Don Wiss wrote:
> I don't see why they would kill calves. They are scrawny. Our ancestors
> weren't dumb. They knew that if they left it alone then a couple years
> later they'd find it again and it would be worth killing. I also wouldn't
> be surprised if they preferred males, knowing that by leaving the females
> alone they could raise the calves and there'd be more for later.

Isn't the flesh of the cows and calves more tender and fatty than that
of the bulls?  Here's an excerpt from Samuel Hearne's journal
(http://web.idirect.com/~hland/sh/title.html):

"The flesh of the buffalo is exceedingly good eating; and so entirely
free
from any disagreeable smell or taste, that it resembles beef as nearly
as
possible: the flesh of the cows, when some time gone with calf, is
esteemed
the finest; and the young calves, cut out of their bellies, are reckoned
a
great delicacy indeed."

It seems that Hearne's Indian acquaintances did not hesitate to kill
pregnant cows.  I've also read that when Indians attacked a bear den,
they would kill all of the cubs.

The apparently logical belief that a species fares best when the females
and children are spared may not always be true, as shown by the
following example (http://www.carc.org/pubs/v20no1/utility.htm):

"This relates to Inuit knowledge that survival of Peary caribou in the
High Arctic depends upon the social
structure of the small herds in winter. Therefore, the management of
these caribou for sustained harvesting
requires, in addition to an overall quota system, the nonselective
hunting of all animals encountered
opportunistically rather than through the management system instituted
by scientists where selective hunting of
large males is advocated with a prohibition on hunting females and
immature animals. The TEK [traditional ecological knowledge] view holds
that only hunting large males will quickly result in the accelerated
death of the remaining population, a view that has been born out by
subsequent monitoring of the south Ellesmere Island regional population
(Freeman 1985)."

At the risk of overgeneralizing, I would describe the hunting methods of
most H-Gs as opportunistic.  Modern notions of wildlife management did
not significantly influence their decisions.

Cheers,
-- Aaron Wieland