“Nature” Has Nothing to do With it.

I can not watch nature documentaries. An affliction that I have had for some time. If there is a documentary that will show cubs frolicking, and animals living care free and happy, well then sign me up. Inevitably, the show documents death. Let’s be clear here. I’m fine with the notion that there is a circle of life, and that carnivores eat herbivores, and so on. I can see that this is nature and this is what it supposed to be.

I am not against hunting for the same reason. I have never been hunting, nor do I plan to soon, but I can keenly see our place in the bigger circle of life, and I am fully aware that to a mountain lion people look fairly tasty. Steak tastes good, Venison tastes good, so on. I just want to make sure that no one thinks that I am on some sort of a vegetarian rant here. Nuff’ said.

No, what bothers me in the shows is that the “nature” nulls a basic human need. Humans have a “nature” to us that make us want to save lives. It’s part of our higher thinking. A gift of conscience and intelligence tells us that life is a cherished thing. Unlike all other animals we have a higher level of thinking that allows us to see what is right and what is wrong.

Why then when I saw March of the Penguins did I witness a small group of baby penguins wander away from the larger group and then freeze to death? Realize if you will, there is a film crew manning the cameras. I will assume that there was someone there with a bit of medical training and I will guarantee that there were penguin experts on hand.

Right. I get you. “It’s nature. They shouldn’t interfere”. I disagree. Is it nature when a man made High Definition camera is mysteriously in the face of these penguins? I forgot that in science class we had that test on “The camera bushes of Antarctica”. There is another part of human nature at work here. The part that tells us that we are not a part of nature. That we are somehow separate from the circle of life and that by documenting this thing called nature the right thing to do is to “not interfere”.

To that, all I can say is: the very fact that you are on location means that you are a part of that very moment in nature. It is true that the penguins would have frozen if a camera was there or not. A tree does make a sound when it falls even if no one is there to hear it. That’s “nature”. But the fact remains that by being at a location filming means that it is the charge of us “higher thinkers” to decide what we will do. The hunter chooses to shoot his prey. The animal experts should intervene when there will be an unnecessary death.

Disagree? Then that is to say that the hunter is interfering with nature, right? Fine. Let me describe another documentary I was unfortunate to have seen. It was about killer whales and the mighty humpback whales. See killer whales are by nature hunters. The documentary rolled on as the killer whales jumped on the back of a baby calf repeatedly until the baby died. The fact there were higher thinking humans there means that something could have been done. The whales could have been scared off. Instead the film crew celebrated that they could capture the moment on film. In the end the killer hales did not eat the endangered species. They sort of nibbled at the calf and moved on. Hunting for the sake of hunting. I equate this to game hunting which I am very much against.

If an endangered species is being documented, and it becomes weak from starvation, isn’t it the responsibility of the only animal that can understand what is happening to it to step in and help? Take our animal counterparts. When a boy fell into an ape pit, didn’t the mother coddle and protect the little boy? That’s basic thinking at work and the choice was still made with ease to help.

We are a part of that. We have our place in nature. We can understand the principles behind protecting the environment, and yet we want to keep rolling. This is because we can choose to do so. Of all of the animals we are the blessed to know we have the choice.