The 1993 Survey

                                                      *
                                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^
                                            / .................. \
                                         ===========================
                                                  +        +
                                                       
                                                       
                                                       
                                                   The 1993
                                             CANADIAN UFO SURVEY
                                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                              Five Years of UFOs
                                                       
                                                 Compiled by
                                              Chris A. Rutkowski
                                                       
                                                       
                                                Contributors:
                
                        Paul Anderson, UFO BC                   Roy Bauer, UFOROM
                        Steve Bucek, UFO BC                     Charles Burchil
                        Grant Cameron, UFOROM                   Daniel Clairmont, MUFON SK
                        Graham Conway, UFO BC                   Tony Cowling, UFO BC
                        Michel Deschamps, MUFON ON              Frances Ellis, UFO BC
                        Lorne Goldfader, UFORIC                 Jeff Harland, UFOROM
                        Gordon Kijek, AUFOSG
                        George Kriger, UFOROM                   Victor Lourenco, MUFON ON
                        Mike McCarty, MUFON ON                  Rob Nowatschka, UFO BC
                        Christian Page, UFO PQ                  Stephen Parsons, MUFON NF
                        Vladimir Simosko, UFOROM                Michael Strainic, UFO BC
                        David Thacker, AUFOSG                   Tom Theophanous, MUFON ON
                        Donald Vanden Hoorn, UFO BC             Ruth Walde, MUFON SK
                        Bonnie Wheeler, CUFORG                  Drew Williamson, MUFON ON
                
                                                              
                                                       
                                                 Published by
                                                 
                                         Ufology Research of Manitoba
                                                   Box 1918
                                              Winnipeg, Manitoba
                                               Canada   R3C 3R2
                                               
                                                 May 5, 1994
                                                                                             
                                      The 1993 Canadian UFO Survey
                
                
                Introduction
                
                     Since 1989, UFO case data has been solicited from all known and active
                investigators and researchers in Canada for analyses and comparison with
                other
                compilations.  Before that time, individual researchers would normally
                maintain their own files, with little or no communication with others.  Even
                today, representatives of major UFO organizations often do not regularly
                submit case data, and the parent organizations themselves tend not to do much
                analyses with the data they do receive, although this is changing.
                
                     After favourable responses from the publication of previous Canadian UFO
                Surveys, UFOROM decided to continue the systematic collection of raw UFO
                report data in Canada and prepare yearly reports for general circulation.  It
                always has been felt that the dissemination of such data would be of great
                advantage to researchers, so it is presented here once again as data with
                some
                analysis.
                
                     This is not to suggest that statistical studies of UFO data are without
                their limitations and problems. Allan Hendry, in his landmark book The UFO
                Handbook, pointed out flaws in such studies and asked:
                
                     ... do UFO statistics represent a valid pursuit for more knowledge about
                     this elusive phenomenon, or do they merely reflect frustration that none
                     of the individual reports are capable of standing on their own two feet?
                     (1979, p. 269)
                
                Hendry offered six questions to ask of statistical ufology: 
                
                     1) Does the report collection reflect truly random sampling?
                
                     2) Have the individual cases been adequately validated?
                
                     3) Are apples and oranges being compared? Are NLs necessarily the same
                        kind of UFO as DDs?
                
                     4) Are differing details among cases obscured through simplification for
                        the purpose of comparisons?
                
                     5) Does the study imply the question: "Surely this mass of data proves
                        UFOs exist?"
                
                and  6) Do the correlations really show causality? 
                
                The Canadian UFO Survey was undertaken with these and other critical comments
                in mind. Readers are left to judge for themselves the value of these
                statistical analyses.
                
                
                Canadian UFO Data
                
                     The response from Canadian researchers to requests for 1993 data was
                less
                prompt than in previous years; there was some difficulty in receiving cases
                from the "active" researchers and there are still some researchers who, for
                whatever reasons, do not submit cases for the annual survey.  In addition,
                some researchers do not maintain useable case files and do not retain
                quantitative criteria in their investigations (for example, contactee
                groups).
                It is now known that only a small fraction of "active" ufologists and self-
                proclaimed "researchers" actually investigate cases and maintain useable
                records. However, despite these problems, more than twice the number of
                reports were obtained for 1993 than the previous year. The 1993 report may be
                much more comprehensive because of its broader database.
                
                     In 1989, 141 UFO reports were obtained for analysis.  In 1990, 194
                reports were recorded.  In 1991, 165 reports were received and in 1992, 223
                cases were examined. In 1993, 489 reports were obtained, an increase of more
                than 200% over the previous year.
                
