The rural environment has become a dredging event, mediated by the shotgun and the excavator. According to one of the news reports, it was called Moskenea and has been killed. Its meat was made of stone and wood, but its disappearance has caused impact and sadness. He lived long in Hondarribia’s lands, since the 16th century he has kept time from generation to generation, showing the consequences of time. He was old, he was aged, there his charm and his condemnation. Reconstruction is authorized and demolished. They ask him for a pill to survive and give him an anthrax. The fly leaves a bite on the territory.

What would be the plot of carnal authors behind violent action? The boldness and shame between the owner and the builder in persuading the legitimacy of the plan. The builder, convinced that the demolition would produce more profit and easier work, would believe that the tranquilizer “will not find anyone”. Or the builder that the owner was going to extend, “quiet, I know these cases and little has happened,” or it could be evidence of impunity and pride: “Quiet, I have friends in the upper classes and they will protect me.”

How can someone take this risk with the heavy investment involved in intervention? The owner has to have a great dream to want a renewed Moskenea substitute while not having any accession to Moscow.

To those living in an architectural heritage I have heard many times telling them that “I can’t do anything in my house.” The subsidy for the maintenance of property may be limited and some rules may be excessively restrictive, but coexistence in a heritage building is an honour and a love relationship should be created with the place of residence sufficient to understand and care for its natural character.