> In some cases, they are only hurting nature, in others, they are literally jeopardizing their own safety.
I find that phrasing odd. The former is much more serious than the latter. Feeding wildlife, for example, is an excellent way to ensure negative interactions with humans in the future. By disobeying posted rules, these people are putting others' lives in danger in addition to damaging the animals.
I think he phrased it that way because most people are much more concerned with their own well-being than with others'. As such, you'd think they'd at least take care because of that, but they clearly aren't.
Of course, we should obey these instructions for the greater good (of nature, of others etc.) but when you are with the kind who can barely watch out for their own safety and well-being, it's hard to convince them out of their own stupidity.
I find that phrasing odd. The former is much more serious than the latter. Feeding wildlife, for example, is an excellent way to ensure negative interactions with humans in the future. By disobeying posted rules, these people are putting others' lives in danger in addition to damaging the animals.