GWT Is a Great Idea

Home , Great Western Trail, Henrys Lake State Park

United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service D R A F T Intermountain Region

Ogden, Utah MARCH 2000 GREATGREAT WESTERNWESTERN TRAILTRAIL

NATIONAL TRAIL STUDY D R A F T

GREAT WESTERN TRAIL

National Trail Study

National Trail Study Great Western Trail March 2000

This report has been prepared to provide the United States Congress and the public with information about the feasibility of adding the Great Western Trail to the national Trails System. Publication and transmittal of this report, including any discussion of a course of action, should not be considered an endorsement or a commitment by the USDA Forest Service to seek or support either specific legislative authorization for the project or appropriations for its implementation. Authorization and funding for any new commitments by the USDA Forest Service will have to be considered in light of competing priorities for existing units of the Forest Service system and other programs.

United States Department of Agriculture ~ Forest Service ~ Intermountain Region

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L i National Trail Study Great Western Trail

March 2000

This National Trail Study presents information on the feasibility and desirability of adding the Great Western Trail to the National Trails System.

The study concludes that the Great Western Trail is a nationally significant trail that meets National Trails System Act requirements.

The study concludes that establishing a continuous trail is physically feasible.

The study concludes that desirability of recognizing the trail is dependent upon the level of community involvement and support available. Also, that adequate funding must be ensured at the time of designation of the trail.

The study examines four alternatives for designation of the trail under existing National Trails System categories. The study also examines two alternatives under the proposed Na- tional Discovery Trail category.

Agencies and the public may comment during the 30-day draft review period ending April 14, 2000. Comments should be addressed to:

USDA Forest Service Great Western Trail Study 2647 Kimberly Road East Twin Falls, ID 83301-7976 Attn: Roshanna Stone

For additional information, please write to the above address or telephone (208) 737-3223.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L iii Table of Contents Summary ...... 3

Introduction ...... 9 Description of the Trail ...... 11 The Role of the USDA Forest Service ...... 11 Development of the Great Western Trail Proposal ...... 11 Public Interest and Attitudes ...... 12 Great Western Trail Concept ...... 14 Existing State of the Trail ...... 15 Other Trail Designation ...... 16

Criteria for National Trails ...... 25 National Scenic Trails ...... 25 National Historic Trails...... 26 National Recreation Trails ...... 26 Connecting and Side Trails ...... 26 Other Trail Categories ...... 27 National Discovery Trails ...... 27 Future Planning Requirements...... 27

Description of Proposed Trail Corridor ...... 31 Historic Sites and Recreation Opportunities ...... 31 Arizona ...... 31 Utah ...... 34 Idaho ...... 38 Wyoming ...... 42 Montana ...... 42 Major Trails in Vicinity of Great Western Trail...... 46 Connector Routes ...... 49

Planning Process ...... 53 Study Scope ...... 54

Issues ...... 57 Resource Protection ...... 57 Trail Access ...... 58 Trail Conflict ...... 58 Economics and Social Environment ...... 58

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L v Alternatives ...... 61 Purpose ...... 61 Benefits of National Trail Designation ...... 61 Vision for the Trail ...... 62 Resource Protection ...... 63 Trail Management ...... 63 Economics and Social Environment ...... 63 List of Alternatives ...... 63 Alternative A: No-Action Alternative...... 64 Alternative B: National Scenic Trail (Mexico to Canada) ...... 66 Alternative C: National Scenic Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, western Wyoming) ...... 70 Alternative D: No National Trail Designation – Coordinated Administration and Management ...... 70 Other Alternatives to be Considered if a National Discovery Trail Category is Created ...... 72 Alternative E: National Discovery Trail (Mexico to Canada)...... 72 Alternative F: National Discovery Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, western Wyoming) ...... 74 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Study ...... 75 National Recreation Trail ...... 75 National Historic Trail ...... 75 National Scenic Trail (Federal Lands only) ...... 75 National Discovery Trail (Federal Lands only) ...... 75

Affected Environment ...... 79 Introduction ...... 79 Natural Resources Overview ...... 79 Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 83 Heritage Resources ...... 83 Prehistory ...... 83 History ...... 84 Historic Sites ...... 84 Scenic and Visual Resources ...... 85 Socio-Economic Environment ...... 87 Demographics ...... 87 Visitor Use ...... 87 Recreation Trends...... 88 Arizona ...... 89 Utah ...... 90 Idaho ...... 92 Wyoming ...... 92 Montana ...... 92

vi G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Summary ...... 93 Anticipated Trail Use ...... 93 Trail Conflict ...... 94 Appropriateness of Motorized Use...... 94 Off-Highway Vehicles ...... 95 National Trail System and Motorized Use ...... 95 Economics of Tourism...... 96 Arizona ...... 96 Utah ...... 97 Idaho ...... 97 Wyoming ...... 97 Montana ...... 97 Summary ...... 99 Land Ownership ...... 104

