New Guinea highland tours - Tasmanian application?

[taswegian]

Read on the ABC the desire to open up the remote highlands of New Guinea http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-30/undocumented-png-mountain-challenge-for-adventurous-trekkers/9282786.
Besides interesting, I wonder how some of that could apply here?
Having to contend with so many differing land owners, everyone's back yard
That's one leaf none involved in the development of our iconic areas seem to take seriously.
Who's back yard is it?
Sure it's everyone's if you take Crown Land as that, administered by Parks, still government owned, but the 'right of use' through long and continued use seems to not be of any importance.
Long and continued use - Bushwalkers able and willing to put some grunt into life and take on these great challenges, but on foot.
Government and developers, seem to think (want) everything, everywhere, to be open slather for all and sundry to reach destinations by whatever means possible, even having exclusive rights.

I'm not referring to blanket no development, but the slithery rope to 'anything goes' is often seen only after it's too late.

There's a post here referring to extra tracks, exclusiveness in the S'west.
I note East Coasters are voicing concerns over increased helicopter activity at Freycinet http://www.examiner.com.au/story/5138404/petition-to-stop-scenic-helicopter-flights-over-freycinet.

Boomer Bay residents concern for loss in amenity.

People of all walks seem to like some peace and quiet and often it's the choices for a particular location or activity that is behind their reasoning for such decisions.
Is it any different that we bushwalkers enjoy the solitude, the tranquility, the exhilaration of being in those remote areas of Tasmania that captivate our hearts, take our breath (in more ways than one), mesmerising and holding us in quiet contemplation of the majesty and sheer beauty, clear skies, stunning sun sunrises/ sunsets and that keep tugging at our minds to return again and again.

Some may want a slice of that without the effort.
Some maybe incapable for varying reasons.
Not all will find themselves on the top of Everest, sending one down on the hallowed turf at Lord's, kicking goals at their beloved AFL/ VFL venue.
Is that a reason to make it available for all and sundry? Or are we content to let those capable or gifted enough to attain such heights, and applaud their efforts whilst not despoiling their activities or venues?

When on Kauai a few years ago we visited Waimea Canyon, and the midst of the enjoyment were interrupted by the clatter of a helicopter, and another.

I'm one who thankfully was fit enough to scale many lofty places, but there's many a place I will never reach now. Particularly those majestic but challenging mountains of the S'west, but I'm content to leave that for others to enjoy.

If it's okay to say No to certain activities in certain areas then is it too much or too exclusive to ask others to respect a particular group of people and their desires and aspirations?

With regards to the New Guinea trips, they seem to cart everything including the kitchen sink with them.