A Traveler and a Viewer Afar

Remember this: Read a book. When you watch television, the questions will come.

I was watching Jim Shockey’s Uncharted episode entitled, “Maneater” and “Desperate Times”. The episodes are centered on the themes of hunting, poaching, hunting dollars and activities as a form of community outreach, nuisance reptiles, and villager death.

In the critique of these episodes, I began asking myself questions as the episodes progressed. There are plenty of things one does not know by not being in a place.

Given the animosity surrounding hunting, this appeared to be presented as episodes illustrating the reasons why hunting is a viable option, lifestyle, and life necessity for given peoples. If you want to promote hunting as a viable option, the presenter needs to address what the viewer could possibly see.

I have observed Mr. Ivan Carter posting on the deaths of African villagers at the jaws of reptiles of prehistoric gander on social media. It is a part of the pro-argument for hunting on the African landscape, which Mr. Ivan Carter has expressed publicly. You can find it on several pages advertising for him. These shows are another tool to promote his and others stance on hunting issues in Africa. Mr. Jim Shockey was present to learn about this problem and get the message to a broader audience.

As I watched the episodes, questions arose.

Questions: Why are the villagers not capable enough or equipped to kill the nuisance crocodiles themselves? Why do villagers have to have a local or foreign hunter travel in to buy a species specific hunting tag and do the job for them?

I understand the village has a quota, but is there no consideration for quota tags when it comes to man-eaters? The dialogue on the show was to buy all the tags up for hunting. This was going to help cull the crocodile numbers.

My experience and knowledge indicates that when you remove one creature, another one is right there to take its place, good or bad. This does not solve the problem of the villager attacks. It only provides a reason for people to hunt crocodiles unmolested by anyone against hunting.

Questions: If you know there is a species of animal lurking under stagnant water, waiting to drag you off, why would you put yourself in jeopardy by inhabiting locations prone to misadventure and death via crocodiles? Is it ignorance? Were the villagers portrayed as stereotypical noble savages instead of competent human beings? Why were the villagers portrayed as helpless compatriots?

It reminded me of a movie where the hero comes in at the behest of the wide-eyed victims, who with prayer clenched fists proclaim, "Save us from this awful beast!"

Questions: Would it be better to improve the lives of the villagers by diverting limited water from the river to give them reasons not to go down and wash on its shores? I would think avoidance would be in order but it is the water that draws the people; move the water. The crocodile is being opportunistic on the villagers trolling the bank.

Is there no simple, self-contained pumping system, where rudimentary filtration is in place to pump clean water, while providing some small amount of hydro-electric power? Did not Rome have an irrigation system using aqueducts?

I thought about the pumping system. What were the possibilities? 

The pumping system could entail:

• A floating, movable platform, in case the village decides they want to move 

• Lead to a series of ponds, with circulatory pumps run by the electricity generated from the river, where fish can be farmed in small man-made ponds

• Used to irrigate small plots of land for limited agriculture

• Hydro-electric output

• Empowers villagers as a people, and deter poaching
• Locally made ceramic canals, removable and redirecting water from a main overhead pipe to a center spider shaped return system to the river. I am just visualizing this in my head. I am taking into consideration movement of people and the drip effect would have patch agriculture crops on rotation. 

This would provide an alternative energy source that is not destructive to the environment but at the same time beneficial to the villagers. This would make the village self-sufficient.

Questions: When the meat is harvested and divided out to the villagers, why do they appear to be trained like the little kids that chase the ice cream truck? Why do the villagers look like sedentary individuals standing around waiting for the hand-out, or be at the mercy of a divine power with little control of their fate? Is there a system to prolong the meat they have, or is it provided fresh daily? 

These are just some questions that arose during my viewership of the episodes. If I noticed it, so did others.

When we consider, as human beings, the issues detrimental to the survival and daily well-being of our fellow humans, why is it so hard to look at the scenario, and solve the problem, or attempt to address it with feats of engineering?

Should we feel embarrassed as inhabitants of this planet, when we look back in history to the accomplishments of our ancestors? When you consider the construction of sustainable habitats and living arrangements in difficult places, and the precision given rudimentary tools, should that not bother us in this time of technology to withhold engineering solutions? Can we save little girls from being eaten by crocodiles in African rivers by using our intelligence?

Come on! Mesopotamia. 

If you can pick and choose where hunting dollars go, why cannot a portion of monies paid to villagers go to building something that would better their lives in the long-term?

Should we hold it against the crocodile and his smile, in its natural habitat, when it attacks a human because it recognizes a human as another food resource?

My opinion was these were decent shows used to extend the olive branch to non-hunting participants. Audience reach through placing these episodes with another channel could have improved the diversity of viewership.

As hunting participants, it is our responsibility to illustrate truthfully, the predicaments that affect outdoor sports and hunting. If you are going to tell a story, in less than an hour, address the obvious holes that need to be filled. This will give your argument more substance. I always thought it sucks that they were relocated down to thirty minutes. 

If you go on the idea the world is filled by easily suggestible human beings, you might be right, but an individual that observes the world constantly, will see the little black dot of a deer shadow acres and acres away, across a field. You utilize the short and longer sights of your mind and eye.

As hunting participants, we can find ways to alleviate suffering for all, while we spend so much down time waiting in a stand. Always think in terms of making others better.

Spend your time well, in thought and action, to others.

Here is a koan from Angelia:

An hourglass is infinite time; never losing or gaining.

Written by: Angelia Y Larrimore

~Courtesy of the AOFH~