Environmental Consequences of the Alternatives...... 109 Natural Resources ...... 109 Heritage Resources ...... 109 Potential Measures to Minimize Adverse Impacts ...... 110 Socio-Economic Environment ...... 110 Visitor Use ...... 111 Land Ownership ...... 112

Financial Resources ...... 117 Arizona ...... 117 Utah ...... 119 Idaho ...... 121 Wyoming ...... 122 Montana ...... 122

Appendices A. Selected Portions of National Trails System Act ...... 125 B. Definitions and Criteria for Selected Trail Categories ...... 143 C. Summary of Public Involvement ...... 146 D. Public Content Analysis and Issue Summary Report ...... 148 E. Summary of Tribal Involvement ...... 162 F. Partial Listing of Individuals and Organizations Contributing to Great Western Trail Efforts ...... 163 G. Estimate of Cost ...... 166 H. Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species that Occur in Counties Along The Great Western Trail Corridor ...... 167

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L vii Bibliography ...... 171 List of Preparers ...... 175

List of Maps Map 1: Location of the Proposed Great Western Trail ...... 10 Map 2: Great Western Trail - Arizona...... 17 Map 3: Great Western Trail - Utah ...... 18 Map 4: Great Western Trail - Idaho ...... 19 Map 5: Great Western Trail - Wyoming...... 20 Map 6: Great Western Trail - Montana...... 21 Map 7: Recreation - Arizona ...... 33 Map 8: Recreation - Utah...... 37 Map 9: Recreation - E. Idaho and Wyoming ...... 41 Map 10: Recreation - Montana and N. Idaho ...... 45 Map 11: Physiographic Regions in Great Western Trail Vicinity...... 82 Map 12: Nearby Communities - Arizona ...... 100 Map 13: Nearby Communities - Utah...... 101 Map 14: Nearby Communities - E. Idaho and Wyoming ...... 102 Map 15: Nearby Communities - Montana and N. Idaho ...... 103

List of Tables Table 1: Summary of Federal Authorities Under the National Trails System Act...... 67 Table 2: Primary Differences Between a National Scenic Trail, the Proposed Discovery Trail, and the Great Western Trail ...... 73 Table 3: Listing of Area Tribal Groups ...... 83 Table 4: Major Heritage Themes ...... 84 Table 5: Historic Routes in Vicinity of Great Western Trail ...... 85 Table 6: National Forests, National Parks and Monuments, and Major Trails in Vicinity of the Great Western Trail ...... 86 Table 7: Resident Population ...... 87 Table 8: National Forest Visitor Use ...... 88 Table 9: Proposed Great Western Trail Miles (by State)...... 105 Table 10: Total Land Ownership ...... 106 Table 11: Land Ownership Miles (by State)...... 106 Table 12: Total Recreation Trail Program Allocations ...... 117 Table 13: Great Western Trail Funding - Arizona State Parks OHV Recreation Fund Awards/Expenditures...... 118 Table 14: Great Western Trail Funding - Arizona State Parks Federal Recreational Trails Program Awards/Expenditures ...... 119 Table 15: Great Western Trail Funding - Utah State Parks Non-motorized Great Western Trail Funding ...... 120 Table 16: Great Western Trail Funding - Utah State Parks Motorized Great Western Trail Funding ...... 121

viii G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Summary SUMMARY

The purpose of this report is to provide information to Congress to determine if it is feasible and desirable to add the Great Western Trail to the National Trails System. The study provides a review to determine whether the Great Western Trail meets requirements for inclusion to the National Trails System.

1. The study includes 4,455 miles of existing trails and roads from Mexico to Canada. 2. The proposal combines existing Great Western Trail segments with other routes to provide a continuous interstate trail corridor. 3. 1,900 miles of Great Western Trail currently are in use in Arizona and Utah. 4. Existing routes in Arizona and Utah are currently not part of the National Trail System. 5. The study will examine whether the trail should be added to the National Trail System.

The Great Western Trail has been proposed as a connected corridor linking together roads and existing trails. The corridor encompasses an area that extends from the Arizona-Mexico border north to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border. As proposed, the trail would cross the scenic heartland of the American West, through the States of Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. By accommodating the entire trails community, the Great Western Trail could fulfill a unique recreation niche not currently being met within the national long distance trail system. The Great Western Trail is unique among long distance trails in that it:

• Utilizes existing roads and trails; • Is planned to be a broad “corridor” often encompassing parallel routes for different users (i.e.: hiking trails and ATV roads); • Is a long distance trail designed to accommodate the entire trail community; • Has many sections for motorized use (ATVs and snowmobiles) as well as hiking, horseback riders, and cross-country skiers.

