Development Manager Robyn Lynn kicked off September with a new monthly feature emailed to PNTA members called Trail Notes where she writes about the PNT, our work on it, and the people who use and love it.
Members have an opportunity to have their questions about the topic answered when we post an expanded version of Trail Notes here on our blog. Want the opportunity to have your question answered? Become a member today!
“Why aren’t you working on the _____ section of trail?” How PNTA Prioritizes Trail Work
Every season, PNTA direct-hires 50 field staff and works with countless volunteers and trail maintenance organizations to give annual maintenance to the PNT. From May to October, our trail crews work in the field on the 1200+ mile trail system. Even still, it’s possible that some trail segments haven’t received service recently.
Funding
Funding is a main consideration when determining what work gets done and where. “If we have funding from a specific agency, we generally have to use it on lands managed by that agency,” says Jeff Kish, PNTA Executive Director. The PNT crosses many jurisdictions and management units; sometimes, the funding to work in a specific area isn’t there. He says our agency partners are chronically underfunded and understaffed; “Some management units don’t have their own crews or funding to contract outside help, which leaves the work entirely up to organizations like ours. That makes the support of our members and donors that much more important. We really couldn’t do it without them.”
Logistics
A significant determiner of what and where is simply the logistics of access. Volunteer work is often done closer to trailheads because it’s practical, satisfying, and efficient for people donating their time. A significant advantage of our Performance Crew model is that our paid youth and young adults can more easily access remote parts of the trail. Still, even these professional trail crews are challenged by how far from their backcountry camps they can work. “We have to camp within 5 miles of where the work is to be done to make the best use of our time, so it takes multiple trips to put every mile within range,” says Sterling Collins-Hill, Western Washington Regional Coordinator. “If our amazing volunteer partners at Back Country Horsemen can get pack animals in, that extends our reach, but until access trails are stock-ready, there may still be areas too deep in the woods for our crews to work efficiently. Even though hikers have access, the packers carrying tools and supplies for our crews might not.”
Federal Processes
“Why aren’t you clearing a path through the Idaho bushwhack?” “How come you haven’t built new trail segments to replace roadwalks?” Jeff says these common questions could be the subject of entire Trail Notes on their own. “The short answer is that building new trail segments is illegal until several important processes have been carried out.”
With member support, PNTA advocates for prioritizing PNT projects on state and federal public land and contributes staff time and other resources to lighten the load on our agency partners. Still, things like optimal location reviews and environmental analyses are time-consuming, costly, and require agency capacity, often in scarce supply. We’re happy to report that we’re making significant strides toward new trail construction projects now that the PNT comprehensive plan is complete. However, as exciting as building new connections is, keeping what we already have on the ground (and the map) is essential too.”
Private Land
Another obstacle to consistent maintenance of the PNT from end to end is that some parts of the trail are on private land, where access for today’s users may be tolerated, but funding or access for trail maintenance and construction might still need to be cultivated. We’re working toward a future where the entire PNT management corridor is permanently protected and publicly accessible, but that work has only recently become possible with the completion of the PNT Comprehensive Plan.
Hazardous Conditions and Employee Safety
For much of the PNT, the maintenance season is only as long as the hiking one is, and our crews can only start their work once the snow has melted – just when hikers have already begun to hit the trail. As a result, the answer to why we’re not working on a specific section may be that we intend to, but you just got there first.
Similarly, trail crews are impacted by other hazardous conditions that PNT users face. Fires and smoke, floods, and washed-out roads and bridges all affect access for PNTA crews and our partners, the effects of which have increased with our changing climate.
While hikers and other users are free to assess the risks that they are personally willing to accept for themselves, when it comes to traveling over snow in steep terrain, fording raging creeks, or inhaling wildfire smoke, these decisions are different for PNTA leadership, who must be trusted to keep crews out of harm’s way. “As an employer, at the end of the season, we want to know that our trail crews were safe and enjoyed the hard work and camaraderie they found during every “hitch,” says Jeff.
Final Thoughts
When you see a trail crew working, stop and say HI, ask questions, and express gratitude for their invaluable service for your enjoyment and the long-term availability and ecological health of the PNT. The crew might not always be from PNTA, but they still share our values of ensuring the trail is well cared for now and into the future. Remember that they are the ones doing the work, not making the decisions, so offer your feedback to us office folk instead!
I hope one of the things you get from all this is that we are so grateful to members like you. From being agile enough to serve the immediate needs of the trail regardless of federal funding to a future where we’ll build new sections or hire more trail crews and organizational staff, there is no way we can do it without you. From the bottom of our hearts, we all THANK YOU!
PNTA Member Questions
Our September edition of Trail Notes prompted the following question from PNTA member Valarie from Sandpoint, Idaho:
“You alluded to the challenges involved with building out the Idaho bushwhack, can you elaborate on that?”