                     In 1993, reports were obtained from contributing investigators' files,
                press clippings, the files of the National Research Council of Canada (NRC)
                and fireball reports from geophysicists and astronomers associated with the
                Royal Astronomical Society of Canada and the Meteor and Impacts Advisory
                Committee (MIAC) affiliated with the Canadian Space Agency.  The NRC
                routinely
                receives UFO reports from private citizens and from RCMP, civic police and
                military personnel. Included among the NRC reports are many observations of
                meteors and fireballs, and these have been added into the UFO report database
                since 1989.
                
                     There are several reasons for including such IFOs in the UFO report
                database. First, previous studies of UFO data have included meteor and
                fireball reports. For this study, the working definition of a UFO is: "an
                object seen in the sky which its observer cannot identify." In many
                instances,
                observers fail to recognize stars, aircraft and bolides, and report them as
                UFOs. That is why some UFO investigators often spend many hours sorting IFOs
                from UFOs. Historically, analyses of UFO data such as American projects like
                Grudge, Sign and Blue Book all included raw UFO data which later resolved
                into
                categories of UFOs and IFOs. Second, observed objects are sometimes quickly
                assigned a particular IFO explanation even though later investigation
                suggests
                such an explanation was unwarranted. One 1993 case can serve as an example:
                Case NRC 93-030, on 26 February 1993, in Cambellton, New Brunswick. It
                involved a triangular formation of 11 lights in which moved slowly through a
                fog layer and was observed for 45 seconds by a witness. The label assigned
                the
                report was "possible meteorite." Given the information on the case, it is
                probable that the object was not a "meteorite," but it is impossible to give
                a
                definitive explanation at this time.
                
                     Fireballs have always been reported in Canada. The tremendous increase
                in
                fireball reports for 1993 suggests that people have become more comfortable
                with reporting observations of unusual objects in the sky. Another factor is
                that organizations such the Canadian Space Agency appear to be more visible
                to
                the general public and are requesting and receiving fireball information.
                This
                easier access to information has accelerated by the blossoming of the
                so-called "Information Highway" and the Internet. Indeed, many of the reports
                in the 1993 survey came via electronic mail and newsgroups.
                
                     Until 1993, the number of Canadian UFO reports appeared to remain
                constant at an average of 180 cases per year, even allowing for the influx of
                cases from new contributors to the database. However, the number of reports
                received in 1993 represents a significant increase over previous years. The
                largest contributor to this increase was a single fireball event on October
                30, 1993. That evening, a spectacular object and a sonic boom was reported by
                literally hundreds of people throughout Canada. More than 120 individual
                reports were filed with astronomers, RCMP, police, the NRC and other
                agencies.
                (This event will be discussed later in this report.) The implication of this
                case is that statistical tabulations of UFO characteristics in 1993 will be
                skewed by a significant amount.
                
                
                Note on Missing Data: 
                
                     Several problems were encountered in acquiring and using data submitted
                by Canadian ufologists:
                
                1)   In some provinces, localized flaps prevented investigators from
                following
                     up individual reports, and instead only noted that several dozen reports
                     were received from a certain area during a particular month. In these
                     situations, the meagre report data (often just a note that an anonymous
                     person had left a message on an answering machine saying that an object
                     had been seen, but no other details) could not be satisfactorily added
                to
                     the database. (The number of such "lost" sightings is not insignificant;
                     more than 200 reports may fall into this category, thus raising the true
                     number of reported UFOs in 1993 in Canada to about 700!)
                
                2)   Only one Close Encounter of the Fourth Kind (CE4) was included in the
                     database. It should probably have been eliminated. CE4s are the
                     sensational "abduction" cases which are currently receiving wide
                     attention. Some researchers have speculated that thousands of such
                     abductions occur each year, based on various surveys and the number of
                     witnesses ("experiencers") coming forward. Since abductions are often
                     reported long after the fact, exact times and dates may be meaningless
                as
                     UFO data. Similarly, since witnesses' memories are clouded or obscured,
                     other data such as colour, duration and even location may be impossible
                     to ascertain. Indeed, if, as some sceptics would suggest, that
                abductions
                     are a psychological rather than a "real" phenomenon, then CE4s may not
                be
                     appropriate for inclusion in UFO databases. And, if they really are true
                     close encounters, their complexity decrees that their inclusion in a raw
                     data listing might be inappropriate as well. For these and other
                reasons,
                     all other CE4 cases were not included in this study. From information
                     received through conversations and interviews with abductee therapists
                     and other researchers, it is possible to speculate that at least 25
                     relatively-documented abductee cases occurred in Canada in 1993.
                
