Once again, one of our community’s high profile Greens has sought to slur the collective character
of archery enthusiasts in the Bega Valley, by submitting a highly emotive
letter - "Picture tells a thousand words" - to the Bega District News (Friday, February 8th, 2013).
The Green in question is Ms Harriett Swift, whose letter to the editor castigates the paper for dedicating too much space to an archery club’s response to controversial statements made in Council session, by Councillor Keith Hughes (The Greens), whom, as it happens, Ms Swift fails to identify as her partner.
Ms Swift has provided a photograph to punctuate her letter – a wallaby pierced by an arrow – and she outlines in some detail, the victim's painful and ultimately fatal ordeal.
The Green in question is Ms Harriett Swift, whose letter to the editor castigates the paper for dedicating too much space to an archery club’s response to controversial statements made in Council session, by Councillor Keith Hughes (The Greens), whom, as it happens, Ms Swift fails to identify as her partner.
Ms Swift has provided a photograph to punctuate her letter – a wallaby pierced by an arrow – and she outlines in some detail, the victim's painful and ultimately fatal ordeal.
No-one in Bega Valley Traditional Archers advocates the
hunting of native wildlife. Nor is there any evidence that anyone from Bega
Valley Traditional Archers was involved in the incident. In fact the incident took place 150klms north of Bega, near Batemans Bay, yet the
letter claims that the photo is proof positive that “an archer” is the culprit,
that archery is bad and that therefore her partner’s opposition to Bega Archers' applications for National Youth Week
and Seniors Week event funding was entirely justified. See Hughes takes aim at archery for details.
And now for the facts:
A quick call to Bateman’s Bay police reveals that no charges have been laid, and no persons of interest have been identified in relation to the incident. The sum total of available evidence exists in the form of a photo of a macropod with an arrow protruding from its body. End of story.
So, allow me to do what Ms Swift clearly did, and make up a story based on a whole lot of presumptions. Presumptions that are, nonetheless, every bit as credible in the absence of detail/evidence/charges, as Ms Swift’s contention that “an archer” is responsible.
My alternative scenario will be deeply offensive to Greens, who will claim that one of their number would never do what I am about to suggest. However, they think nothing of attributing the most heinous crimes and intent to archers that would never dream of targeting a native animal; people the likes of whom Ms Swift and her ilk do not know, have never met, yet have absolutely no problem portraying as irresponsible, coldblooded killers.
The alternative explanation:
There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the issue of hunting on public lands – Forests, National Parks etc. The Greens have been very vocal in their criticism of hunting on public lands, and they have deployed every weapon at their disposal in opposition to it. There can be no doubt – they hate it and they are out to put a stop to it!
A particularly hard-line member of the party-faithful (we’ll call him Iva Green-Bias) is tired of the relative lack of broad community support for The Greens’ opposition to hunting. Iva decides that it’s time to play hardball, and what better way to do it than by contriving an incident that will graphically demonstrate “hunter cruelty”, thereby promoting a negative image of hunters while also creating a highly emotive icon for the cause.
Iva pops onto the net and in 20 minutes he has bought a light bow and some basic target arrows for $150. It’s little enough to pay, he thinks, for a photograph that will keep paying for itself well into the future, and off he pops to a very high profile park near Bateman’s Bay.
Iva reckons that shooting a wallaby in a touristy area will maximise the chances of the wallaby being found, either dead or alive, but either way, with an arrow protruding from its body.
Because a bow makes little sound, Iva is able to take many shots without drawing attention to himself before actually hitting his target. Iva’s target is not killed outright and he is unable to retrieve it.
Not to worry, he thinks, it was shot in a very high profile area, so with any luck someone will find it for me. This act weighs heavy on Iva’s conscience, but he figures the sacrifice is warranted, given the magnitude of the cause.
The Wallaby is later found and rushed off to animal welfare workers, who immediately attribute the act to cruel hunters. Mission accomplished and all suffering thus justified for the greater good.
The End
Is this what actually happened to the wallaby in Ms Swift’s photo? I haven’t got a clue, and nor do you in the absence of any witnesses or evidence, other than the presence of the arrow.
It could have been a hunter. It could have been a Green extremist. It could have been an alien from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. One does not need to be an “archer” to discharge a bow. One merely needs hands, inclination and opportunity.
In short, Ms Swift’s accusations and assertions about the photograph are simply speculation born of her desire to punctuate the point she is intent on making. This is the emerging nature of the intolerance fostered by the zealots within The Greens. Facts and evidence are unimportant, as is the principle of innocence until guilt is proven.
What's important is misleading the public in order to achieve your ends, which always justify the means.
Ms Swift – thinking it is so, contending it is so, trying to make other people believe it is so, does not make it so. But attempting to incite hatred by incessantly seeking to portray a specific cultural group within the community as intrinsically evil, is the essence of bigotry.
