Read the passage. Moving a historic building away from an eroding shore can preserve its materials and prevent total loss. Yet heritage is not contained only in beams and stone. Orientation toward the water, connection to neighboring structures, and community practices tied to the original site may contribute to significance. Relocation therefore creates a paradox: the act that saves the object can alter the relationships that made it valuable. Refusing to move may also sacrifice everything to an ideal of untouched place. Responsible planning should document what cannot be carried, involve communities in deciding which relationships matter most, and avoid describing relocation as preservation without remainder. Sometimes moving is justified, but the loss of place should remain visible in the account of what was saved. Which title best captures the passage's qualified defense of relocating threatened heritage?