Approximately 64% of the 4,455 miles of trail is located on lands administered by the Forest Service. An estimated 20% is in private ownership, and 5% is located on State, city, or county land. About 8% of the trail is located on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, and 3% is located on Tribal government administered land. Almost half of the proposed trail corridor being studied for national Great Western Trail designation, or 1,901 miles of combined trails and roads, are already in use as the Great West- ern Trail. These segments, located primarily on public lands in the States of Arizona and Utah, have been designated for Great Western Trail use over the last ten years. Many of these segments are popular recreation routes. The study concludes that the Great Western Trail is a significant trail that deserves inclusion in the National Trails System. The study also concludes that the desirability for designating the trail is mixed. Where there are strong partnership relationships with interested public trail support organizations, local communities, private landowners, and grassroots support is strong, national designation of the trail corridor is desirable. In areas where there is a lack of interest, community support, or local involvement, desirability of designating the trail becomes ques-

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 3 tionable. In addition, adequate funding must be ensured to provide coordinated management if the trail is designated on the National Trails System.

ALTERNATIVES The study examines four alternatives for designation of the I am in favor of Great Western Trail. multiple use for our public land. The A. No-Action Great Western Trail B. National Scenic Trail (Mexico to Canada) is a perfect example C. National Scenic Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, and of this. Responsible outdoor recreation western Wyoming) can be enjoyed by D. No National Trail Designation – Coordinated Adminis- many different tration and Management people. What a wonderful way to In addition, the study also considers two other alternatives make new friends and enjoy our great under a National Discovery Trail category. As the category of Na- country. tional Discovery Trail does not currently exist under law, Congress –Sandy, UT would need to enact legislation that authorizes this new category before these alternatives could be considered.

E. National Discovery Trail (Mexico to Canada) F. National Discovery Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, western Wyoming)

The no-action alternative, Alternative A, would result in no immediate change in trail management for existing Great Western Trail segments in Arizona and Utah. The trail would not be uniformly administered as part of a national trails system. Over time, new segments may be added if individual States, local communities, and agencies are supportive in developing new trail segments. Although this alternative is feasible, it would not serve to acknowledge the national significance of the Great Western Trail. Under Alternative B, the Great Western Trail would be designated a National Scenic Trail (Mexico to Canada). Forest Service administration, oversight, and trail coordination would be provided along a corridor stretching from Mexico to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border. The Forest Service would prepare a comprehensive management plan and resource inventories. With the involvement of State and local agencies, private landowners, and local groups, management of the trail would occur as a coordinated effort. An exception to Section 7 (c) of the National Trails System Act, which prohibits the use of motorized vehicles on National Scenic Trails, would be necessary. The study team has concluded that this alternative is not feasible at the present time because there is insufficient trail-wide support along the northern trail corridor. Under Alternative C, the Great Western Trail would be designated a National Scenic Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, western Wyoming). Forest Service administration, oversight and trail coordination would be provided along a corridor stretching from Mexico to the eastern Idaho-Montana border near West Yellowstone, Montana. Northern Idaho and Montana would not be included. The Forest Service would prepare a comprehensive management plan and resource inventories. With the involvement of State and local agencies, private landowners, and local groups, management of the trail would occur as a coordinated effort. An exception to

4 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Section 7 (c) of the National Trails System Act, which prohibits the use of motorized vehicles on National Scenic Trails, would be necessary. The study team has concluded that this alternative is possible and has sufficient public support. However, the suitability of designating a scenic trail along hundreds of miles of motorized routes is questionable and may conflict with National Scenic Trail purposes. The team has concluded that although this alternative is possible, a National Scenic Trail designation is not well suited for Great Western Trail purposes. Under Alternative D, the Great Western Trail would not be designated a National Trail. The Forest Service would, however, emphasize completion of a comprehensive management plan and conduct resource inventories on the southern portion of the trail in Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, and western Wyoming. Planning and inclusion of non-Federal lands would only occur with the permission of the landowner. Emphasis would be on a shared, coordinated administration and management of current Great Western Trail segments. Any future trail routes north of the Idaho-Montana border near West Yellowstone, Montana or in northern Idaho would only be included upon request by States or local government agencies with a strong grassroots base of support. The study team has concluded that although this option could be an improvement over current conditions, without a National Trails designation it is not likely that completion of this plan would take high priority for agency funding or personnel. Also, this option does not afford the full provisions of National Trail status.

