Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Fish remains in Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene sites in the southern Columbia Plateau and northwestern Great Basin and artifactual evidence of fish exploitation indicate local Paleoindians exploited fishes. There is no significant difference in the proportion of assemblages with fish and the proportion of assemblages without fish in each area. The percentage of assemblages with anthropogenically deposited fish remains decreases over time in both areas, but there is an increase in the percentage of assemblages with anthropogenically accumulated fish between 12,000 and 11,000 cal yr BP in the Great Basin. Taxonomic richness in the two areas reflects sample size and analytical thoroughness as well as precontact reality. There is a statistically significant difference between the percentage of assemblages with fish remains collected using 1/4-in screens (18.2 per cent) and the percentage collected using 1/8-in screens (55.2 per cent). A rigorous study of legacy collections of Paleoindian fish remains is recommended.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lyman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: