&gt; to protect you must either you take steps to dissuade people, or resort to some form of enforced quota system<p>This isn&#x27;t true. You can channel people into the behaviors you want by making them easier; it&#x27;s not an all-or-nothing &quot;no matter what our environment is like, 3% of visitors will leave litter&quot; situation. There are many things you could do to reduce environmental damage while accommodating <i>more</i> visitors:<p>- You could put handrails around the trails. People aren&#x27;t supposed to leave them anyway.<p>- You could station trash cans along the trails. This makes it much easier to throw your trash in an appropriate place.<p>- You could establish fire pits in which it was officially OK to have fires.<p>- You could patrol the trails. This doesn&#x27;t work well when hikers are rare, but it scales beautifully as they get more common. Or, you could have a stationary security presence in problem areas.<p>- You could blaze new trails.<p>Everything I&#x27;ve listed except trail patrols is something I&#x27;ve personally seen in some areas. (Full disclosure, I&#x27;m actually just assuming that new trails get blazed from time to time. I have, however, personally experienced trails being radically reworked between visits.)<p>&gt; [machismo is] far better than paved sidewalks and concrete staircases replacing trails<p>Why?