Other Alternatives to be Considered if a National Discovery Trail category is created: As a National Discovery Trail (Mexico to Canada) under Alternative E, the Forest Service would provide overall administration and coordination with Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and local groups for management of a trail corridor stretching from Mexico to Canada. Congress would need to amend the National Trails System Act to include discovery trails as a category of trails in the National Trails System. The Forest Service, in coordination with others, would provide the comprehensive management plan with emphasis on connections to communities. The study team has concluded that this alternative is not feasible at the present time because there is insufficient trail-wide support along the northern trail corridor in northern Idaho and Montana. Opportunities for feasibility could be evaluated in the future, however, if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge. Alternative F designates the trail from the border of Mexico north to the Continental Divide at the Idaho-Montana border near West Yellowstone, Montana as a National Discovery Trail (Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, and western Wyoming). As a National Discovery Trail, the Forest Service would provide coordination with Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and local groups for management of the trail corridor. Portions of the trail in northern Idaho and Montana to the Canadian border would not be included unless States or local government agencies specifically applied for inclusion. In order to implement this alternative, Congress would need to amend the National Trails System Act to include discovery trails as a category of trails in the National Trails System. The study team has concluded that this alternative is feasible and desirable. The alternative would afford the Great Western Trail protection as a National Systems Trail, provided a discovery category is added, and has strong Federal, State, local government, community, and grassroots support. Opportunities for including portions of northern Idaho or Montana could be evaluated in the future if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 5 Introduction INTRODUCTION

The American West holds a singular place in our national imagination. From the time Lewis and Clark first crossed the Continental Divide in 1805, the region has been the crucible of heroism and heartache, of manifest destiny, and of dreams both realized and destroyed. The sweeping basins, thrusting mountains, and mighty rivers of the interior West are remarkable enough, but they are all the more compel- ling when juxtaposed with the region’s rich human history. For centuries, life in the West has been one of hardship, yet people stay on, drawn by landscapes whose very vastness seems to promise prosperity and possibility. Many of the Fed- erally designated national trails of the Lees Ferry Wagon Road, Arizona. Wagon Lees Ferry West run from east to west, echoing pioneer movements to and through the region. Recently the United States Con- gress has requested to know (P.L. 104-333) whether it is feasible and desirable to add to the National Trails System a south-north trail that traverses the scenic heartland of the American West. Proposed as a 4,455-mile-long network of interconnected roads and trails stretching from the Arizona-Mexico border to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border, the Great Western Trail would provide a long distance trail experience to a variety of recreational trail users. The proposed Great Western Trail corridor showcases the spectacular scenery for which the region is justly famous, but it also gives users an intimate look at the cultural heritage of the Intermoun- tain West: its small towns, ranches and farms, its Native American history, and the fierce spirit of independence that has forged the region’s character. A designation under the National Trails System could provide a link with a chapter in Western heritage when indigenous people and early travelers crossed the vast open areas of the West to explore mountains and settle communities. Much of this heritage has been preserved, offering modern trail users a view into the past. Whatever the method of travel–be it on foot or horseback, from the seat of a bicycle, or in a motor vehicle–the trail is a continuous reminder of a time when the West could be hostile, even dangerous. Each mile of rugged, but beautiful, terrain can only leave visitors with respect and admiration for the Native Americans, settlers, and travelers who once saw this land in its untamed beauty.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 9 Map1 Location of the Proposed Great Western Trail

10 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L DESCRIPTION OF THE TRAIL The proposed Great Western Trail follows a 4,455-mile corridor through the western States of Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. It incorporates stunning desert and canyon landscapes, high plateaus, open woodlands, alpine meadows and densely forested glades. The proposed Great Western Trail links the paths of ancient people and early settlers to present day residents, by winding through remote abandoned settlements as well as thriving modern communities. Rather than a single trail route, the concept of the proposed Great Western Trail incorporates braided use of existing trails and roads to create a long distance system to serve the entire trails community.

