Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Trail Building Best Practices
|
Hi all! There is a crag in my area that currently has one sport route. There is a trail most of the way, but the last 1/2 mile or so is pretty heinous bushwhacking. I think that an access trail would make a huge difference for vegetation, erosion, access etc. The land is owned by the Forest Service. Do you guys have any tips for trail building best practices? Would going up there and improving the VERY VERY faint social trail with shovels, picks, and saws be the right thing to do? Any wisdom would be appreciated! |
|
Hi Camdon. Trail building on federal land without authorization from the managing agency is illegal and you could be issued a citation if caught. I agree a well-designed and built trail is better than multiple eroding trails, but without clearance from land manager you would be acting illegally. |
Jay Goodwin wrote: That's why you don't build a trail, you build a user generated path. Trails require maintenance and planning and upkeep from the respective land managers, user generated paths do not. |
Camdon Kay wrote: Really hard to say without knowing the type of soil, the cross-slope, terrain, etc. A lot goes into planning and cutting properly built, maintainable, and erosion resistant trails. Also important to note that building trails with shovels, picks, and saws on Forest Service land without permission is VERY not allowed, and has led to significant access issues in places. |
|
Thanks for the input, everyone. If a social trail develops where people walk, is that also an issue? There is a trail to some of the other crags in the area, and I believe they were created by climbers (not 100%, and it has been 20 years). Would the Forest Service be willing to build <1/2 mile of trail if we made a good enough case to them? |
|
Hypothetically, user generated paths may be acceptable. Non-hypothetically, the fastest way to get your new mini-crag shut down would be to build a pirate trail to it. Either involve FS early (best done through your local climbing access group/access fund), or keep it in stealth mode. Maybe delete the thread even… |
|
Does one sport route need a dedicated trail? I would argue that it's not really a crag yet and just a random route that will likely fall into obscurity since it's all alone. However if it's going to be a Craig with some further development that's a different story. My understanding is that doing dirt work with shovels etc is where things get more sticky with the Forest Servic. Think of it more in terms of designating rather than building. Use some rock cairns and clippers to designate one trail to the crag, it will wear in to a decent trail over time if it's not too steep. Ryan K wrote: Ryan, do you have examples of crag's getting shut down solely because of a trail being built to them? I would guess 90+ percent of crag's on US public lands have non-authorized trails to them. |
|
Don’t ask, Don’t tell |
|
I have seen some wild stuff with recent boulder landing development that would put social trail building to shame |
Camdon Kay wrote: I believe the law is aimed towards tool-assisted maintenance and creation. Theoretically I could imagine a world in which a land manager would argue that following a social trail just on feet could theoretically constitute trail maintenance, but I have a really hard time believing a judge would agree with that even in that theoretical world. In my neck of the woods, the vast majority of "social trails" are actually originally and continually game trails anyways - nothing sees enough foot traffic to be a human social trail. In regards to your last question, the answer is "it depends" but the much more realistic answer is "absolutely not a chance". The USFS is extremely understaffed and most trails built are built for people who like hiking, not for folks trying to reach specific destinations (i.e. most trails are either loops or connect between other trails, they're not just single point out-and-backs). The exceptions to this rule are typically in very high interest, scenic areas - glaciers, alpine lakes, gorges, etc. |
Blake M wrote: I do know of a couple. I’m not saying what you’re proposing isn’t logical, or right. But, I would be very cautious. We’ve seen large sweeping bans (not because of rogue trails necessarily) on FS land at least twice in the last few years. I think that warrants cautious action in general.. Rogue trails are a big focus for land managers right now. Like I said, I would engage with your local climbing access group to dialogue with the land managers about a new trail if it really needs a proper one. |
|
As others have said, work with the land manager and get permission first. As for trail building resources, here is a guide from the California Department of Parks and Rec, https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=29674 |
|
I'm in a similar pickle with a sport crag I developed a few years ago that I've been reluctant to make public. The trail got lightly worn in from my own use. I clipped some branches, moved some sticks, but a short part at the bottom I feel needs a few stairs/switchbacks and side cribbing to not make a mess of the Duffy hillside. I want people to come to this place, but I feel I can't make a bunch of stairs without risking the fallout mentioned. How do we as developers make an area public, without the delimeas of adding our name to it? |
|
I think this is the crux of the whole “developing” thing from a land managers perspective. Our real impact is not the backpack full of bolts and trundling we add to a crag. It’s the erosion from parking at an unsanctioned pull-off, hiking up a fall-line approach trail, getting to the base and sitting around all day near the wall, throwing down packs and creating a “staging area” etc. I think every LCC should have a professional trail builder on payroll, and more importantly recognized as such by the FS, BLM, NPS, whatever. |
|
Host of environmental issues with goonie trails. Impact on animals, plants, water quality, access. |
