One exercize discribed in the book was where he had to track himself. That really taught him how to track since he did not travel in a straight line, but would go here to look at something, then there to look for something else.

On page 139 was a bit where Owen (the MC, the pov, the Mamur Zapt of the title) curses out there in the desert in front of the bedawin trackers.

The trackers looked at him admiringly.
"That was a mighty curse," said one. "It does a man's heart good to hear it."

quote:

---

My brother related a story written by a guy who was trained in modern times by indians.

---

The vast majority of people who have survival training and training in tracking are not highly skilled. There is a difference between the apprentice level of training and the highly skilled master of any craft. To quote Tom Brown's website: "There can be no distinction between Tracking and Awareness; thus, Tracking becomes the doorway to the Universe." Tom Brown is a virtuoso of his craft... his long and successful track record (pardon the pun) speaks for itself.

I'd love to take classes from him as research for my books; sadly my budget has to make do with the Tom Brown, Jr. tracking field guides I own instead.

They are noted for their phenomenal endurance, and will pursue a quarry for up to two days, on foot. They can harry antelope down to exhaustion. To do that, they need to follow at pace, so they can only make the briefest of actual stops to check for tracks.

Now, change the condition of the deer...bleeding (and, subsequently, wounded to the point that its range is limited, unless the wound(s) are minor), a broken leg (which will cause a scraping, smeared track that's easier to spot), etc. and you've got yourself an easier quarry. Humans, for example, generally leave so much sign behind in the woods that a six year-old kid could track them. That is, of course, assuming said humans were not trained to leave little or no sign of their passage.

BTW, what game were you hunting, J? I'm assuming it's either some kind of varmint or a deer that you shot just before sunset.

Inkwell
-----------------
"The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp."
-Anonymous

Ouch. Sounds like the round deflected off the scapula, alright. I've seen it happen even with high-powered centerfire rifles (albeit more rarely). It truly is amazing how sturdy bone is...for an organic substance, it holds up to kinetic force extremely well under certain conditions. Unfortunately for you, this seems to be one of those times.

Agreed on the not giving the animal a painful death issue. I hate it when hunters are portrayed as callous (or even gleeful...thanks, Disney) in their pursuit and harvest of game. I, for one, respect the life I am taking...and feel a measure of sadness at the moment I take the shot. However, I do believe in the conservation element of the sport, having seen the effects of Chronic Wasting Disease firsthand (not to mention countless roadway accidents during years the deer harvest was overrestricted). That's in Pennsylvania, BTW. I've heard the overpopulation issues are much worse in places like Wisconsin.

Yeah, that didn't hijack the thread...much.

I think that it's good for animals to feel pain occasionally. Lets them know they're alive and reminds them how best to stay that way and all. The key issue is that you don't try chasing an animal at night. Either the shot was lethal or it wasn't. If it wasn't, then chasing the animal is pointless anyway. If it was, than all you accomplish by pursuit is giving the quarry something to escape. That enhances the duration of the adrenaline response, and a wild animal's adrenaline response is not to be taken lightly. Not at night, anyway. As a human, there is a short list of other animals that are less well adapted to nocturnal activity than you, and deer aren't on that list.

You're right about waiting--if the animal isn't down and in clear view, you need to give it some time. That's why I sat for 25 minutes (the length of the interval explained below) before going after her. It's always amazed me that being shot mortally scares deer a little bit, but someone walking up on them after they are shot gives them enough adrenaline to run a mile before they admit to being dead.

I wonder to what degree humans share the biology that makes that possible.

It's foolish to wait overnight for a cleanly hit animal. Here are the guidelines I use: 10 minutes for one that drops in its tracks; 25 for one that ran out of sight but about which you are confident of a vital hit; 4 hours or overnight for gut or unknown point of impact. My doe fell into the second category, as the shoulder bone deflection that seemes likely to have happened in my case is rare even for muzzleloader.

A gas latern makes blood stand out in a way that you have to see to believe, and most deer hit clean in my experience die within 10 minutes and 50 yards of the shot. Tracking isn't that tough in those conditions, even in the dark.

Given that's what happens most times, it would be foolish to run the real risk of leaving your hard-won game to the coyotes overnight just to avoid the low percentage chance that your prey someone survived a large-bore bullet through the lungs (by, for example, a freakish bone deflection).

