> However, there would still
> have been a lot of variety in a paleo hunter-gatherer's diet

A point which Williams would certainly endorse. In fact, he has a major
beef (no pun intended) with paleo-ists who over-emphasize meat in the diet.

Hunter-gatherers schedules are ultimately ruled by the whim of the seasons.
There can be no doubt about that. However, that does not mean they are
unable to plan and predict where their next meal is coming from, and it
does not mean they are unable to prepare for seasonal changes by storing
(drying, freezing in colder climates) food. Which - if successfully
implemented - somewhat clouds the concept of "eating only seasonal foods".
In fact, storing food would only increase the variety throughout the year.
(Almost like a "supplement"? :)

I would wager that although most hunter-gatherers spent only a few hours
each day "getting" food, a good chunk of time was spent making sure they
had backup for next week, or next month, or even next season.

> First, there is a limit to how much of any given resource an environment
> can provide. This would tend to limit the population that a
> hunter-gatherer group could support

The settled Natufians were apparently so successful as h-g's they had to
resort to infanticide to keep their population limited. That is, until they
"discovered" agriculture.

> For all of these reasons I believe that any strategy which introduces
> increased variety into the diet is consistent with Paleo diet principles.

I wholeheartedly agree.