I believe it was the Lakota --- and that's a good point --- they may not have hunted them,
per se.
However, if Kent Hovind says they hunted them, I'll take his word on it --- for now.
Here's an interesting article:
SOURCE
Should have read further in your source, AV:
Still, the other problem with his theory is that it ignores what Indians themselves have to say about the Thunderbird.
They describe the Thunderbird as a spiritual, not just physical, being. It is not seen as just a large, fearsome predatory bird that people tell stories about. Rather, it's an integral part of Plains Indians religion and ritual. Only by ignoring this fact could we put our Western ethnocentric biases into effect, and reduce it to a zoological curiosity. The Thunderbird is much more than that; the Indian attitude toward it comes from more than just the mere fact that it is supposed to be really big. To understand the origins of Thunderbird myths, it's necessary to see how they connect with other elements of Indian belief and ceremony - especially the Trickster complex - and see how they fit into the structure of Plains Indian myth as a whole.
As I thought. White cryptolozoologists layering their own excited notions atop the actuality of Aboriginal beliefs.
I am sorry you would take a convicted conman's word over that of entire indiginous peoples.
