On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 23:38:22 -0700, Peter Brandt <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Amadeus:
> >I tend to think so too, but it's always a question of amounts.
> >Without nets and fishhooks and in dry areas the amounts would have been
> >very low, I think.
>
>Does this mean that you are now willing to concede the same point when
>it comes to plant foods?  ;-)

Yes. The same thing of course applies to the amounts of particular plants
which later became a staple. Legumes, cereals.
Not plants in general as in general I can see them as the most reliable
and practical source.
But with great seasonal variety (not a whole year staple, mabe no staple at
all). And with a broad palette to choose of.

Same thing with variety applies also to the variety of animal foods.
This is very nicely described at this site:
http://www.naturalhub.com/natural_food_guide_meat.htm
Now only 4 animals are staple and they are even very much modified by
agrigulture. Previousls... read yourself.

regards

Amadeus