This leads me to wonder about the official Greens position on a related matter about which The Greens have been very quiet indeedy. Their spokespersons have decried ‘amateur hunting’ as dangerous and inhumane. They have rejected the suggestion that for many it is a highly spiritual pursuit and they have even said it has no place in a civilised society.
I respect and even relate to the spirituality embodied in Aboriginal traditional stories of the Dreaming that so often figure around hunting, and I respect traditional indigenous hunting rights and practices. But what of The Greens…do they also believe that indigenous hunting should be limited to “the professionals”…are Aboriginal people cruel, irresponsible and uncivilised?
I trust that The Greens objections to hunting are not limited solely to people they perceive to be of white Anglo-Saxon heritage?
Anyway, I'll get outa ya way now....
And now for the facts:
A quick call to Bateman’s Bay police reveals that no charges have been laid, and no persons of interest have been identified in relation to the incident. The sum total of available evidence exists in the form of a photo of a macropod with an arrow protruding from its body. End of story.
So, allow me to do what Ms Swift clearly did, and make up a story based on a whole lot of presumptions. Presumptions that are, nonetheless, every bit as credible in the absence of detail/evidence/charges, as Ms Swift’s contention that “an archer” is responsible.
My alternative scenario will be deeply offensive to Greens, who will claim that one of their number would never do what I am about to suggest. However, they think nothing of attributing the most heinous crimes and intent to archers that would never dream of targeting a native animal; people the likes of whom Ms Swift and her ilk do not know, have never met, yet have absolutely no problem portraying as irresponsible, coldblooded killers.
The alternative explanation:
There is a great deal of controversy surrounding the issue of hunting on public lands – Forests, National Parks etc. The Greens have been very vocal in their criticism of hunting on public lands, and they have deployed every weapon at their disposal in opposition to it. There can be no doubt – they hate it and they are out to put a stop to it!
A particularly hard-line member of the party-faithful (we’ll call him Iva Green-Bias) is tired of the relative lack of broad community support for The Greens’ opposition to hunting. Iva decides that it’s time to play hardball, and what better way to do it than by contriving an incident that will graphically demonstrate “hunter cruelty”, thereby promoting a negative image of hunters while also creating a highly emotive icon for the cause.
Iva pops onto the net and in 20 minutes he has bought a light bow and some basic target arrows for $150. It’s little enough to pay, he thinks, for a photograph that will keep paying for itself well into the future, and off he pops to a very high profile park near Bateman’s Bay.
Iva reckons that shooting a wallaby in a touristy area will maximise the chances of the wallaby being found, either dead or alive, but either way, with an arrow protruding from its body.
Because a bow makes little sound, Iva is able to take many shots without drawing attention to himself before actually hitting his target. Iva’s target is not killed outright and he is unable to retrieve it.
Not to worry, he thinks, it was shot in a very high profile area, so with any luck someone will find it for me. This act weighs heavy on Iva’s conscience, but he figures the sacrifice is warranted, given the magnitude of the cause.
The Wallaby is later found and rushed off to animal welfare workers, who immediately attribute the act to cruel hunters. Mission accomplished and all suffering thus justified for the greater good.
The End
Is this what actually happened to the wallaby in Ms Swift’s photo? I haven’t got a clue, and nor do you in the absence of any witnesses or evidence, other than the presence of the arrow.
It could have been a hunter. It could have been a Green extremist. It could have been an alien from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. One does not need to be an “archer” to discharge a bow. One merely needs hands, inclination and opportunity.
In short, Ms Swift’s accusations and assertions about the photograph are simply speculation born of her desire to punctuate the point she is intent on making. This is the emerging nature of the intolerance fostered by the zealots within The Greens. Facts and evidence are unimportant, as is the principle of innocence until guilt is proven.
What's important is misleading the public in order to achieve your ends, which always justify the means.
Ms Swift – thinking it is so, contending it is so, trying to make other people believe it is so, does not make it so. But attempting to incite hatred by incessantly seeking to portray a specific cultural group within the community as intrinsically evil, is the essence of bigotry.
This leads me to wonder about the official Greens position on a related matter about which The Greens have been very quiet indeedy. Their spokespersons have decried ‘amateur hunting’ as dangerous and inhumane. They have rejected the suggestion that for many it is a highly spiritual pursuit and they have even said it has no place in a civilised society.
I respect and even relate to the spirituality embodied in Aboriginal traditional stories of the Dreaming that so often figure around hunting, and I respect traditional indigenous hunting rights and practices. But what of The Greens…do they also believe that indigenous hunting should be limited to “the professionals”…are Aboriginal people cruel, irresponsible and uncivilised?
I trust that The Greens objections to hunting are not limited solely to people they perceive to be of white Anglo-Saxon heritage?
Anyway, I'll get outa ya way now....
It brings back memories of swans coots etc being placed on parliment steps after duck opening blaming hunters. CSIRO took them away for inspection and this is what they found. No shotgun pellets, plenty of freezer burns on the birds, so how did they die, not from shooters that's for sure.
ReplyDeleteStuart