As for humans, wild humans do have pretty amazing adrenaline responses. But domesticated humans, like all domesticated animals, lose most of that capability. Feral humans can gain quite a bit of it back, but there's still a difference.

quote:

---

We'll continue with the conceit that other writers might learn something useful from reading hunters talking about hunting.

---

All true regarding the 45-70. Personally, I like the Marlin models...they make an excellent saddle gun. I also have a Marlin 336CS (which I don't think they manufacture anymore) chambered in 30-30 caliber.

In Pennsylvania's notoriously thick underbrush a lever-action carbine is far more efficient than any bolt (despite the reduction in accuracy and range). I rarely find myself taking shots over 150 yards. Besides, only a pump rifle (or semi-automatic) is faster on the follow-up shot, though I prefer the lever action, m'self. Pump rifles just feel...wierd. I reserve that action type for shotguns.

I know that hunting can be a sensitive issue for people, but, given the subject matter of the kinds of writing we do, I thought some here might appreciate the educational value of a discussion on hunting & tracking.

quote:

---

i hunt wallabies with a razor blade. It's tricky but makes me feel manly.

---

Are deers an invasive species in parts of the US? Or feral farm escapes?
We have problems in Australia with feral animals camels, donkeys, goats, boars, cats, dogs etc Why kill the native wildlife when you can bag a wild German Shepherd... you can even pretend it's a wolf if you squint right.

Down here in Tasmania we have feral peacocks and pheasants too so you can dress-up like english shooting party and say 'Pip pip' and stuff.

Oh! I just remembered, on Mariah Island they are infested with Wombats. They are not native to the island so they have an annual wombat cull, where you can chase them around and blat'em to pieces. Then of course you need to check their pouch in case they have young. If they do its just kinder to pull them out and stomp on 'em rather then let them starve inside their mothers cooling body.

However, I was viewing it more from a narrative perspective. I mean, the story from J's perspective...makes sense but doesn't make me happy in a "bond with the land" sort of way. Whereas the story from the doe's perspective just seems kinda...unhappy. "Dear Diary, Luckily survived direct hit from large caliber weapon and successfully eluded hunter today. DD, Feeling pretty good, snacked a bit and the shoulder has stopped bleeding so much. DD, felt a bit nauseous from the let-down but the wound is closing up and I'm feeling pretty darn invincible...." P.S. posted on internet, "the hunter came back the next day with a more powerful weapon."

My mom was just telling me a story about visiting the zoo with my sister and kid. It was one of those zoos that give pretty big enclosures for the animals, so they were not visible if they were feeling shy. They went down to see the cougar, and were disappointed to hear that the cougar was not being visible that day. Nonetheless, they proceeded on the hope that things might change. Indeed, my mom did spot the cougar peeking out from the verge of his little grove. But being so far from the visitor area, and mostly under cover, he wouldn't make a good photographic subject. So she very politely requested that he come out and pose for a picture.

He kindly assented, and came right out to the area below the walkway, posing for several pictures. When she was finished, she gave him her heartfelt thanks, to which the cougar replied, purring.

"It was my pleasure. Incidentally, I happen to notice that you have a rather succulent infant up there...."

Hoptoad asked:

quote:

---

Are deers an invasive species in parts of the US?

---

As an FYI, the plural of deer is deer. No "s" on the end. In answer to your question: They can be.

City folk don't have much trouble with deer; those of us who live in a more rural environment see them frequently. Folk who live on the fringes of town have problems with the deer eating rose bushes--they love eating the rose hips--and other flowers. If you make a sock of old panty hose mesh, and fill it with bone meal and hang it from your rose bushes, the deer will stay away. Deer will eat bark, particularly in the winter when other fodder is covered with snow, and are rough on young trees. They can strip the bark and kill the tree.

The biggest problem we have with deer is hitting them with a car. A small doe can be, perhaps, waist high at her back; a large buck can be considerably bigger than that. You smack into a deer going 70 miles an hour and it's toast for the car AND the deer. They roam at night, as well as during the day, and dusk/twilight time is when you'll most often find them grazing in open fields.

Hunters appreciate deer so much that they can't stand idly by and watch huge percentages of the population suffer from chronic wasting disease or starvation every winter.

quote:

---

deer–noun, plural deer, (occasionally) deers.

---

Unfortunately dictionaries only really detail usage. Little miss smarty pant

oh and trousercruit you need a smilie on your post or we will esteem thee an enemy...