                3)   Approximately 30 reports were received after statistical analyses had
                     been run. This is unfortunate, but emphasizes the need for ufologists to
                     respond promptly to requests for data. Although it is widely known that
                     data collection for this annual study begins in January of each year,
                     many ufologists delay sending their data or ignore repeated requests for
                     data submissions.
                
                
                Method
                
                     Data for each case was received by UFOROM from participating researchers
                across Canada. The information then was coded and entered into a WordPerfect
                file, separated by tabs. The file was then converted into ASCII DOS text and
                uploaded into a UNIX environment where it was read into a SAS statistical
                package and analyzed.
                
                     The coding key is as follows:
                
                Example: 993 10 23 2108 CALGARY AB  NL  600  BLUE  1  TRI  RUMBLE  6  DND  P
                
                Field:     1  2  3    4       5  6   7    8     9 10   11      12 13   14 15
                
                     Field 1 is a default YEAR for the report  (UFOROM is now coding to allow
                             for the next millennium).
                
                     Field 2 is the MONTH of the incident.
                
                     Field 3 is the DATE of the sighting.
                
                     Field 4 is the local TIME, on the 24-hour clock.
                
                     Field 5 is the geographical LOCATION of the incident.  
                
                     Field 6 is the PROVINCE where the sighting occurred.
                
                     Field 7 is TYPE of report.
                
                     Field 8 is the DURATION of the sighting, in seconds (a value of 600 thus
                             represents 10 minutes).
                
                     Field 9 is the primary COLOUR of the object(s) seen.
                
                     Field 10 is the number of WITNESSES.
                
                     Field 11 is the SHAPE of the primary object.
                
                     Field 12 indicates whether or not a SOUND was heard.
                
                     Field 13 is the assessed QUALITY of the report.
                
                     Field 14 is the SOURCE of the report.
                
                     Field 15 is the EVALUATION of the case.
                
                
                Analyses of the Data
                
                     In 1993, there were apparent significant increases in the number of
                reports in Manitoba, while there was an apparent decrease in reports in
                Alberta and Quebec.  As usual, British Columbia represents the largest
                fraction of UFO reports of all the provinces.  Since 1990, BC has garnered
                between 30% and 40% of the total number of cases per year.  As mentioned in
                previous annual reports, this is partly due to the highly efficient UFO
                reporting system in that province, and the comparatively large number of
                active investigators. The rest of the Provinces appear to have had average
                numbers of reports in 1993.
                
                     If we look at only the NRC as a source for UFO reports, the geographical
                distribution of cases is more related to population. The most reports then
                come from Ontario, followed by Manitoba and Quebec. As mentioned earlier,
                there was a major fireball over the prairies in 1993, raising the number of
                cases from Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and this caused the higher proportion
                of
                reports from those two provinces. Taking that factor into account, the
                distribution of cases agrees somewhat better with population, although there
                is still an overabundance of reports from Western Canada. It is not clear why
                this would be so.
                
                
                                                    TABLE 1
                                    Distribution of UFO Reports by Province
                
                                                                               
                                         1989    1990    1991    1992    1993  
                                                                               
                                  BC      15      76      59      90     157   
                                  AB      16       9      22       8      56   
                                  SK      18      10       7       9      93   
                                  MB      22      20       6      23      74   
                                  ON      34      21      30      56      51   
                                  PQ      28      36      16      10      32   
                                  NB       1       7       9       9       3   
                                  PEI      -       3       1       -       1   
                                  NS       3       5       7       3       3   
                                  NF       3       4       4       4       7   
                                  YK       -       1       1       3       -   
                                  NWT      1       2       -       1       5   
                                                                               
                
                
                
                     The monthly breakdowns of reports during each year show slightly
                different patterns from those of previous years.  In 1989, there was a
                significant increase in UFO reports in the late fall, with other months
                maintaining what appeared to be a fairly constant "normal" level of reports.
                But 1990 saw two major increases in report numbers in two months: April and
                August.  The "normal" level of monthly report numbers appeared to be constant
                in other months, with minor fluctuations.  In 1991, reports peaked in August,
                but there was no single obvious trough. The 1992 breakdown again shows no
                clear peaks in monthly report numbers. This is most curious, because UFO
                reports often are thought to peak in summer and trough in winter. This has
                never been the case with Canadian UFO reports throughout this five-year
                period
                of study.  In 1993, the opposite of what is usually imagined was true: there
                were peaks in winter, and troughs in summer. The October peak is easily
                explained as due to the fireball. Even taking this into account, there are
                more cases in fall than in summer, and more in winter than spring and early
                fall. Again, there is no immediately obvious reason for this.
                
