Amadeus Schmidt said:
You know that I see general "meat" eating as unpaleo because nearly all of
these meat masses which are consumed today, are "produced" in the most
unpaleo manner. Not only in the way of production, but also in it's
composition.

My response:
There are many sources for hormone and antibiotic-free and free-range
poultry and meat; lamb is typically range fed; and grass fed animals are
becoming more widely available.  If we took modern cattle and just stopped
grain fattening them--just slaughtered them after taking them off the
range-- they would have a composition like wild game.  So, it's not hard to
replicate the composition of wild animals.  Chicken breast is very lean, and
very widely available; ditto for white meat fish.

Amadeus wrote:
Furthermore I looks as if consumption of animal carcass can't have been a
very high part, due to physiological constraints in absence of enough fat,
as it was out of the arctis.

My response:
I don't know if you realize that the low fat content of wild game is not a
limiting factor if one has access to an ample amount of carbohydrates from
fruits, roots, shoots, tubers, and other vegetation.  Nuts and vegetable
fruits (for example avocadoes in some coastal climates) would supply
additional fat, along with fatty fish from oceans or streams.

Amadeus wrote:
When in India this year, I've seen the natives....capturing various seafood
like crabs....However even though this coast is very rich of fish (with
plenty of dolphins) the catch was small. Few items for a long walk.
The fish the tourists get, comes from trawlers.

My response:
You are talking about a highly populated area.  Modern India is not the same
as it was 5,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 years ago!!!  Agriculture and industry
allowed for the overpopulation of India and other locales.

If you read Price's book you will learn that the natives he studied lived so
closely with their environment that they understand the concept of a given
land's carrying capacity.  They controlled their numbers far more
effectively than we modern people, in part by doing long term ecological
breast feeding, and having other social controls in place.  I do not believe
that people had to be constantly moving.  If they controlled their numbers
and ate a wide variety of foods, particularly foods that regrow or mulitiply
quickly, they would not have exhuasted the land and food supply.

Modern people have a lot to learn from the native people, who have become
estranged from the land upon which they feed and depend.   When people are
removed from the  land and the source of their food, they do a lot of
unwise, even crazy, things!

Regards,
Rachel