We do have vegitarians here in America. I even have Vegitarian meals. I prefer large slices of Vegitarians.... (sorry, could not resist)

I do know from experiance, that actually TRYING something will improve your writing when you are discribing that activity.
I was nearly a professional quality wilderness photographer when younger. Some photographers were bothered by hunting, as after it is shot, you cannot take pictures of it in the wild. A photographer could stalk and "shoot" the same animal a dozen times, maybe shoot it even more.
While there was excitement of photographing deer, I had no problems with hunting them, even though I never did it. I could never afford the opportunity to try.
Someone who has hunted, can apply that experiance to their stories.
Those who have ever tracked can use that also.

quote:

---

We do have vegitarians here in America. I even have Vegitarian meals. I prefer large slices of Vegitarians.... (sorry, could not resist)

---

I'm not familiar with this particular religious denomination. There's a group that are called "Vegetarians," which may be similar in belief system.

If you want to hit a deer with your car, the method is simple. Drive around worrying that you might hit a deer. The stupid animals will flock to cross the road in front of you. I think that if hunters could master this attitude ("I'd better be extra careful lest I accidentally discharge my rifle into some cute animal's head") they could save thousands of dollars spent on lures, blinds, stands, camo...probably you could dispense with the rifle and just run through the woods blindfolded with a big rock.

Though that would probably be pretty strenuous, come to think of it.

Questions
Set A: In a fantasy setting what is a realistic reason to hunt a deer and not, lets say, a squirrel or two? How long could you keep the meat? What infrastructure would you need to preserve it? How many would an average doe feed? How much would go to waste if you couldn't preserve it? Would it have been butchered on the spot? Do they bury the waste? Do they burn it?

If you encountered someone out hunting deer, how likely is it that they would be alone? Is it more likely to be a group of men? Would it be fairly safe to assume that they would be supporting a tribe, village a large number of people? If you followed them would you be likely to be led to a village where the men disappeared for days at a time hunting deers? In a village of let say 30 people, how long would the meat last until the men had to go hunting again?

May sound dumb and obvious but without rifles and 4wd what are the realistic pros and cons of hunting large animals? Would the hunters be more likely to be on foot or on horses, or maybe on foot with their horses nearby?

Questions
Set B: Most of the character's I choose as MCs are generally more likely to be the 'stalked' than the 'stalkers'. They would try to cover their trail. Have you ever tried tracking a person who is trying to cover their tracks? What is it like?

On another note, Have you ever tried to sneak up on a lone sentry? Or even just someone who is alert or suspects you're out there? If so, is it normal to get a powerful urge to rush up on them in the last 30ft ? It just gets too intense, expecting to be discovered. In my opinion the last 10 -20 metres is where self discipline really comes into play. I am really interested in the emotional conditioning required to be a successful man hunter.

Any number of reasons. The most obvious is the quantity of meat. You can feed one person on a few squirrels. If you need to feed 10, deer is the way to go. Another reason would be for tanning purposes. If your hunter wants meat and leather, deer have a better hide, and lots more of it. A third reason would be technology. With real primitive tech, like bows and arrows, a whitetail deer isn’t significantly more difficult to hunt than a squirrel. Hitting a squirrel with a longbow at 25 yards requires a very, very high level of skill, and doesn’t provide much of a payoff. Hitting fatally a deer at 40 yards is substantially easier to accomplish. Squirrels are easier to find, because they don’t run away from man in the same way that deer do; they are far less vigilant, and they don’t have the deer’s incredible sense of smell and high-strung wariness. A deer, however, gives you a much bigger payoff in terms of useable materials, and hunting game for that size (or at least something bigger than squirrel—say a rabbit) is necessary if one hunter is providing for a group of people. When it comes to small game in a low tech situation, trapping is likely to be much more effective and efficient than hunting.

2) How long could you keep the meat?

Depends on the temperature. Once you process the deer (cut it into transportable pieces of meat—quarters and backstraps, for example) you can carry the meat for some time (at least 48 hours) in a temperate climate in a backpack before it turns, provided you can keep the flies off. Hotter climates reduce the shelf life. Preservation techniques can extend this time (see below). In a cold climate (<40 degrees Fahrenheit), the meat will keep just like its in a refrigerator, provided your body heat doesn’t spoil it as you carry.

3) What infrastructure would you need to preserve it?