                     However, in an historical analysis of 480 Manitoba UFO cases in UFOROM's
                MANUFOCAT, a distinct June peak and December trough was found. Analyses of
                13,000 cases in Project Blue Book found a similar June peak and December
                trough, though Hendry (1979) suggested that this was a statistical artefact.
                Further studies are needed to understand the monthly distribution of UFO
                data.
                
                
                
                                                   TABLE 2
                                            Monthly Report Numbers
                
                                                                              
                                        1989    1990    1991    1992    1993  
                                                                              
                                Jan      13      17      13      15      59   
                                Feb       9       7       7      16      15   
                                Mar       6       6      17      27      20   
                                Apr       9      47      12      16      22   
                                May       5      10       7      22      14   
                                Jun       9      10      12      16      38   
                                Jul       5       9      16      23      27   
                                Aug       5      47      25      19      49   
                                Sep      12      15      16      11      41   
                                Oct      32      16      12      16     152   
                                Nov      27      10      11      21      24   
                                Dec       9       -      17      21      21   
                                                                              
                
                
                
                
                     An analysis by report type shows a similar breakdown to that found in
                previous years.  The percentage of cases of a particular type remains roughly
                constant from year to year, with minor variations. Nocturnal lights (NLs),
                for
                example, comprised 60% of all reports in 1989, 73% in 1990, 67% in 1991, 61%
                in 1992 and up to a high of 76% in 1993. The average of these is 69%, which
                agrees well with the meta- analysis conducted by Hendry (1979), which found
                that NLs comprised 70% of the cases studied. But, because he was using the
                original standard Hynek classification system, he did not have the present
                category of Nocturnal Discs (NDs). These were probably distributed between
                NLs
                and DDs in his study.
                
                
                
                                                   TABLE 3
                                Report Types (Modified Hynek Classifications)
                
                                                                               
                                         1989    1990    1991    1992    1993  
                                                                               
                                NL        84     141     110     136     372   
                                ND        20      24      26      44      77   
                                DD        16      15      13      20      26   
                                CE1       10       2       7      15       8   
                                CE2        7       1       4       5       2   
                                CE3        -       -       1       2       1   
                                CE4        2       4       2       3       1   
                                EV         2       3                       1   
                                RD                         1                   
                                PH                         1       1           
                                                                               
                
                
                
                For those unfamiliar with the classifications, a summary follows:
                
                     NL (Nocturnal Light) - light source in night sky
                
                     ND (Nocturnal Disc) - light source in night sky that appears to have a
                        definite shape
                
                     DD (Daylight Disc) - unknown object observed during daytime hours
                
                     CE1 (Close Encounter of the First Kind) - ND or DD occurring within 200
                         metres of a witness
                
                     CE2 (Close Encounter of the Second Kind) - CE1 where physical effects
                         left or noted
                
                     CE3 (Close Encounter of the Third Kind) - CE1 where figures/entities are
                         encountered
                
                     CE4 (Close Encounter of the Fourth Kind) - an alleged "abduction" or
                         "contact" experience
                
                     EV (Evidence) - a case where physical traces left by an event are the
                        primary claim
                
                     RD (Radar) - UFOs observed on radar
                
                     PH (Photograph) - photographs of a UFO, but no actual sighting
                
                     The category of Nocturnal Disc was created by UFOROM for differentiation
                within its own report files.  Similarly, Evidence is also an ad hoc creation,
                and may not be applicable by other researchers. Normally, Evidence would
                include such physical traces as "crop circles", "landing rings" and "saucer
                nests". However, in 1990 there was a great increase in the numbers of such
                traces discovered in North America, and it was decided to treat these as
                separate from UFO reports in these Surveys.
                
                     The breakdown by Evaluation for 1993 cases was similar to results from
                previous years.  There were four operative categories: Explained,
                Insufficient
                Information, Possible or Probable Explanation, and Unknown (or Unexplained).
                Readers are warned that a classification of Unknown does not imply that an
                alien spacecraft was observed; no such interpretation can be made with
                certainty, based on the given data (though the probability of this scenario
                is
                admittedly never zero).  In most cases, Evaluations are made subjectively by
                both the contributing investigators and the compiler of this report.  The
                category of Unknown is adopted if the contributed data or case report
                contains
                enough information such that a conventional explanation cannot be
                satisfactorily proposed.  This does not mean that the case will never be
                explained, but only that a viable explanation is not immediately obvious.
                
