Hunters ironically develop the most nuanced understandings of the animals they then shoot. They spend long hours observing them and speculating about their social organization ("this ol buck was trying to lead me away from the others ...." ), territorial habits, their traces, droppings etc. Historically, some of the most extensive studies of animal communication--and other realms of animal behavior--have been done by hunters. They have also developed animal call instrumentation for which there is a large market. We use these extensively in OOZ interactions, thereby building on many years of empirical testing and lay knowledge. However hunting technology stands in sharp contrast to technologies of OOZ. Whereas in hunting the technologies are used to create a tremendously asymmetric architecture--that is, devices to see animals when they can't see us; devices to act at a distance on animals when they can't act at a distance from us--the OOZ creates technologies of reciprocity: what you can do to the animals they can do to you. e.g. you can talk to the geese they can talk to you, you can follow them, they can follow you.
Although Hunting and OOZ activities involve very different interactions, both script time investments in observing animals in their habitat. Nature photography and filming is often likened to hunting. The widespread familiarity with creatures that nature documentary provides in many 2 and 3 second shots of animals televised to huge audiences provides a very different interpretive opportunity. The OOZ scripts, specifically the video clip database provides the capacity to reinforce, reinterpret and support speculative theories.