[joker]

[pimaCanyon]

My two cents: There will always be only a small fraction--a very very very small fraction--of hikers who are willing to do the hard work required to hike an off trail route in the North Cascades. Not only do you have to be good at map reading and route finding, but you also have to be in excellent physical shape and have the endurance to do so. It's the effort involved and the resulting very small percentage of folks who have the desire to put out that kind of effort that will keep these places relatively wild. Fortunately we have a lot of rugged country in the North Cascades--country too rough, too wild, and too steep--and without maintained trails. Many of these places will continue to see only a few parties a year due to their ruggedness and the amount of effort involved to hike thru them. But, the Enchantments you say! Yes, the Enchantments have been discovered and were soon overrun. However, they're a different animal because there are trails into them! And once they were discovered and overrun, the land management agencies stepped in and instituted a permit system. (Ditto for other areas that have been discovered and subsequently overrun, the High Sierra for example.) The elephant in the room is population growth. As long as we as a species keep pumping out babies we can expect to see more degradation of the few wild places we have left. But nobody wants to talk about that, so instead we'll hem and haw over whether to keep our trip reports "secret". Sorry folks, too late for that! As Tom S pointed out, the info is already out there for someone willing to research it. So those who want to put the genie back into the bottle: too late, too late!! But in lieu of zero--or negative--population growth the land management agencies will (hopefully!) monitor human traffic in an particular area, and if the human impact exceeds a certain threshold, they should implement a permit system. I for one hope that we continue to see more and more people fall in love with our mountains and other wild places, both those places that are easily accessed by trail and also those places that are reached only by off-trail travel and are very difficult to get to. Large numbers of people having experienced our wild places is the best way we can ensure that these places will continue to be preserved and remain undeveloped.

[iron]

problem is there are trails into many of the remote, hard, rugged areas too. boot path, but good enough. it's a slow march of de-wildernizing. just look at all the bulger peaks. practically an established route for all of them. some of them were yet to be climbed 40 years ago.

[pimaCanyon]

[AlpineRose]

The Big One is overdue. When it does occur, that will help with everything from crowded trails to protecting sensitive areas. Or maybe the final bacterial mutations rendering all existing antibiotics useless will happen first.

[Tom]

[Malachai Constant]

The most beautiful areas of wilderness IMO are high alpine areas with stupendous views. They are unlikely to be saved by more visitors this is because most have little marketable timber or minerals. Access is difficult in most cases. Enchantments are an exception but in my view they are a rather ordinary lake basin if they were in the Sierra or Winds. Granite has few miners unless in a contact zone and the spindly larches are not about to lift a loggers skirt. The Spring Manning era of raising awareness has largely passed, I am content to only tell friends of my alpine endeavors, not the world.

[joker]

[pimaCanyon]

[pimaCanyon]

[DIYSteve]

[pimaCanyon]

[Malachai Constant]

I remember a proposed area on Sandy butte near Winthrop, probably more of a real estate promotion which was killed by economics and lack of interest by corporations. I also remember a threat to begin mining again near LaBohn gap,but that always seemed an attempted greenmail plot. Of course there was the proposed copper mine on miners ridge.

[DIYSteve]

[joker]