The primary reason that they went extinct was due to a loss of food. The Maori hunted all of the moa species of bird (large and flightless) to extinction. Another prime example of natives living "in tune" with nature...
There are thousands of examples, in nature, of invading or adapting species eating out the food supply of other species, causing extinctions. This isn't an example of natives not living 'in tune' with nature, it's an example of people being 'a part of' nature.
I think you may have missed the sarcastic subtext of the original post. There's a recurrent myth in the modern world, especially in technologically developed societies, that "natives" or "primitive man" or whatever somehow lived and still live "in tune" with nature or in harmony with it or whatever. They all supposedly respect the land in a way we don't, are inherently wise, spiritual, blah, blah, blah.
You are, of course, correct in pointing out that hunting species to extinction is a very natural thing t
past and "primitive" societies would have exploited or would exploit nature as thoroughly as we do, anyway, were it not for limitations of populations and technology.
Dead on. The only reason the buffalo was still around in huge quantities was because native americans didn't have rifles, or horses for that matter.
Native cultures were famous for "slash and burn" agriculture, possibly the most destructive farming method around that leeches all the nitrates out of the soil in just a few ye
Slash-and-burn does not leech nitrates out of the soil any faster than modern agriculture, but modern methods include putting it back with chemical fertilizers.
Slash-and-burn is better than crop rotation if the land is returned to fallow for many years before being slashed-and-burned again.
Slash-and-burn does not leech nitrates out of the soil any faster than modern agriculture
Actually it does - because most of the nitrates lie on top of the soil in the form of ash from the burning, and are washed off almost immediately in the first rains. Slash and burn will only get you one - or if you're lucky and it doesn't rain too much two - good harvests.
Of course letting the land return to fallow is PART of crop rotation (with the added twist that modern rotation adds the planting of nitrogen fixing plants/legumes for a season), so I don't see how slash and burn could be "better".
In Tune... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you may have missed the sarcastic subtext of the original post. There's a recurrent myth in the modern world, especially in technologically developed societies, that "natives" or "primitive man" or whatever somehow lived and still live "in tune" with nature or in harmony with it or whatever. They all supposedly respect the land in a way we don't, are inherently wise, spiritual, blah, blah, blah.
You are, of course, correct in pointing out that hunting species to extinction is a very natural thing t
Re: (Score:5, Insightful)
past and "primitive" societies would have exploited or would exploit nature as thoroughly as we do, anyway, were it not for limitations of populations and technology.
Dead on. The only reason the buffalo was still around in huge quantities was because native americans didn't have rifles, or horses for that matter.
Native cultures were famous for "slash and burn" agriculture, possibly the most destructive farming method around that leeches all the nitrates out of the soil in just a few ye
Re: (Score:0)
Slash-and-burn does not leech nitrates out of the soil any faster than modern agriculture, but modern methods include putting it back with chemical fertilizers.
Slash-and-burn is better than crop rotation if the land is returned to fallow for many years before being slashed-and-burned again.
Re:In Tune... (Score:2)
Slash-and-burn does not leech nitrates out of the soil any faster than modern agriculture
Actually it does - because most of the nitrates lie on top of the soil in the form of ash from the burning, and are washed off almost immediately in the first rains. Slash and burn will only get you one - or if you're lucky and it doesn't rain too much two - good harvests.
Of course letting the land return to fallow is PART of crop rotation (with the added twist that modern rotation adds the planting of nitrogen fixing plants/legumes for a season), so I don't see how slash and burn could be "better".