                                                   TABLE 4
                                       Evaluation of Canadian UFO Data
                
                                                                                           
                                 1989        1990        1991        1992         1993     
                                                                                           
                                #    %      #    %      #    %      #    %       #    %    
                                                                                           
                   Explained                            2    1.2   17    8     154   31.5  
                                                                                           
                   Insuf.      74   52.5   90   46.4   80   48.5   83   37     170   34.8  
                                                                                           
                   Poss.       47   33.3   78   40.2   69   41.8   74   33     115   23.5  
                                                                                           
                   Unknown     20   14.2   26   13.4   14    8.5   49   22      50   10.2  
                                                                                           
                
                
                     The average proportion of Unknowns throughout the 5-year study was about
                14.5%, a high figure considering that this would imply that more than one in
                ten UFOs cannot be explained. However, there are several factors which affect
                this value. The level and quality of UFO report investigation varies because
                there are no explicit standards for ufologists. Some "believers" might be
                biased to consider most UFO sightings as mysterious, whereas those with more
                of a sceptical predisposition might tend to subconsciously (or consciously!)
                reduce the Unknowns in their files. Furthermore, since there are no
                absolutes,
                the subjective nature of assigning Evaluations is actually an interpretation
                of the facts by individual researchers.
                
                     If we look only at those Unknowns with a Quality rating of eight or
                greater, we then are left with only 26 high-quality Unknowns in 1993 (5.3%).
                This value is comparable with other years: 4.9% in 1989, 4.6% in 1990, 7.3%
                in
                1991 and 7.6% in 1992. And, if we eliminate the category of NLs from the 1993
                Unknowns in an attempt to focus on detailed, close observations of UFOs, we
                get only 16 cases out of the original 489, or 3.3%. This last value is in
                accordance with the USAF Blue Book studies which found three to four percent
                of their cases were "excellent" Unknowns.
                
                     The average Quality rating of reports was 6.36, indicating that there
                was
                a significant amount of useful information available through investigations
                for the majority of cases. A breakdown of Quality versus Evaluation shows
                that
                both the Explained and Unknown reports carried with them a substantial amount
                of information. Obviously, in those cases, either the investigators found
                enough evidence to explain the observations as of conventional objects, or
                found that their investigations could not find an explanation with the same
                quality and level of information. The cases with Possible explanations or
                Insufficient Information were of much lower Quality and, hence, less
                information for evaluation.
                
                     The Quality of Nocturnal Lights varied considerably, while NDs, DDs and
                CEs had an average Quality Rating near 7 on the scale.
                
                     Finally, it should be emphasized that even these high-quality Unknowns
                do
                not imply alien visitation. Each case may still have an explanation following
                further investigation. And of those that remain unexplained, they remain
                unexplained, but still are not incontrovertible proof of extraterrestrial
                intervention.
                
                     The hourly distribution of cases follows a similar pattern for 1993 as
                in
                previous years.  There appears to be a continuous curve, with a peak at 2200
                hours local and a trough around 1100 hours local. Most sightings occur
                between
                9:00 p.m. and midnight. Since most UFOs are nocturnal lights, this is not
                unexpected. The number of possible observers drops off sharply near midnight,
                and we would expect that the hourly rate of UFO reports would vary with two
                factors: potential observers and darkness.
                
                     The average number of witnesses per case went down from a value of
                2.12/case in 1989 to 1.40/case in 1990, then up again to 1.91/case in 1991.
                In
                1992, this value was up slightly to 2.36/case. The average number of
                witnesses
                in 1993 was 2.07/case. The five-year average was 1.97 witnesses per case.
                These figures indicate that a typical UFO experience has more than one
                witness, and support the contention that UFO sightings represent observations
                of physical phenomena.
                
                     The category of Duration is interesting in that it represents the
                subjective length of time the UFO experience lasted.  Naturally, these times
                are greatly suspect because it is known that people tend to misjudge the flow
                of time.  However, some people can be good at estimating time, so this value
                has some meaning.  Although an estimate of "one hour" may be in error by
                several minutes, it is unlikely that the correct value would be, for example,
                one minute (disregarding the claims of "missing time" during the abduction
                category of experiences).  Furthermore, there have been cases when a UFO was
                observed and clocked accurately, so that we can be reasonably certain that
                UFO
                events can last considerable periods of time.  The average duration of a
                sighting can be calculated as a summation of all given durations then divided
                by the number of cases with a stated duration.  The resulting value for 1991
                is about 12 minutes, down from 19 minutes in 1990. In 1992 and 1993, the
                average duration was again about 12 minutes. This surprisingly long duration
                is due likely to the large number of sightings lasting only a few seconds
                contrasted with the comparative few that lasted several hours.
                
                     An interesting result of the analyses is that long-duration sightings
                tend to occur in the early morning hours, from about midnight until 6:00 a.m.
                It is probable that the majority of observations at this time are those of
                astronomical objects, moving slowly with the rotation of the Earth.
                
