Kate Rigby (p.12) argues that there are two limitations to Heidegger's conception of an eco-poetics as dwelling. Both flow from his conception of language is the house of being.

The first is that it denies language to the non-human world (like Descartes) thereby claiming signification purely for the human world. This renders the non-human world effectively silent. A silent non-human world is effectively a dead world; a world where the biodiversity has gone.

Rigby's second limitation of Heidegger''s over-evaluation of the poetic world states that there is an obliteration of difference between earth and world since the earth is disclosed in language. is there not something about at the time, season and atmosphere of place that is not sayable, not expressed by poetry?

Both lines of criticism are limitations because they indicate human hubris.