Response to Comment on “Permanent human occupation of the central Tibetan Plateau in the early Holocene”

Abstract

Zhang et al. contest that Chusang was part of an annual mobility round that “more likely” included seasonal use of high-elevation environments than permanent use. We show that their probabilistic statement hinges on indefensible claims about hunter-gatherer mobility. In the context of quantitative data from hunter-gatherer ethnography, our travel model shows that seasonal-use models are highly unlikely to explain Chusang.