> >But how *shure*
> sure. your spelling is rather annoying.

Andrew, it's not wise for someone who has apparently
not mastered his first language to be throwing stones
at someone who is trying to master his second (or
perhaps third or fourth) language. Chill out, man.

> I suppose that it was a great upswing for some plain
> hunting tribes like
> Sioux - maybe they were not even existing before
> 1492.

The plains tribes have existed for a very, very long
time. I know the Native Americans in the Idaho and
Utah were hunting rhinos as long as 15,000 years ago.
I'm not as familiar with the tribes in the Plains
states, but I would guess they've been hunting buffalo
for at least a couple thousand years.

> I can't imagine going on
> foot the miles to meet the
> herd, then sneak undiscovered and then successfully
> hunt
> with much success. And then take home the prey. ...

*Most* of those tribes were nomadic and followed the
migrations of the herds. Granted, I'm sure it took
hundreds of years to learn where the buffalo would be
at any given time, but once the knew it was no longer
a matter of 'finding' them, but rather, waiting around
to spring the trap.

> Then the arrows. Paleo humans didn't invent bows and
> arrows until
> "recently" (40kya).

I recently visited an archeological dig in central
Idaho. The site had been occupied at various times by
different offshoots of the Shoshone, Blackfoot or Nez
Perce indians. The archeologists were able to identify
different migrations according to what type of
arrowhead they encountered. About 2000-3000 years ago
whomever lived there used the arrowhead style of the
plains indians (arrowheads with "notched" edges rather
than straight). They explained that the plains indians
originally developed this variation because it helped
them hunt larger game - like buffalo. And buffalo
*did* range in northern Idaho.

However, people arrived in America already had bow and
arrow technology, so your point is really moot.

> Ok, but in sum I think the cliff driving hunt wasn't
> a frequent occasion.

Didn't have to be. The number of animals killed would
have sustained the tribe for a number of weeks -
perhaps months - at a time.

> In other cases hunting could have been dangerous -
> when approaching
> buffalos on foot or mammoth or elephants -  big
> game.

And early humans would have devised ways to keep
themselves as safe as possible during a hunt (or war).
Hence, the invention of the lance, spear, atlatyl,
arrows, long bow, poisoned darts, boomarang, bolo,
(later crossbows, muskets, shotguns, rifles, canon,
ICBM, etc. The last two, of course, should *not* be
used for hunting :).

> In the wild I would have been invalid or dead)

One of the reasons humans have been so successful is
our willingness to provide for others who cannot
provide for themselves.