Meat and hide can be preserved by dry curing (salting and smoking) or by pickling. Both take some time (days or weeks), and aren’t really ideal for a band of adventurers on the move. But they would work for someone laying up provisions for a journey. Here is a good site on those processes: http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/yf/foods/he155w.htm#curing
The infrastructure for preservation is minimal. Curing requires only, at minimum, basic staples like salt and sugar. Nitrites are also required, but saltpeter (available in fantasy worlds) can be used.

4) How many would an average doe feed?

An average doe will dress out to 75-125 pounds, depending on the subspecies. The 75 pound dressed-weight deer will have a girth (at the chest) of about 26 inches and will provide about 35 pounds of meat. The 125 pound dressed-weight deer will have a girth at the chest of about 38 inches and will provide about 70 pounds of meat. If the game animal is the only source of food, people will eat 3-6 pounds of it per day. So a doe on the small side of average will feed a group of 5 for a day, 2 if everyone eats small portions. A doe on the large side of average could feed that same group for 2 days and breakfast on the third comfortably, and up to 5 if everyone eats sparingly. If you get a largish doe and a group of small eaters in a hot climate, the meat might well turn before it is all consumed. A monster buck, by contrast, might have a chest girth of 46 inches and provide 125 pounds of meat. Elk dress out on average at around 450 pounds, and provide about 250 pounds in meat.

5) How much would go to waste if you couldn't preserve it?

If our group of 5 finicky eaters gets a huge doe in a warm climate, they might waste 20 or so pounds of meat.

6) Would it have been butchered on the spot?

Dressing the deer soon after killing is essential to preserving the meat initially. The harvested deer would have been dressed “on the spot.” Dressing is the process of removing the internal organs, described here (graphic): http://www.angelfire.com/bc/canuck2/gutting2.html
Butchering is the separate process of carving the meat into storable pieces. In a traveling-hunter situation, butchering would likely be completed soon after dressing, perhaps after carrying the carcass back to camp.

7) Do they bury the waste? Do they burn it?
This is an excellent question. The one thing they wouldn’t do is LEAVE IT NEAR CAMP. Deer innards attract bears like sugar attracts bees. And, if not bears, then raccoons, coyotes, and all manner of irritating little creatures. The waste portions also smell absolutely terrible. They make good fishbait if you are right on the water, but there aren't many other benefits to keeping the stuff. There is no harm to leaving the waste on the ground—yotes or bears will eat it. But, whatever is done, the waste will be kept far from camp due to the unpleasantness of the smell and the unpleasantness of suprise black bear visits.

7) If you encountered someone out hunting deer, how likely is it that they would be alone? Is it more likely to be a group of men? Would it be fairly safe to assume that they would be supporting a tribe, village a large number of people? If you followed them would you be likely to be led to a village where the men disappeared for days at a time hunting deers? In a village of let say 30 people, how long would the meat last until the men had to go hunting again?

Depends on the society. Deer can be hunted alone or in groups. Alone, hunting can be done from a stand (an elevated platform that takes the hunters sight and scent away from the deer’s keen eyes and nose—deer seldom look up), still hunting (the practice of walking slowly through the woods—like 50 yards an hour—stopping often, looking for deer), stalking (following sign such as tracks, rub lines, or scat to bedding areas where deer spend most of the daylight hours). In groups, deer can be driven (a practice where one group of men walks loudly through the woods in a line, scaring the deer, who naturally run more or less directly away from the line of drivers, to hunters waiting along likely escape routes) by men or by dogs. The manner in which large game was hunted would depend totally on the nature of your society. For skittish animals like deer, driving can be effective short term but may have the long-term effect of pushing the herds out of the immediate area of the village. A village that depending on a class of hunters for meat would likely encourage those hunters to use either solo hunting techniques or group hunting with a sophisticated plan of territory management to avoid running the home range of the deer too far away from the village.

8) May sound dumb and obvious but without rifles and 4wd what are the realistic pros and cons of hunting large animals? Would they be more likely to be on foot or on horses, or maybe on foot with their horses nearby?

Deer love cover, and are thus more likely to be found and hunted in wooded areas where horses are less practical than in the plains. Horses smell and make noise, both serious disadvantages in hunting deer. The pros of hunting deer with low-tech equipment is that the payoff for your effort is considerable—100+ pounds of meat. Bowhunting deer is still a popular sport. A deer-sized animal is also much easier to hit and kill with an arrow than something smaller. The cons would be that hunting an animal of that nature for survival purposes takes a great deal of time and effort. It almost requires a social structure that designates some men just to hunt, without other responsibilities.