PNTA Executive Director Jeff Kish jumped in to take this one:
As with any new trail construction project on public land, an environmental analysis would need to be conducted before any ground disturbing work can begin. This could be a little more complicated than most projects because the bushwhack spans both federal and state lands, which each have different requirements and processes required for compliance.
Environmental analyses can often take a year or more to get scheduled, and then take several months or longer to complete. During an analysis, many specialists must examine the proposed route to determine its potential impacts on a variety of natural and cultural resources. In this particular location, which is part of the Selkirk Mountains Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone, extra attention would need to be given to the possible implications of increased recreation access on grizzly bear core habitat for instance. Mandatory public processes, which include initial public scoping and public comment periods, and an objection resolution process must also be conducted to complete environmental analysis.
Before an environmental analysis can begin however, the Forest Service has to determine if a trail should even be built, and if so, where.
“If it should even be built?!” You might ask. Yes, if it should even be built. The PNT comprehensive plan lays out the management practices that must be adhered to during the trail design process.
While it dictates that:
The PNT travelway should generally be a moderately developed or developed trail (equivalent to Forest Service trail class 2 or 3 standard terra trail)
it goes on to say:
b) For short segments in limited locations, as appropriate to the setting and terrain, the PNT
may be constructed and maintained to be a minimally developed trail (equivalent to Forest
Service trail class 1 standard/terra trail).
The plan further lists the definition for Trail Class 1 as:
Trail class 1 – Minimally Developed: Primitive trail, minimum to nonexistent constructed features.
This direction could technically allow for future trail users to continue following the game trails, barely-there boot paths and scrambles that today’s users experience.
As per the PNT comprehensive plan, the only way this decision can be made is through a formal optimal location review (OLR). OLRs require both extensive Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis and on-the-ground fieldwork, and are dependent on local units having adequate staff capacity to collaborate with PNTA and the trail administrator. The optimal location for the trail is the one that best meets the desired conditions for the trail, in support of the trail’s unique nature and purposes, as defined in the PNT comprehensive plan. Once initiated, OLRs can take several months or longer to complete on their own. Any trail construction project that would establish or change the location of the PNT must be approved by the Secretary of Agriculture before it can proceed.
In addition to having an approved optimal location review and completed environmental analysis, PNTA can not build a new trail segment on lands managed by the Idaho Department of Lands (IDL) unless they agree to host the trail and authorize the work. While the completion of the PNT is a mandate from the US Congress, there is nothing in federal law that can compel state or private landowners to participate in the completion and management of a national scenic trail. If IDL were to determine that the construction and management of the PNT in its optimal location would be incompatible with other management objectives for the landscape, a land purchase or swap may be needed in order to create a permanent management corridor where the trail could be built.
You may be wondering what role PNTA has in pushing these efforts forward.
While the PNT was formally designated by Congress as a national scenic trail in 2009, the legally-required comprehensive plan for the trail was not completed until December 2023. The comprehensive plan is where desired conditions and management practices for the trail are legally defined, and where the criteria to guide the optimal location review process come from. As a designated national scenic trail, this guidance first needed to be created and presented to congress before the trail could continue its development.
PNTA was involved every step of the way throughout the development of the comprehensive plan. Not only were PNTA representatives appointed by the Secretary of Agriculture to serve in both PNT advisory committees, PNTA was involved outside of the councils through its relationship to the agency as the primary management partner. No other non-federal entity spent more time or had more influence on the development of the PNT comprehensive plan than PNTA.
The next round of planning that has tiered off the comprehensive plan is the development of the Optimal Location Review Guidelines manual. This document will be used by OLR teams to carry out the work of optimal location review. The Forest Service contracted PNTA to draft this manual. The guidelines are currently complete and undergoing review and refinement through a collaborative process with the agency, and are expected to be utilized for the first pilot optimal location review for the PNT by the end of this year.
While the PNT is administered by the Forest Service, and optimal location reviews can only be prioritized and initiated by the trail administrator, PNTA representatives are called out in the PNT comprehensive plan and OLR guidelines to play a key role as essential members of any future optimal location review team. In this role, PNTA will serve not only as subject matter experts, but also as independent watchdogs, making sure that the process leads to the best possible outcomes for the trail, its users and surrounding ecological communities.
After optimal location reviews have been conducted, PNTA will remain involved throughout the public process associated with environmental analysis. During this time, we’ll also inform and call on PNTA supporters to participate through public comment.
Public comments received during the environmental analysis could have the power to significantly sway decisions about if the trail should be built at all, and if so, where it should go. Previous public engagement that was conducted throughout the development of the PNT comprehensive plan revealed that public sentiment around building a new trail segment through the Idaho bushwhack was split. For every person who felt that building the trail was of paramount importance, another called for no trail at all. Some view the bushwhack as a PNT “right of passage” that must be retained. Others feel that further development could lead to visitor use management problems and potential conflict with other important management objectives for the area.
When the time comes to answer the question about what to do in Idaho, we’ll be here to help walk you through it. Until then, we’ll keep putting out maximum effort elsewhere.