                     Duration data by itself is not wholly useful in analyzing UFO behaviour.
                Hendry describes Duration data this way:
                 
                     Duration is a powerful feature of identity when it refers to extremely
                     short and long events, but is otherwise mostly a reflection of the
                     witness's behaviour during the event, coupled with the fluctuating
                     behaviour of the objects watched. (1979, p. 249)
                
                Extremely short duration events are usually fireballs or bolides, while very
                long duration events of an hour or more are very probably astronomical
                objects. In between, there can be no way to distinguish conventional objects
                from UFOs solely with Duration data. (Hendry also cites a Canadian study by
                an
                Ontario UFO group which timed aircraft observations and found that the
                duration of such sightings varied between 15 seconds to more than 8 minutes.)
                
                     The Duration of sightings decreased with the number of reports. The
                majority of sightings had Durations of only a few seconds, while those with
                longer Duration were less in number.
                
                     In cases where a colour of an object was reported in 1993, the most
                common colour was white (36.3%), followed distantly by red (15.7%).  Other
                colours were also represented, although there is a noticeable change from
                previous years, when green and orange were the dominant colours.  Since most
                UFOs are nocturnal starlike objects, the abundance of white objects is not
                surprising.  Other colours such as red, blue and green often are associated
                with bolides (fireballs).
                
                     Shape was a good predictor of UFO type, as was expected. Fireballs and
                point sources were usually Nocturnal Lights, whereas cigars, discs and
                triangles were either Nocturnal Discs or Daylight Discs.
                
                
                Summary of Results
                
                     As with previous annual Surveys, the 1993 Survey does not offer any
                positive proof of the physical reality of UFOs.  However, it does show that
                some phenomenon which is called a UFO is continually being observed by
                witnesses.  The typical UFO sighting is that of two people observing a
                moving,
                distant white or red light for several minutes.  In most cases, the UFO is
                likely to be eventually identified as a conventional object such as an
                aircraft or astronomical object.  However, in a small percentage of cases,
                some UFOs do not appear to have an easy explanation and they may be given the
                label of "unknown".
                
                     What are these "unknowns"?  An additional classification is useful to
                try
                and better understand this kind of report.  In the gathering of data for the
                study, contributors were asked to give a value for their personal Evaluation
                of the reliability of the report.  This value is noted as "E" in the case
                listing.  This value gives the likelihood that the UFO experience "really"
                occurred as described by the witness.  Granted, it is impossible for any
                investigator to judge this absolute value; often, a subjective value for two
                categories of "strangeness" and "probability" is assigned.  The Evaluation
                value is another subjective value imposed by the investigator or compiler (or
                both) with a scale such that the low values represent cases with little
                information content and observers of limited observing abilities and the
                higher values represent those cases with excellent witnesses (pilots, police,
                etc.) and also are well-investigated.  Naturally, cases with higher values
                are
                preferred.
                
                
                The 1993 high-quality unexplained cases were the following:
                
                9930130 1900 Quidi Vidi,NF      ND 3600s blue ball, 20 witnesses, STRA
                9930226 1805 Arthur,ON          DD 720s  black cigar, 2 witnesses, CAM
                9930402 1715 Prince George,BC   DD 900s  black object, 2 witnesses, STRA
                9930514 2200 Penticton,BC       ND 10s   cigar-shaped object, 2 witnesses,
                STRA
                9930725 2130 Brocklehurst,BC    ND 300s  1 witness, STRA
                9930726 0100 Brocklehurst,BC    ND 3600s round object, 4 witnesses, STRA
                9930802 2230 Mission,BC         DD 15s   red triangle, 3 witnesses, RCMP
                9930804 0436 Glenella,MB        ND 120s  yellow object, 1 witness, URM
                9930812 0030 Lethbridge,AB      ND 5s    black triangle, 3 witnesses, ASG
                9930820 2245 Winnipeg,MB        DD 90s   yellow triangle, 1 witness, URM
                9930821 2045 Vernon,BC          ND 150s  polygon, 12 witnesses, STRA
                9930822 1930 Kamloops,BC        ND 3s    white trapezoid, 1 witness, STRA
                9930901 0330 Dorothy Lake,MB    C3 60s   blue light & entity, 1 witness, URM
                9930912 1800 Surrey,BC          ND 20s   silver triangle, 3 witnesses, STRA
                9930912 2030 New Westminster,BC ND 20s   red oval object, 2 witnesses, STRA
                9931219 2340 Cold Lake,AB       C1 1200s 2 witnesses, ASG
                
                
                The interpretation of this list is that these cases were among the most
                challenging of all the reports received in 1993.  It should be noted that
                most
                UFO cases go unreported, and that there may be ten times as many UFO
                sightings
                that go unreported as those which get reported to public, private or military
                agencies. Furthermore, it should be noted that some cases with lower
                reliability ratings suffer only from incomplete investigations, and that they
                may well be more mysterious than those on the above list.
                
