Great perspective, Evan! I think we could clarify this with the kinds of policies that show up--they wouldn't need to be all-out bans of practices, but sustainability policies like annual limits, designated spaces for certain activities, regulations of equipment used, etc.
We've also discussed how a lot of environmentally destructive activities are actually results of economic inequality, as providing employment opportunities for remote communities can often help push companies toward more sustainable models of both employment and impact. So we're definitely not looking to villainize individuals and groups acting out of necessity or using environmental resources responsibly--I think we are largely equating opportunism with the kind of corporate decision making for profit without regard for effects on regional ecosystems and economies. Hopefully we can get that kind of nuance across in the narrative!
Really appreciate the input! :)