• SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 days ago

    The argument is not that they chose not to harm the land, but that they simply couldn’t significantly harm the land, and there usually wasn’t any incentive to, because they couldn’t get at anything under the land anyway.

    About the only option was intentionally setting first/grass fires, and that happened plenty.