                     UFOs were reported at a rate of about 40 per month across all of Canada
                in 1993, although throughout the 5-year span of this study, the rate drops to
                20 per month. Witnesses range from farmhands to airline pilots and from
                teachers to police.  Witnesses represent all age groups and racial origin.
                What is being observed?  In most cases, only ordinary objects.  However, this
                begs a question.  If people are reporting things that can be explained, then
                the objects they observed were "really" there.  Were the objects we can't
                identify "really" there as well?  If so, what were they?
                
                     These are questions only continued and rational research can answer, and
                only if researchers have the support and encouragement of both scientists and
                the public.
                
                
                Comparisons with Other Analyses of UFO Data
                
                     It is most instructive to compare the UFOROM analyses with those of
                other
                organizations, particularly the National Sighting Research Center of New
                Jersey, headed by Paul Ferrughelli.  The NSRC results have been reported in a
                series of publications, a recent one being the National Sighting Yearbook
                1992.  The NSRC collected UFO reports from newspaper clippings, UFO
                publications and MUFON case files and analyzed the raw UFO data.  Because of
                the difference in data sources, a comparison with the UFOROM results will not
                be true.  However, it is still interesting to compare the two studies.
                
                     The NSRC found a total of 197 UFO reports in 1992.  This number was
                slightly less than that of Canada for the same year.  Because of its larger
                population, it is likely that the USA had many, many more sightings that were
                never accessed through the NSRC's sampling technique.
                
                     The NSRC study revealed that there was no clear trend in the monthly
                distribution of UFO reports in the USA. Peaks were found in June and
                December.
                Grouping the American and Canadian studies together yields a monthly
                distribution with troughs in mid-summer and mid-winter, with slight
                variations
                month-to- month.  It is possible to speculate that with adequate report
                sampling, there would be no monthly variation in the number of sightings,
                except for major flaps which would be more noticeable in an international
                survey. This is somewhat counter-intuitive and suggests that UFO reporting is
                independent of climate and seasonal variations. That is, people do not see
                more UFOs in summer because they spend more time outdoors during that season.
                
                     Like the Canadian study, the American data was unevenly distributed
                throughout the country. Most reports came from just two states, Florida and
                Indiana.  The Florida flap is likely due to the Gulf Breeze reports which
                receive a great deal of media attention.  The distribution of sighting
                duration was nearly identical to the Canadian study.  The average duration of
                a typical American UFO sighting is between 3 and 9 minutes.
                
                     For the hourly distribution of UFO cases, the American study found a
                symmetrical distribution with a pronounced peak at 9 PM local time and a
                trough at around 9 AM local time. This is in complete agreement with UFOCAT
                studies by Hendry (1979) and others cited by him. Canadian distributions are
                normally about one hour later in each peak, but are otherwise identical in
                distribution.  It is possible that there is a "Daylight Savings" effect
                within
                the time data. Breakdown by Hynek classification yields identical
                distributions within both American and Canadian studies, with NLs being
                overwhelmingly predominant.
                
                     A major difference between the Canadian UFO Survey and other studies of
                UFO data is that Close Encounter cases appear to be under-represented in the
                former database. CEs comprise an incredible 30% of the NSRC data and nearly
                50% (!) of the cases in David Spencer's MUFON UFO Report Database. There is
                no
                question that some screening and/or selection is occurring in the studies
                with
                high proportions of CEs. Hendry (1979) noted that CEs comprised 13% of the
                Blue Book unknowns and 14% of his own unexplained cases. (There were four
                unexplained CEs in the 1993 Canadian study.) In each of these studies, CEs
                represent slightly less than one percent of the total cases.
                
                     In summary, Ferrughelli's analyses of American UFO data yield results
                remarkably similar to the UFOROM Canadian studies, despite the differences in
                collection procedures.   The two studies are complementary, and will aid
                further research into the UFO phenomenon.
                
                
                Addendum:  
                
                The Anomalous Event of October 30, 1993
                
                At 9:39 PM CST on October 30, 1993 (0339 UT on October 31, 1993), a brilliant
                object was seen streaking through the night sky over the Canadian prairie
                provinces. Literally hundreds of people witnessed the event, which lasted
                less
                than 10 seconds. Most observers thought the object was greenish-blue in
                colour, though some thought it was orange-red. Reports were received from
                witnesses in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario, with some outliers
                in North Dakota and as far away as Indiana. Because of its trajectory and
                appearance, the object was assumed by scientists to be have been a fireball
                or
                very large meteor. It appears that the burn started over eastern Alberta,
                headed east across Saskatchewan and terminated somewhere over Manitoba.
                Dozens
                of people near Dauphin were jarred by a tremendous "sonic boom" that some
                compared to "a car hitting the house." The noise followed the passage of the
                object by approximately two minutes. Witnesses in eastern Manitoba generally
                saw the object somewhere to their west, so it may have fallen over Lake
                Manitoba.
                
