Just admit you support Russian imperialism. At the very least, you support allowing it over keeping it in check.

Bend over for Russian imperialism, then. Got it.

I imagine it would be difficult to rally the institutional will to commodify a field which blooms for so short of a time.

>So let's just lock people out of nature? What else do you propose?

Please don't take this the wrong way, but... How frequently do you go out hiking, backpacking, climbing or primitive camping? I ask because in a lot of wilderness areas in the US, you need a permit to visit, and the number of permits issued can be limited and strictly enforced. Regulating visitation of publicly held spaces isn't a new or novel form of land management.

Bans like this are sometimes necessary to prevent loss of the ecosystem as a resource, and they're almost never permanent. It would be this way even if everyone respected wilderness spaces; the mere act of visiting will cause some measure of deterioration of the land and wildlife.

I can relate to being bummed about a place being closed for a time, but I think it's important to remember, especially in California, that there are still a tremendous number of beautiful places to visit and enjoy.

That hasn't worked for basically the entirety of human history

This happens all the time with trails in our national parks. They get shut down and allowed to go dormant every few years to promote rehabilitation of the local wildlife. It falls pretty squarely in line with conservation ethics.

>People should respect nature...

But they don't. Welcome to the world.