Your example was great. Don't tell me about it. Go do it. Tell me the difference between wool and linen. This is as much about going for a walk as anything.
There are a dozen options I can think of, I chose one off the top of my head. Just because I gave you an axe and a knife does not mean you need to use them. Think out of the box. You could make a third tool to make the water carrier.
There is at least one option that does not require either of the tools. If you don't want to kill animals for a bladder fine; use your head and come up with an alternative.
You know I am new around here so I am not really certain. Do the people on BCUK actually go outdoors or is it all done from a computer?
Show me don't tell me.
You may not realise this, but there is actually a great risk of diminishing the total available learnable material by stipulating that everything is shown by photographs.
As educated humans we are able to utilise three different kind of abstractions in representing or communicating knowledge, namlely the enactive, the iconic and the symbolic stage.
The enactive stage is were the person communicating the skill is actively doing the skill. This is a physical representation of knowledge, ofte utilised in combination with procedural knowledge.
The iconic stage is were you are using pictures, photograps or drawings (of varying complexity) to communicate the chosen subject. The complexcity of the communicated knowledge thereby greatly depends of the skill of the communicating person in establishing a iconic representation of the chosen subject. This may, or may not, correlate with skills in the underlying subject being discussed.
Luckily, as modern humans, we have another, vastly more complex tool at our disposal, namely the symbolic stage. In the symbolic stage knowledge is represented by words and sentences having no structural isomorphy to the actual phenomenon being represented by words.
Of course, the symbolic stages is associated with declarative knowledge, and is as such an adequate tool for representing knowledge of great complexity; much greater complexity than could ever be communicated by using the enactive or iconic stage.
The modern obsession with learning from photographs or videos can therefore be construed as actively reducing the amount of complexity is is possible to communicate, and therefore actively diminishing the total amount of knowledge.
For such a relatively simple piece of improvised equipment as a water carrier, and taking into account the greatly varied possibilities of creating or improvising one from the ressources of nature, one should definately not exclude the amount of knowledge and information which only meaningful representation is by use of the symbolic stage as declarative knowledge.
Furthermore, in a situation as the one you describe in the OP is not necessarily desirable to apply bushcrafting techniques to the problem. Rather, as there is a certain haste to the situation, it should be about utilising the ressources already abundant. For instance by transporting the water in the leather-hat commonly worn in the iron age:
(Image courtesy of Silkeborg Museum - Full URL:
http://www.silkeborgmuseum.dk/en/tollund.html)
And no, I am not going to reproduce a leather hat just to be able to satisfy a "pics or it didnt happen"-retoric. In fact I strongly resent the imaginary boundary being drawn up between people communicating by words or people communicating by pictures. Chosing to represent a chosen subject in a symbolic language instead of a iconic language should as such not be construed as a person lacking actual skill - it might be the exact contrary, namely that the person has such vast knowledge in the given subject that they already has realized that the subject could not be adequately represented in a meaningful way in any other stage than the symbolic.
And, as a final remark, you should probably be aware that "Toddy" is in fact a archeologist. She probably holds more knowledge about the iron age than the rest of us members combined...
//Kim Horsevad