• bobzer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    What do you consider pre-industrial?

    Agriculture directly led to the destruction of native biomes in any country that practiced it.

    More people = more agriculture = more land cleared.

    So long as most people who live die from avoidable famines, war and disease, then yes, it’s sustainable. But “in check” is probably the better term.

    • dumples@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Altered doesn’t have to mean destruction. A human touched ecosystem can be different but doesn’t have to be a monoculture. There are a huge number of human specific plants, most of which we call weeds now, that only exist around people that can provide food and medicine to us. Looking at how modern permaculture farming works there’s a huge amount of diversity within their food forests which are directly human touched while leaving more wild sections. These wild sections are more native specific and their value is acknowledged instead of called wasted space. Humans are part of an ecosystem so we alter it but don’t have to destroy it