ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) (08/14/85)
This one just gets better. My original reply to Don Heller's comment about killing mastodons with rocks was: > In real > life, of course, a thirty lb. boulder falling on a Mammoth or > Imperial elephants head MIGHT have gotten his attention. Twenty > people throwing rocks at him would undoubtedly have gotten him > pissed off. Mr. Heller now replies: >Getting the [mastodon|elephant|...] pissed off is the whole point. Then you >can get it to do something stupid, like killing itself in the fall off a cliff. Remember now, the original discussion was about the possability that man caused the total EXTINCTION of mammoths, mastodons, imperial elephants etc. I will admit that men could have killed an occasional elephant, although at a cost in human lives. That is a very far cry from killing ALL of them. If any of you readers are planning an elephant hunt anytime soon, use a 460 Weatherby safari rifle; please don't use rocks. Rocks couldn't hurt an elephant's body and it's damned unlikely they could hurt his feelings badly enough to make him commit suicide by jumping off of a cliff. A far more likely reaction would be to stomp the rock thrower(s) flatter than one of Aunt Jemima's finest; even if the elephant had planned to commit suicide that day anyhow for some ulterior motive known only to him, he would probably stomp the rock throwers FIRST, and then commit suicide. There also remains the problem of how this technique was used to exterminate the elephants in Oklahoma and the plains states, where excavating artificial cliffs would have been very difficult in the age before bulldozers.
mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (08/15/85)
In article <372@imsvax.UUCP> ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) writes about the
difficulties primitive men might have had exterminating various megafauna
in prehistoric America. He provides some fine ridicule of rock-throwing
and cliff-falling ideas.
However, some of us have much greater trust in man's destructive abilities,
as well as some anthropological knowledge.
Off the top of my head, I can think of several other techniques adequate
for eradicating a number of species of megafauna. Such as:
1) Pit traps. A broken leg from a small pit could handicap a mammoth
sufficiently to make it relatively easy to kill.
2) Using fires to drive into traps or kill directly.
3) Poisons. Elephants, girraffe and other large game are still killed
today by slow-acting poisons in wounds.
4) Habitat destruction. Frequent burning, introduction of dogs (which would
change grazing patterns by killing or chasing herbivores), etc. could
change habitats sufficiently to cause specialized herbivores to starve.
Specialized carnivores could die out when their prey species were
eliminated.
5) Deprivation of key resource bottlenecks. Such as water holes, migratory
routes, salt licks, etc. If prehistoric America was anything like
recent Africa is, game was not randomly distributed: it followed clear
migratory routes between resources critical for survival. A tribe
occupying a critical point on such a route could systematically exterminate
the entire population using that route.
These are only a few of the multitudinous ways humans have killed large
animals. We don't know which techniques or in what combination they might
have been used, but it's not simple to rule them out.
--
Mike Huybensz ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrhpeter@baylor.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (08/16/85)
> I will admit that men could have killed an occasional elephant, although at a > cost in human lives. That is a very far cry from killing ALL of them. If any > of you readers are planning an elephant hunt anytime soon, use a 460 Weatherby > safari rifle; please don't use rocks. Rocks couldn't hurt an elephant's body > and it's damned unlikely they could hurt his feelings badly enough to make him > commit suicide by jumping off of a cliff. A far more likely reaction would be > to stomp the rock thrower(s) flatter than one of Aunt Jemima's finest; even if > the elephant had planned to commit suicide that day anyhow for some ulterior > motive known only to him, he would probably stomp the rock throwers FIRST, and > then commit suicide. There are many places in North America where this technique was used regularly. There was an article in the Scientific American on one of thema few years back. You're also giving a rather antropomorphic description of the mastodon's potential behaviour. -- Peter da Silva (the mad Australian werewolf) UUCP: ...!shell!neuro1!{hyd-ptd,baylor,datafac}!peter MCI: PDASILVA; CIS: 70216,1076
beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Beth Christy) (08/20/85)
From: ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden), Message-ID: <372@imsvax.UUCP>: >Remember now, the original discussion was about the possability that man >caused the total EXTINCTION of mammoths, mastodons, imperial elephants etc. Yup, that's true. But I can't for the life of me remember/figure out WHY y'all were discussing that. Could somebody refresh my memory? Thanx. -- --JB (Beth Christy, U. of Chicago, ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth) "Oh yeah, P.S., I...I feel...feel like...I am in a burning building And I gotta go." (Laurie Anderson)
pamp@bcsaic.UUCP (pam pincha) (08/23/85)
In article <372@imsvax.UUCP> ted@imsvax.UUCP (Ted Holden) writes: >> In real >> life, of course, a thirty lb. boulder falling on a Mammoth or >> Imperial elephants head MIGHT have gotten his attention. Twenty >> people throwing rocks at him would undoubtedly have gotten him >> pissed off. > >Mr. Heller now replies: >>Getting the [mastodon|elephant|...] pissed off is the whole point. Then you >>can get it to do something stupid, like killing itself in the fall off a cliff. > Remember now, the original discussion was about the possability that >man caused the total EXTINCTION of mammoths, mastodons, imperial elephants etc. >I will admit that men could have killed an occasional elephant, although at a >cost in human lives. That is a very far cry from killing ALL of them. Note the theories of the extinction of the larger mammals by man never states that the hunter-gathering groups at the time killed them ALL Off!!! What it does state is that man re-enterred the area just after an "ice age". The environment was in a very delicate state of balance. The species at that time may have been having problems because the environment was changing so rapidly.(Meaning that their adaptations to a particular niche was becoming more of a hinderance than an asset.) (Note it is also in these periods of transition that most species either change and adapt if the conditions are right, or they die out.) The Big game Hunter-Gatherer groups that arrived changed that delicate balance through their hunting techniques (which consisted mainly of stampeding herding animals over cliffs)(This was NOT the time period of hunting only for those animals that one needs for food. Sites have been uncovered with hundreds of herd animal skeletons, only a few of which show Human slaughtering.) These techniques (that included not only the cliff stampeding with fire and such, but also included some atlatl thrown spears with very sharp, well manufactured flint and obsidian fluted points) possibly upset the balance of the food chain enough to cause several species to die out. So the basic premise is that a combination of rapid environmental changes causing stress to several species numbers along with the advent of man and his mass slaughtering techniques that killed off the larger mammals. (Remember that the death of these herd animals would severly affect the carnivores which are generally smaller in number anyway....) (Another side note to an earlier comment about how could men have been so stupid as to kill off the horses..... One has to remember that horses were NOT domesticated some 15000 to 10000 years ago. They were small,scrawny beast considered to be quite tasty morsels. Furthermore they were also herd animals, easily scared, and driven off cliffs. Lets face it they haven't develope many more smarts since then. For animals as large as they are they are still cowards!) > There also remains the problem of how this technique was used to >exterminate the elephants in Oklahoma and the plains states, where excavating >artificial cliffs would have been very difficult in the age before bulldozers. One doesn't need a 100ft cliff. Just a few feet, and a lot of running beasts, and thats all you need. The kill sites that have been found have been just such places. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ P.M.Pincha-Wagener (Don't blame Boeing for any of MY ideas and/or opinions!) -----------------------------------------------------------------------
kendalla@iddic.UUCP (Kendall Auel) (08/30/85)
A very good friend of mine has just finished writing a fictional novel called "The Mammoth Hunters". She has done a great deal of research for this book. If you're interested in origins, you'll love this book! It'll be on the shelves in October or November. Her name is Jean Auel, and she has also written "The Clan of the Cave Bear" and "The Valley of Horses".