THE ROLE OF THE USDA FOREST SERVICE The National Trails System Act (PL 90-543), as amended by H.R. 4236, directed the Secretary of Agriculture to study the feasibility and desirability of designating the Great West- ern Trail as a national trail. The Forest Service was assigned responsibility for preparing the study. A study team was assembled in March 1998. Other Federal agency representatives worked with the Forest Service study team. The interagency group consisted of the three involved Forest Service regions (Southwestern, Inter- mountain, and Northern regions), the Forest Service’s Washington, D.C. office, the National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management. Representatives from the Great Western Trail Association and State agencies also contributed information and provided assistance to the study team as needed.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE GREAT WESTERN TRAIL PROPOSAL Many people credit Lyle Gomm, retired Uinta National Forest Recreation Staff Officer and Intermountain Region Trail Coordinator, as being the “father” of the proposed Great West- ern Trail effort. The effort to establish a long distance trail began in Utah during the 1970s with the idea of a Wasatch Crest Trail. When conflicts between different types of trail users arose, efforts turned toward establishment of a trail system that would accommodate a variety of users. With the help of fellow Forest Service employees Don Nebeker and Stan Tixier, Gomm organized an interagency team including the Forest Service, Utah Department of Natural Re- sources, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service in 1985. This trail system concept introduced through the news media was subsequently well received, and public support grew for the newly named Bonneville Rim Trail slated to connect the Grand Canyon and Yellowstone National Parks. In January 1986, Dale Sheewalter, volunteer and promoter of the fledgling Arizona Trail (Grand Canyon National Park to Nogales, Mexico), proposed that the Arizona and Bonneville Rim Trails be combined as a long distance trail. This is how the name “Great Western Trail” came to be. Amid growing public interest, two volunteers, Simon Cordial, from England, and James Mayberger, New York, hiked the length of the proposed Great Western Trail from Priest Lake,

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 11 Idaho at the Canadian border to Nogales, Mexico from May to October 1986. Their purpose was to develop a trail log for future trail alignment. Since 1987, Great Western Trail Conferences have been hosted annually in Utah and Idaho. A volunteer nonprofit support group, the Great Western Trail Association, has been active since 1989. Trail organizations, volunteer coordinators, and State and Federal agencies have participated in the development of the trail since that time. In January 1995, U.S. Rep. James V. Hansen of Utah introduced legislation designating the Great Western Trail for study as a potential National Scenic Trail. Subsequently, the Great Western Trail study was authorized under the National Trails System Act (P.L. 90-543; 16 U.S.C. 1241 et seq., as amended through P.L. 104-333). See Appendix A for selections from the Act.

PUBLIC INTEREST AND ATTITUDES Long distance trail efforts are dependent upon strong partnerships at local, state, and national levels. Involvement with committed Federal, State, Tribal, local communities, private nonprofit organizations, and volunteers at local levels is critical to success. Many of these factors are currently in place for the proposed Great Western Trail. Vibrant State trails councils and strong State trails programs are evident in several of the States the Great Western Trail crosses. Strong support is evident in the States of Arizona and Utah where development and use of the Great Western Trail has been ongoing. Communities and organizations in eastern Idaho are also supportive. Response on designation of the trail through northern Idaho and Montana has been mixed. A total of 903 public comments were received from 24 states. The majority of the letters received (91%) came from states that would be directly affected by the trail: Arizona - 5%, Utah - 5%, Idaho - 5%, Wyoming - 2%, and Montana - 74%. These comments included those who support the idea of a long distance trail for all uses and those who oppose trail designation. Public involvement information is included in Appendix C. Appendix D contains a summary of public responses. The proposed Great Western Trail concept was founded on the premise that it would be administered and maintained in collaboration with a competent trail wide volunteer-based organization. The administering Federal agency may provide seed money, use or make available Federal facilities, equipment, Great Western Trail meeting, Flagstaff, Arizona. meeting, Flagstaff, Trail Western Great

