Ward (1992; Oikos 63: 312-317) recently argued that optimal foraging theory suffers from a lack of alternative models and suggested that satisficing might serve as such an alternative. We disagree with both premises and argue that the optimal foraging approach generates multiple alternative and testable hypotheses within its own logical framework. Conversely, satisficing can only be defined in ways that are either trivial or a subset of optimal foraging. Satisficing fails as a coherent alternative to optimality because its predictions are not testable and therefore cannot be refuted. Ward also cited one result from our earlier work with ants as evidence for satisficing in nature