Questions
Set B:

1) Most of the character's I choose as MCs are generally more likely to be the 'stalked' than the 'stalkers'. They would try to cover their trail. Have you ever tried tracking a person who is trying to cover their tracks? What is it like?

I’ve tracked people as a training-type game, but never when they deliberately covered their trail. I can say that watching deer makes you acutely aware of how limited human senses are. I’ve watched deer bed down 50 yards in front of me. When I glanced away and glanced back, I could no longer see them, even though I knew exactly where they were. They remained invisible until they stood up to browse again. Deer have on a couple occasions thrown me for a loop by doing a precise 180, running back along their own trail, and then cutting off to the side. I spent a long time at the “end” of the trail, trying to find the next sign, not realizing that what I was looking for was actually 10 yards behind me.

2)On another note, Have you ever tried to sneak up on a lone sentry? Or even just someone who is alert or suspects you're out there? If so, is it normal to get a powerful urge to rush up on them in the last 30ft ? It just gets too intense, expecting to be discovered. In my opinion the last 10 -20 metres is where self discipline really comes into play. I am really interested in the emotional conditioning required to be a successful man hunter.

Can’t say I’ve ever done this with anything more serious than pride on the line. Even in games, I’ve felt like my breath was loud enough to be heard from miles away. I kept looking away from them, because I was convinced that my gaze would draw their attention. There is definitely a point of diminishing return, where you are so close that you can’t move without a high likelihood of alerting them, but you can probably get to them in a rush before they cry out. The discipline is, as you say, forcing yourself to wait until you’ve really reached this point instead of running when you feel like you can’t take the tension anymore of testing each inch of ground before relaxing weight onto your forward foot. The payoff for that discipline is the look of pure shock on your buddy’s face when you yell in his ear and shove him over into the mud. : )

However, there have been many, many other threads of a similar technical or procedural nature that existed without criticism (and continue to exist) for a long period of time. Subsequently, I can only assume that the hot-button nature of this topic is responsible. My thought on the matter? Tough. It's fine to state your opinion regarding a subject or disagree with others...in fact, that's one characteristic of an ideal learning environment. But complaining about a thread's lack of literary focus whilst others (for example, the 'Fast-Acting Poisons' thread...which I love, don't get me wrong) continue to thrive and evolve, simply because you don't really like a particular topic or the object of that discussion, borders on the hypocritical.

And as for the doe, I want to make clear that my earlier...enthusiasm, for lack of a better word, was of a more sympathetic nature for the deer than a gleeful "good job, old chap" statement. Even if the wound had appeared closed, long-term damage would likely have made life difficult (if not impossible) for the animal...things like infection and residual mobility damage, which could cause a host of other problems. I was glad, from a conservationist standpoint, that the wounded animal was harvested, not left out to cope with the detrimental consequences of a close brush with death. As stated previously, a clean kill is important to many hunters...we don't want the animal to suffer needlessly.

While this may sound contradictory to some (after all, the animal in question wasn't asking to be shot), it is more than plausible from the standpoint of one who is conscious of more than just the thrill of the hunt or excessive pride in a wall-mounted trophy, without taking a hands-off approach to the problems at hand. Not everyone is suited to hunting, and that's perfectly fine. If everyone was we would have rampant overharvesting issues, and the eventual extermination of all game.

Because of our past actions (as rstegman pointed out), the predators who originally restricted the deer population are too few in number to continue that task. Therefore, some of us need to step in and maintain the balance of nature. In a certain sense, that is a tragedy...but one that does man no apparent good to constantly anguish about.

*Sigh*

This is what happens when I get involved in an issue so close to home. I guess I'm just fed up with the bad rap hunters (and hunting, in general) get in today's media and culture. Sorry if any of this sounded excessively defensive and/or accusatory...that was not my intent.

And, not to be one to point the proverbial finger and ignore the other three pointing back, I'll contribute literarily to this discussion.