12 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L tools, or technical assistance. Section 7 (a) (2) (h) (1) of the National Trails System Act states that the administering Federal agency “may enter written cooperative agreements with the States or their political subdivisions, landowners, private organizations, or individuals to operate, develop, I personally would not like to see the and maintain any portion of such a trail either within or outside a Great Western Trail Federally administered area.” Under Section 11 (a) of the Act, the become a reality. I administering Federal agency is “authorized to encourage volun- think there are teers and volunteer organizations to plan, develop, maintain, and more than enough manage, where appropriate” national trails. This includes volun- existing ORV roads and access. I have teers operating programs to organize and supervise volunteer ef- seen a huge in- forts, conduct trail-related research projects, or provide education crease in noxious or training to volunteers. Long distance trail organizations like the weeds everywhere Appalachian Trail Conference, the Continental Divide Trail Alli- there are ORV ance, the Oregon-California Trails Association, and the Pacific Crest roads. –Butte, MT Trail Association have successfully demonstrated the benefits of cooperative management. Nationwide, trail organizations supporting national trails reported 498,702 hours of volunteer labor in 1998, valued at $6,909,157. These organizations contributed another $4,403,802 in 1998 to support various trail projects and programs. In 1990, the Great Western Trail Association was incorporated under the provisions of the Utah Nonprofit Corporation and Cooperative Association Act. A president and board of direc- tors were appointed to coordinate efforts to designate, develop, promote, and maintain the Great Western Trail through partnerships between Federal, State, and local government agencies as well as private property owners and user groups. The national association council is headquartered in northern Utah and also has four chartered State councils: one each in Ari- zona, Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming, seven local chapters and one currently being developed in Montana. The national association has more than 200 dues-paying members. The mission of the Great Western Trail Association as stated in its business and operation plan is to assist in the promotion, construction, and maintenance of a multi-use corridor of trails from Mexico to Canada and to link and protect significant resources along the trails with the support of volunteers, public, and private partnerships. In March 1997, the Great Western Trail Association initiated and signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and the States of Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming to establish a general framework for co- The GWT is a great idea. It should be implemented from ordination and cooperation between the Association and Mexico to Alaska . . . but do it these agencies. The MOU has provided a foundation without the strings and prob- for working together on issues of common interest and lems associated with the carrying out mutually beneficial programs and activi- National Trail System. ties. –Happy Jack, AZ Separate from this Congressional study, the Great Western Trail Association members and volunteers have been active since 1989 dedicating and signing segments of the trail. State coordinators located in Arizona, Utah, and Idaho working for the Great Western Trail Association promote the trail by recruiting local trail groups and volunteers. Partnerships have been developed with local Federal, Tribal, and State agencies,

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 13 community leaders, groups, and individuals to identify and designate trail routes. To date over 1,900 miles of Great Western Trail have been approved and are signed. The Great Western Trail Association has published a Utah guidebook that contains maps of the trail. The tens of thousands of people who have volunteered and completed work on the Great Western Trail illustrate a base of support for future management. In Utah, on the Pleasant Grove Ranger District of the Uinta National Forest alone, more than 21,000 volunteers have participated. More than 700 Great Western Trail Eagle Scout projects have been completed. Thousands of volunteers have donated time on other national forests in Utah and Arizona in support of the Great Western Trail. Many community leaders, county commissioners, and business owners have supported Great Western Trail efforts in Utah and Arizona. Some communities in Utah have already made significant investments in land or facilities linked with proposed Great Western Trail development. As an example, Provo, Utah recently purchased a $400,000 tract of land at the mouth of Rock Canyon for a trailhead that provides access to a segment of the Great Western Trail. In February 1994, the States of Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming – in partnership with the Intermountain Region of the Forest Service – conducted a 1,200-mile promotional snowmobile tour along the Great Western Trail route from Bryce Canyon National Park in southern Utah to West Yellowstone, Montana. The theme of the event was “Linking Communities by Snowmobile Along the Proposed Great Western Trail.” NBC and ABC affiliate television stations, the Salt Lake Tribune, and Snow West magazine also participated in the ride. In all, seventeen riders completed the full tour while several hundred participants from local areas participated by completing shorter segments. As a whole, these efforts illustrate the extent of community involvement and widespread interest in the Great Western Trail.

GREAT WESTERN TRAIL CONCEPT The Great Western Trail differs from the familiar concept of a trail, a blazed path, or beaten track most widely associated with foot or horseback travel. For the purposes of this study, the term “trail” refers to a wide variety of travel routes which includes single track trails, two-track backcountry dirt trails, single lane dirt roads, gravel roads, and busy, high speed paved highways. The Great Western Trail combines already established roads and trails together to provide a connecting link for long distance travel. In some areas, these roads and trails are adopted along one singular route. In other areas, an interconnected braided system provides for separate routes, side trails, or loop trails that either terminate independently or rejoin a main trail route. The purpose of using braided or sepa- Already too much national forest land has been fragmented and rate routes is degraded by road building and timber harvesting. A new ORV mega- twofold. It is route through the national forests will only further degrade and fragment wildlife, fishery, and watershed resources as well as widely recog- spread exotic weeds into remote areas of the national forests. We nized that rec- have yet to see a popular ORV route not characterized by cross- reational trail country/off-trail traffic, erosion, ruts and weed infestation. use is increas- –Boise, ID

14 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L ing. The supply of trails is limited and cannot keep pace with the demand. There is competition for trails among recreation users who differ on preference of trail travel method. The braided trail system can provide opportunities to disperse trail traffic using existing trails and routes. This is an important consider- Utah. Canyon, Red ation in areas where trail use is more concentrated. Secondly, access can be provided to different trail routes using fewer, common trailheads. In discussing the Great Western Trail concept, questions inevitably surface about what types of trail use are expected and anticipated. When the concept for the trail originated, it was acknowledged that the Great Western Trail would incorporate principles of shared use. These were broadly interpreted to mean that some segments might best serve a combination of motorized and non-motorized uses where this mix is compatible (i.e. on forest roads). Other trail routes may be separated to maintain quality experience, for purposes of public safety, or to adhere to administrative restrictions (i.e. in wilderness areas). Specific trail use management decisions would be determined at the local level through local forest planning.

