One thing to consider in this is how much education it's LIKELY the general public would glean from visiting the smaller sites, the more fragile places. Education is a wonderful goal, but Loie and I have seen plenty of people wandering around places that are elaborately signed, not bothering to read; telling their kids to climb on the rocks to pose for pictures; dropping trash; walking or climbing on things they obviously should not; learning little or nothing about either history or respect for it.

You folks are concerned enthusiasts. You're a tiny minority. Trade the location of new places strictly among yourselves and, if you like, with the "pro's." Post pictures and field notes with explanations of why you're withholding the specific locations, heavily emphasizing that you feel the need to protect the sites from outright vandals, looters and the generally disrespectful. Make this problem an issue. Because it is. Perhaps the relative lack of saleable material at your sites affords them some protection against the looting that goes on constantly in the U.S., but the principal remains the same: genuine concern in the face of demonstrated irresponsibility.

Send us daytrippers to places that are monitored and protected. We'll get as much education--historical and conservationist--as we can handle at the biggies and midsizers. If it happens that some of us become enthusiasts, we'll be here eventually and make it into the circle of respectful folks that share the precise locations.