If ever you need to write a scene involving tracking or hunting, it is helpful to have a sense for the environment in which that scene is set, instead of just the little technical details of either activity. The environment shapes both; the condition of the soil, terrain, foliage, the temperature (it's harder to track across frozen ground), weather (or across snow while fresh snow is still falling), and many other natural aspects are critical to the given circumstances. My advice, if you have not had the oppurtunity to either hunt or track yourself, would be to spend some time in the woods (or whatever locale your particular story demands). Sit and observe...take in the sights and sounds and smells. Look around for signs of wildlife...piles of 'scat' (solid waste), pawprints, territorial markings, etc.

Maybe even try a little tracking yourself (don't worry about feeling inadequate to the task...just follow a trail as far as you can). The mindset of a hunter/tracker is totally different from that of one who casually strolls through the forest. See how many 'out of place' things you can notice (note: they aren't really out of place, but you get what I mean). I don't usually consider 'roleplaying' necessary for writing, but this is one time I'll go ahead and recommend it. You simply can't substitute research for the real thing, IMHO. And even if all this time 'in country' doesn't help you, you'll get to spend a little time alone with nature (or with your family and/or friends; with kids you could make a game out of it, and I'm sure they'd love it...for a while at least).

I'll look through my collection for some good books on this topic and post the info (assuming I can find them). I know I've got at least one prime reference around here, somewhere....

Inkwell
-----------------
"The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp."
-Anonymous

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/27/em.00.html

You'll have to scroll down about 20% to reach the relevant information. Otherwise, you'll just be rehashing the riveting screenwriting of CNN's finest.

Inkwell
-----------------
"The difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp."
-Anonymous

Even if you manage to spot an alert, stationary sentry, you shouldn't try sneaking up on that sentry. Find a different sentry or wait for the situation to change. If you can disguise yourself as a non-threatening entity (begger, peddler, fellow-guard, whathaveyou), and get to almost arm's length (arm's length plus one stride minus your forearm), it is possible to make a lethal or disabling attack of some kind before the sentry has any time to react effectively (it is best if you strike from a crouched position rather than standing erect, if that works with your disguise).

As we two-leggeds continue to encroach on the wilderness territory of the four-leggeds, we will continue to have more and more encounters of an urban nature. I know of several sightings within the Portland, OR suburbs of cougars.

Mama, keep an eye on your children...

Oh... and here's a true-life "hunting" story for you. You could never pass this off as credible fiction. My family has an old-fashioned log cabin in the Blue Mountains. Our cabin is about a mile from a neighbor's cabin. While we live about 3 hours away, the neighbor and his wife live relatively nearby, in a town about 30 miles away. They were up checking on their cabin late on a Sunday afternoon. He saw sign of bear in the yard, so he cautioned his wife to be on the lookout. It grew dark. She was sitting inside the house when she looked up and saw the bear with its face pressed up against the screen of the open window. She called to her husband who was in the yard to alert him about the bear. He managed to make it into the house, where his gun was at. By now it's full dark, and the bear ambles off in the yard. The wife says, "I saw him head out by the bird feeder." The bird feeder was painted white, and he could barely make it out in the gloom of night. So he shot his gun in that direction, hoping to frighten the bear off.

Grandma was never as into hunting as Grandpa, but she went with him anyway. (True love, that.) So once she was out with him and their oldest son, Craig (don't know how old he was at the time - probably ten or so), and Grandpa dropped a buck. When he went to dress it he discovered he'd left his knife back in the truck a few miles back, so he left Grandma and Craig with the deer and went to fetch it.

Well, Grandma is a do-it-yourself kind of gal, and she'd watched it done before, and you know, she still had an old, blunt hatchet with her (for some reason - I was never clear on this), and she figured she could at least get started while Grandpa was gone. So she started trying to slice open that buck like she'd seen it done, and really ended up hacking at it instead. But she got the thing open and started scooping things out...

I understand that if you do it right, it all just falls onto the ground. Of course, Grandma didn't do it right. And she had punctured some right nasty little bags of goo. But she was persistent, and by golly, Grandpa wasn't going to come back to a half-dressed buck. So she got up to her elbows in... stuff. After a bit, she got frustrated about how slippery everything was, and had a brilliant idea. She wrapped some entrails around a bush, and said, "Craig, come help me drag this buck around."

So they dragged the buck about ten feet, wrapped the entrails up a bit more, dragged it another ten, wrapped and dragged, wrapped and dragged... and by the time Grandpa got back with the knife, there was Grandma, Craig, and a hollowed-out buck in the middle of a ring of entrails draped over the forest underbrush.

*shudder*

I still hate that book.