EXISTING STATE OF THE TRAIL

ARIZONA Hundreds of miles of trail have been designated in Arizona in the area north of Phoenix to the Utah border. The Arizona State Parks Off-Highway Vehicle Program has published and distributed maps of the Arizona section of the Great Western Trail. The map depicts the existing and proposed Great Western Trail routes, as well as segments proposed for signing in the near future. Accompanying the map is a description of the trail routes and highlights of nearby historic and interpretive sites, known as “Points of Discovery”, and a mile-by-mile accounting of the potential trail experience. Magazine and newspaper articles on the Arizona section of the Great Western Trail have appeared in several Arizona publications. Portions of the trail in the southeastern part of the State from the Mexican border to Phoenix are still in the planning stages. The developed Arizona section accommodates many trail users using existing backcountry roads. The first trail segment dedicated was the Bulldog Canyon Trail on the Mesa Ranger District in April 1996. In April 1998, the 72-mile Cave Creek Segment of the Great Western Trail was added along with Sears-Kay Ruin, recognized as

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 15 the first sanctioned “Point of Discovery” on the Great Western Trail. Visitor interpretive signs are located at the ruin, an ancient Hohokam village atop a hill overlooking the Great Western Trail north of the communities of Carefree and Cave Creek. Another segment has been designated in the northern part of the State along Highway 89A from Marble Canyon northwest to Fredonia.

UTAH Over 1,600 miles of Great Western Trail roads and trails are in place in Utah. The Great Western Trail was designated Utah’s Centennial Trail in 1996 by Governor Michael Leavitt as part of Utah’s Statehood Centennial celebration. The Paiute ATV Trail in Utah is part of the Great Western Trail that traverses three mountain ranges through the rugged canyons and deserts of central Utah. Including side trips, there are more than 820 miles of trail on the Paiute system. Information from trail counters in southern Utah on the Fishlake National Forest alone indicate that there were over 51,000 combined Great Western Trail and Paiute ATV Trail users in 1999. Monitoring and trail maintenance is a cooperative effort that is shared by seasonal Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management patrols, Utah State Parks employees, County Sheriff’s Departments, Trail Host programs, volunteers, and State Trail Ranger’s programs.

IDAHO, WYOMING, AND MONTANA Although potential Great Western Trail routes on existing roads and trails are identified in eastern Idaho and western Wyoming, none of these routes are currently designated as part of the Great Western Trail. Three 50-100 mile wide study corridors have been identified in northern Idaho and western Montana. No routes have been dedicated in northern Idaho or western Montana.

OTHER TRAIL DESIGNATION In May 1999, the Great Western Trail was designated one of sixteen National Millennium Trails. The National Millennium Trails Program is an initiative of the White House Millen- nium Council in partnership with the U.S. Department of Transportation that recognizes, promotes, and stimulates creation of trails to “honor the past and imagine the future” as part of America’s legacy for the year 2000. A collaborative of public, private agencies, and organizations support this effort to demonstrate national commitment to improving trails nationwide. Federal Recreational Trails Program guidelines encourage States to give extra project evaluation credits to trails that have qualified for Millennium Trail status. By linking separate trail sections through several States, the Great Western Trail proposal responds to the intentions of the National Trails System Act to have a connected system of trails throughout the Nation. It also helps meet one of the goals of the 1988 President’s Commission on the Outdoors to offer an outdoor trail opportunity within fifteen minutes of every American’s home or place of work.

16 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 2 Great Western Trail Arizona

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 17 Map 3 Great Western Trail Utah

18 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 4 Great Western Trail Idaho

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 19 Map 5 Great Western Trail Wyoming

20 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 6 Great Western Trail Montana

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 21 Criteria for National Trails CRITERIA FOR NATIONAL TRAILS

Under the National Trails System Act, a four-step process outlines establishment of a Na- tional Scenic or National Historic Trail. These steps are:

(1) A legislative request for a feasibility study is made. (2) The study is conducted by a Federal agency. (3) Congress passes an amendment to the National Trails System Act to establish the trail. (4) A management-planning document is created for the trail.