                A complication of the investigation is that a check with NORAD revealed that
                a
                booster rocket from a Russian space mission had apparently re-entered the
                Earth's atmosphere over Canada at precisely the time of the observation. It
                was thus postulated that the observations were consistent with that of the
                space hardware re-entry, and that there had not been a meteoric event.
                However, one researcher was told by another military spokesperson that an
                orbiting camera directed at Canada had recorded two separate events occurring
                within a few minutes of each other. It was possible, then, that some
                witnesses
                had seen the re-entry, while others had seen the fireball. A problem was that
                the predicted impact point or the rocket booster was near Nova Scotia, and
                there were no reports farther east than northwestern Ontario. In addition, if
                the booster was low enough to create a sonic boom over Manitoba, it could
                not,
                under any circumstances, survive to the Atlantic Ocean. And what could be
                made
                of the outlier reports in the United States? Finally, it is most curious that
                no observer saw two events. It would seem logical that at least one person
                would have seen two objects, given the large number of witnesses and recorded
                observations.
                
                Is it possible that a rocket booster re-entered the Earth's atmosphere at the
                same point and the time as a meteoroid? Although the statistical probability
                of such a unique tandem event is not zero, it is very unlikely. Something
                very
                remarkable and still not completely explained was seen by hundreds of people
                that night.
                
                
                References:    
                
                          Ferrughelli, P. (1992). National Sighting Yearbook 1992. National
                          Sighting Research Center, 60 Allen Drive, Wayne, NJ  07470.
                
                          Hendry, Allan. (1979). The UFO Handbook. Doubleday, NY.
                
                          Rutkowski, C. A. (1986). The UFOROM Datafile: MANUFOCAT. Ufology
                          Research of Manitoba, Box 1918, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada  R3C
                3R2.
                
                          Spencer, T. David. (1993). Initial results from the UFO report
                          database. MUFON UFO Journal, number 305, pp. 13-15.
                                                                                             
                                                                    
                 
                                                                                             
                                         The 1993 Canadian 
                                       UFO Survey:  Five Years of UFOs
                                                       
                                             Summary of Findings
                
                
                1.   The number of UFO reports in Canada has been increasing since 1989.
                     Reasons for this include increased public awareness of where to report
                     UFOs and the increasing participation by UFO researchers in the annual
                     studies. There were 141 UFO cases reported in Canada in 1989, but by
                     1993, the number of UFO cases rose to 489.
                
                2.   More UFOs are reported in Western Canada than in Eastern Canada.
                
                3.   More UFOs are reported in the fall and winter than in the spring and
                     summer.
                
                4.   Two-thirds of all UFOs are classed as Nocturnal Lights; that is, they
                are
                     simply lights moving about in the night sky. Most of these can be
                     explained as aircraft or astronomical objects.
                
                5.   31.5% of all UFOs reported in 1993 were explainable as misidentified
                     ordinary objects.
                     34.8% of the cases had insufficient information to find an explanation.
                     23.5% had possible explanations.
                     50 cases (10.2%) could not be explained.
                
                6.   Of the unexplained reports, only about half were of high quality (26
                     cases, or 5.3%). That is, these cases were relatively well-investigated
                     and well-witnessed and were judged as reliable cases by at least one
                     investigator.
                
                7.   Most UFOs are seen around 10:00 p.m.
                
                8.   UFOs usually have more than one witness. Normally, two or more people
                see
                     a UFO at the same time.
                
                9.   UFO sightings last an average of about 12 minutes.
                
                10.  Most UFOs are white in colour.
                
                
                These findings show that UFOs represent a continuing phenomenon that refuses
                to go away. More and more people are reporting UFOs each year, from all
                provinces. If UFOs do not represent alien visitation as is popularly
                conceived, the numbers of reports demand that the phenomenon deserves
                scientific study, if not as a physical phenomenon, then a sociological or
                psychological one.
                
                %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
                
                For those who wish a hard copy of this report, including 28 additional
                tables and graphs not available in ASCII, send $10.00 to:
                
                                        Ufology Research of Manitoba
                                                 Box 1918
                                             Winnipeg, Manitoba
                                              Canada   R3C 3R2