April 24, 2006
Statement for the GGNRA General Management Plan
SFMTB.com would like to explain why we think that the GGNRA trail building and trail use policy is outdated, illogical, non-sustainable and dangerous, and why these policies should be completely rewritten as part of the GGNRA's new General Management Plan.
WHY GGNRA TRAIL POLICY IS OUTDATED
------------------------------------------
The GGNRA trail policy is based on the 1983 book titled, "NPS Trails Management Handbook".
A 2003 Point Reyes trail inventory references it and says: "The most recent NPS document providing guidance for trail construction and maintenance is the NPS Trails Management Handbook, published in 1983 by the Denver Service Center."
When the NPS Trails Management Handbook was written, mountain biking was in its infancy, and definitely not on any agency's radar. To attempt to apply this handbook to mountain bike use is irresponsible. Modern trail planning policy in the GGNRA (but certainly not all NPS units, as many trail managers have adopted more modern practices) is being made based on a book which is 23 years old! The policies outlined in this 1/4 century old book are contrary to what is being practiced in modern sustainable trail designs which are in use in other federal, state and local jurisdictions. (see below)
WHY GGNRA TRAIL POLICY IS ILLOGICAL
------------------------------------------
The same Point Reyes document when outlining its trail policy, makes numerous biased claims. For example, in describing equestrian/hiking trails it says:
"These trails provide a leisurely horseback riding or hiking experience. They are unpaved and the developed width may vary from three to six feet. Gradients are similar to those for hiking-only trails. These trails are not appropriate for bicycle use because of potential safety problems and diminished quality of experience."
Why is a narrow-width trail appropriate for hikers and horses but not for bicyclists? The reasons for closing these trails only to bicycles are illogical.
Except for stairways, a modern bicycle allows its rider to traverse the same terrain as a hiker. On my mountain bike one is able to travel the trail with the same dexterity and control as a pedestrian, assuming that he doesn't ride at an excessive speed. The bike is simply an extension of one's feet and can be operated in complete safety. It is not logical to exclude mountain bikes due to vague and unproven "safety problems".
There is no logical reason why a narrow width trail cannot be shared by all user groups. "Diminished quality of experience" is a subjective feeling, one that could apply to all user groups. Simply sharing a trail does not diminish the quality of experience. Mountain biking is a safe, non-polluting, muscle-powered recreational activity, just like hiking and horseback riding.
The Cactus Forest Trail in Saguaro National Park is a narrow 24 inch wide trail that has been open to hikers, equestrians and mountain bikers for more than 12 years. This popular trail has been safe and without conflict. Thousands of miles of singletrack trails are open to hikers, mountain bikers and equestrians on federal, state and local lands throughout the country. There is clear and compelling evidence that the Point Reyes policy statement quoted above is not only inaccurate and illogical, but also demonstrates a bias against mountain bicycling that is not based on research or fact. It contains opinion and is inappropriate in a planning document.
WHY GGNRA TRAIL POLICY IS NON-SUSTAINABLE
------------------------------------------
We have hiked and ridden my bicycle on most of the trails within the GGNRA. The fire roads in the parks are generally built along ridge lines and down fall lines. The "fall line" is the direction that gravity would carry water down a hillside. This leads to erosion, and if not addressed, turns a trail or road into a gully that is impassable. Modern trail building techniques state that sustainable multi-use trails should:
--be narrower in width and built along a hill's contours to prevent water from channeling along a fall line.
--utilize grade reversals, rolling grade dips, outsloping and maximum grades (dependent on cross-slope grade and soil types) to prevent water from traveling down a trail.
--should not contain stairways, which are not passable for equestrians and mountain bikers.
In addition, conflicts between bicyclists and other users can be mitigated by using:
--Open sight lines along trails to prevent surprise encounters on blind corners.
--Calming devices, such as tight turns to keep bicycles from building up speed.
--Education, including signage, so that trail users are aware of the need to be respectful of one another.
Many trails in the GGNRA that are badly deteriorating because of poor trail design.
The GGNRA planners could benefit from three books that outline the details of modern sustainable trail building techniques and discuss impacts:
1) Trail Solutions: IMBA's Guide to Building Sweet Singletrack
3) Don Weir's "A Guide to the Impacts of Non-Motorized Trail Use," a comprehensive review of impacts on natural resources as well as social and economic impacts.
It would also benefit the GGNRA planning staff to familiarize themselves with the Bureau of Land Management's "National Mountain Biking Strategic Action Plan." This document, adopted in 2002, is a well-recognized document that provides guidance for accommodating mountain biking on shared use trails.
Lastly, it should be recognized that:
--All user groups contribute to the erosion of natural-surface trails.
--All user groups put some pressure on existing native plant populations by trampling plants near the trail edge and by unintentionally introducing non-native invasive plant species.
Therefore a sustainable trails policy should also include a well-organized volunteer program made up of trail users, which works to both restore native plant populations and eradicate non-native invasive plant species in the natural areas which border the trail system. The NPS' own successful Presidio Park Stewards Volunteer Program, in which SFMTB.com members have volunteered regularly for 3 years, and the Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy's “Trails Forever” volunteer program satisfy this requirement.
The lack of knowledge about modern trail building science, techniques and user impacts at the GGNRA is unacceptable and GGNRA management is not achieving professional standards in this regard. Operating on a policy that is outdated and illogical as well as supportive of non-sustainable trail designs is unfair to all user groups.
WHY GGNRA TRAIL POLICY IS DANGEROUS
------------------------------------------
According to the 2004 NPS Presidio Trails and Bikeways Plan, "multi-use trail corridors range from 8 ft to 14 ft wide. The trail corridor would have a hard surface, 6 ft to 10 ft wide, 1 to 2 ft wide soft-surface pedestrian shoulders on one or both sides."
The relevant portion of this plan can be found here:
These multi-use 6+ foot wide trails are built with hard pack, road-like surfaces that are often covered with rocks and gravel, and which are usually built on relatively steep fall-line grades. Smooth, wide, and steep multi-use trails is the perfect trail design if you are trying to maximize biking speeds. Bicycles can quickly build up a high velocity on these types of trails and the loose rock and gravel make braking and turning treacherous. In addition, these trails channel water and erode badly, creating additional hazards for all trail users.
In reality, AND TOTALLY CONTRARY TO GGNRA POLICY, narrow-width multi-use trails which are made on natural surfaces, with terrain features such as rocks and curves, with good sight lines and calming devices, and which are built along hill contour lines instead of fall-lines would provide the safety the GGNRA claims to seek. This is because bicycle speed is greatly diminished due to lower trail grades and technical challenges that force bikers to slow down, and are sustainable because the water does not channel down the trail and cause erosion.
The current GGNRA policy of smooth, steep and wide multi-use trails is a recipe for accidents, and a nightmare for risk management staff.
WHAT WE ARE ASKING GGRNA TO DO
------------------------------------------
Due to the reasons outlined above, we are asking for a total overhaul of the GGNRA trail building and trail use guidelines as part of the updated General Management Plan. These should include:
1) Trail use and design decisions based on current standards accepted by most federal, state and local agencies.
2) Narrow width, sustainable and challenging trails that are open to all nonmotorized users.
3) Policies based on accepted trail building science and peer-reviewed research instead of personal bias.