I hypothesized that statistical ritual has supplanted knowledge accrual as the sine qua non of wildlife science. Under the hypothesis, I deduced occurrence of 1) significance testing of the obvious and inconsequential, 2) quantitative debasement of research problems, and 3) publication of papers that largely lacked information but were methodologically impeccable. Articles in past and recent wildlife literature fit the deductions and supported the hypothesis. Thus, wildlife science is operating inefficiently because quantitative formalities are supplanting ecological information in technical articles. This problem can be corrected by a change of mindset in authors, referees, and editors. The change entails less emphasis on quantitative ritual and more emphasis on information that aids in understanding and explaining nature and managing wildlife.