of this, apparently, was noticed nor aroused any concern in Mrs Bower.
Once again, I ask you, the reader, to decide if you are prepared to believe all this.
The following year, Bower in interview with Clas Svahn told it slightly differently: “One day my wife said to me, ‘the car needs servicing very regularly, I notice with all this mileage that’s going on the clock’.” The story is somewhat altered, in that the car mileage was noticed because of its servicing schedule, not because Mrs Bower was suspecting an affair.
When we read Macnish's book, Crop Circle Apocalypse, we get some interesting background on the so-called 'Healey's Comet' quintuplet of 1984. Macnish says (p228): "Doug went on holiday to Sussex and while there made a quintuplet near Alfreston [sic]." This is not particularly important until we get back to the issue of Mrs Bower and the car mileage.
At the London meeting in 1993, according to Paul Fuller’s summary, Ilene herself invoked the Alfriston circles of 1984 as a contributing factor in the mileage being high, and now added that she “noticed [the resulting high mileage] because she did the books for her husband's picture-framing business” - in other words, nothing to do with actively checking up on him because she suspected infidelity, and not because the car kept needing to be serviced. Moreover, if, as Macnish says, they had been on holiday there, Mrs Bower would have had in her mind a perfectly valid reason for there being higher than usual mileage that week - so why invoke the journey and mileage at all?
The plot thickens yet further in the 2005 interview which appeared in the book The Field Guide. This version has Mrs Bower journeying from Southampton to Alfriston with Doug, but not for a holiday - in fact, to view the circle he’d just made (without her knowledge). So, they were apparently not on holiday there at the time, and in any case, there was still a reason known to her for why the car mileage would have been high that specific week - their sight-seeing trip.
Also in The Field Guide (p225) Bower says: "I used to tell [Mrs Bower] every time the car needed servicing. One time I approached her about it and she said 'But the darned thing was only serviced a few weeks ago'." So, another twist. Now, it is Bower flagging the mileage up to her. Incidentally, we should note that even cars with high mileages need servicing rather infrequently, certainly not every "few weeks".
Clearly not all of this can be true. Which parts are legitimate is anyone’s guess, and to compound matters, there are several other worrying factors in Mrs Bower's testimony. For example, after recounting how she initially disbelieved her husband’s story about making all the circles, she challenged him: “I said to him ‘all right tell me where the next one will be then’” (TODAY 10.9.91). But come 1998, and the interviews for the 1999 Countryfile programme, her story was, “I said [to Doug], ‘I’ll select a design, I’ll select a field - and you can do it the next evening, and then you can take me and show me that you’ve done it.’ And this is what he had to do,” - which is a different story from merely asking him where it would be.
According to D&D’s testimony, they had made around 200 circles since starting in 1978 – an average of around 15 per summer. According to the testimony, Mrs Bower only confronted her husband “after six years of his nightly disappearances” – which is to say, after the 90th or so absence. That means that on 90 occasions, Doug Bower was out of the house during the night, with journeys as far afield from his Southampton home as Warminster in west Wiltshire – and these are considerable journeys to keep making. Such journeys would entail driving times of logically an hour-plus, and the fact that the circles were started after dark (in summer, after, say 10pm at the earliest), and considering that it takes time to make a circle, then he would not have returned home until into the early hours. This is supported by statements elsewhere, in which the two mention being out at 2pm and so on – and Bower says he did this up to 90 times.
Mrs Bower supposedly thought her husband was out drinking with Chorley all this time, despite the fact that pubs stopped serving by law at 11pm in those days. Of course it was not unknown for “lock-ins” to occur, and it is possible the two could have retired to Dave’s house before Doug went home. Nevertheless, one would have thought that indulging in prolonged drinking sessions like these would mean Doug got home somewhat under the influence. Yet by his account, he would have been sober enough to make the circles with accuracy, then drive a car home. He would hardly have staggered in the door drunk.
Moreover, it is baffling that Mrs Bower would not have realised if he really were out in farm fields. As someone who has hoaxed circles myself, I can say that a regular hoaxer would have left plenty of tell-tale signs – muddy boots, muddy trouser bottoms, damp clothing generally, fragments of plant material in his clothes and in the car, dirt on his person, muddy traces in the car – and so on.
Besides keeping files of photos (no digital cameras in those days, just physical photographs), Doug would buy newspapers and store files of cuttings. He also surreptitiously created (and kept) crop design paintings and diagrams, and was the proud owner of a stomper board, a bizarre cap with a sighting device and sundry other equipment. None of this, apparently, was noticed nor aroused any concern in Mrs Bower.
Once again, I ask you, the reader, to decide if you are prepared to believe all this.