<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="https://publishpress.com/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Living with wrens: 40 years in Plummer&#8217;s Hollow	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.vianegativa.us/2011/08/living-with-wrens-40-years-in-plummers-hollow/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.vianegativa.us/2011/08/living-with-wrens-40-years-in-plummers-hollow/</link>
	<description>Purveyors of fine poetry since 2003.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:16:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: David Harmon		</title>
		<link>https://www.vianegativa.us/2011/08/living-with-wrens-40-years-in-plummers-hollow/#comment-18165</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Harmon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:16:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vianegativa.us/?p=13041#comment-18165</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;Are we capable of finding new niches and living lightly on the land, or is human residence inherently destructive? &lt;/i&gt;

Some of both, but I think your parallelism is broken:  It&#039;s folks like you, long-term residents of a place, who can &quot;live lightly on the land&quot;, because memory and experience give perspective.  It&#039;s the migrants, the ones who settle new territories, who see their new homes as &quot;undeveloped&quot;, and think first of what resources they can extract from the place.

Of course, even long-term residents can be destructive eventually, as with the depletion and destruction of farmland (Persia and Mesopotamia, much of Africa and Asia, patches in lots of other places).  But we &lt;i&gt;have&lt;/i&gt; learned a lot since the dawn of agriculture, and the land gets a &lt;i&gt;much&lt;/i&gt; better deal from folks who expect their descendants to be living off the same land they are... in whatever shape it&#039;s been left for them.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Are we capable of finding new niches and living lightly on the land, or is human residence inherently destructive? </i></p>
<p>Some of both, but I think your parallelism is broken:  It&#8217;s folks like you, long-term residents of a place, who can &#8220;live lightly on the land&#8221;, because memory and experience give perspective.  It&#8217;s the migrants, the ones who settle new territories, who see their new homes as &#8220;undeveloped&#8221;, and think first of what resources they can extract from the place.</p>
<p>Of course, even long-term residents can be destructive eventually, as with the depletion and destruction of farmland (Persia and Mesopotamia, much of Africa and Asia, patches in lots of other places).  But we <i>have</i> learned a lot since the dawn of agriculture, and the land gets a <i>much</i> better deal from folks who expect their descendants to be living off the same land they are&#8230; in whatever shape it&#8217;s been left for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
