"While the Mink’s preferred prey is the Common Muskrat, it also takes rabbits, mice, chipmunks, fish, snakes, frogs, young snapping turtles, and marsh-dwelling birds; occasionally it raids a poultry house. Like weasels, the Mink kills by biting its victims on the neck. It eats where it kills, or carries the prey by the neck into its den, where it caches any surplus."
http://www.enature.com/fieldguide/s...p?recNum=MA0037
"Sometimes a mink kills more food than it can eat at one time; it stores the rest in its den to eat later."
http://ladywildlife.com/animal/americanmink.html
You can find dozens restatements of this.
The behavior of the other animal you mention is statically anomalous in comparison to the systematic patterns of rapacious humans.
it's all fascinating.
this isn't deep - it's quantitative.
a few dozen excess food kills is statistically insignificant compared to the millions and billions of humans that have destroyed equal numbers of humans and other species by the most savage means available in the animal kingdom.
it doesn't get you anywhere trying to dispute this simple numerical and quantitative fact.
you can make ethically relativistic arguments if you like. but you'll notice I didn't use any ethical judgements in my statement:
"Ever since I have had an opinion, my opinion of humans is that we are the most brutal, savage, cruel, vicious, and muderous animal ever to have walked the earth."
There's no denying this simple fact.