Final answer:
Hunter-gatherers would be better off in a drought due to their mobility, the ability to access a diverse range of food resources, and established social networks which allow for the utilization of resources in neighboring territories.
Step-by-step explanation:
If a serious drought occurred, a group of hunter-gatherers would likely be better off than a sedentary population primarily due to their mobility and varied subsistence strategies. Hunter-gatherer societies have the ability to move to different territories in search of food resources, making them more adaptable to changing environmental conditions such as drought. In contrast, sedentary agricultural communities are tied to specific plots of land for their crops and cannot easily migrate in response to a lack of resources.
Moreover, the gatherer-hunter mode of subsistence often involves a diversified diet obtained from a wide range of foraged plants and hunted animals. Sedentary populations, on the other hand, rely heavily on cultivated crops, which could fail during a drought, potentially leading to food shortages. Gatherer-hunters also have established social networks that allow them to access resources in neighboring territories, further enhancing their resilience to environmental stresses.