The amendment of the National Trails System Act that authorized the study specified that the Great Western Trail be studied for inclusion as a National Scenic Trail. However, due to the Congressional intent to identify characteristics that make the proposed trail worthy of designation, this study will consider the Trail for other categories of national trails including National Scenic, National Historic, National Recreation, and Connecting and Side Trails. The Great Western Trail will also be evaluated against National Discovery Trail criteria. This category of trail has been proposed as a new addition to the National Trails System. The study adheres to guidelines for national trail feasibility studies as described in Section 5 (b) of the National Trails System Act.

NATIONAL SCENIC TRAILS National Scenic Trails are congressionally authorized long distance routes designed for hiking and other compatible uses. A National Scenic Trail does not allow motorized use unless an exception to Section 7 (c) of the National Trails System Act is made. The Continental Divide National Scenic Trail has such an exception that allows the use of motorized vehicles where trail segments were placed on motorized routes as long as it does not substantially interfere with the nature and purposes of the trail. The Continental Divide National Scenic Trail has been managed since 1978 using this authority. National Scenic Trails should be continuous, have high recreational values, and pass through areas with nationally significant scenic, natural, historical, or cultural qualities. Administered by a Federal agency, National Scenic Trails should be capable of attracting visitors from throughout the country and abroad. As much as practical, they avoid motor roads, mining areas, commercial, and industrial developments that detract from the trail’s natural condition and recreational experiences.

I have worked for several years with the Boy Scouts in Utah National Parks Council. We have donated thousands of hours in service on the trail doing trail construction . . . (and) trail maintenance. My hope is that this extremely unique trail will be recognized, protected and preserved for the generations yet to come. The trail is absolutely a marvelous experience. –American Fork, UT

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 25 NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS National Historic Trails are Congressionally authorized routes, including motor transportation routes that recognize prominent travel routes of exploration, trade, migration, and military action. These trails, which are administered by a Fed- eral agency, generally consist of remnant sites and trail segments rather than continuous trails linked by a motor tour route. Their purpose is to identify, interpret, and protect nationally significant historic routes and their remnants and artifacts for public use and enjoyment.

NATIONAL RECREATION TRAILS National Recreation Trails are existing trails recognized by the Federal government as contributing to the National Trails Horse riding in Wyoming. riding in Horse System. They provide a variety of outdoor recreation uses and vary in length and accessibility. National Recreation Trails are designated by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture and are managed by public and private agencies at the local, State, and national levels. Congressional action is not required to designate a National Recreation Trail.

CONNECTING AND SIDE TRAILS Connecting and Side Trails are components of National Scenic, Historic, and Recreation Trails. They provide additional points of public access to or between the above trails. Congres- sional action is not required to designate these trails.

26 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L OTHER TRAIL CATEGORIES

NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAILS A new category of trail has been proposed for inclusion in the National Trails System Act. This category has not been incor- Do people really porated into law. The U.S. Senate of the 105th Congress did ap- want to ride 3,100 prove the following definition, however: miles on an ORV or National Discovery Trails are continuous, interstate trails that snowmobile? provide outstanding outdoor recreation and travel. They connect –Bozeman, MT representative examples of America’s trails and communities. Na- tional Discovery Trails should provide for the conservation and enjoyment of significant natural, cultural, and historic resources associated with each trail and represent locations in metropolitan, urban, rural, and backcountry regions of the Nation. The trail must be supported by a competent, trail wide nonprofit organization, and have extensive local and trail wide support.

FUTURE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS If the Great Western Trail were authorized, the next step would be the preparation of a comprehensive planning document. Prepared by either the Forest Service or a collaborative organization, the plan would contain greater detail on the management, development, and use of the trail. The plan would also define the roles and responsibilities for Federal, State, and county agencies, and for participating private citizens or groups. After the comprehensive management plans are approved, operational plans would be defined. For non-Federal lands along the authorized trail, participation in both the comprehensive planning effort and the subsequent implementation of that plan would be strictly on a willing-landowner basis. Hiking in Wyoming. Hiking in

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 27 Description of Proposed Trail Corridor DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TRAIL CORRIDOR

HISTORIC SITES AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES

ARIZONA Although the proposed trail route near the border with Mexico has not yet been fully identified, it may access Sky Islands. This natural preserve located on the Coronado National Forest east of the town of Lochiel is noted for its unique botanical and faunal diversity. Jaguars from Central America are dominant here and prey upon the javelinas. The San Rafael Valley, near the Mexican border by Lochiel, is the home to a short-grass prairie reserve. As one of the few intact Spanish land grants in Arizona, the prairie has been designated as the site for a future Arizona State Park. It is also interesting to note that the movie “Oklahoma!” was filmed at this location. The area south of Tucson was also used for early Spanish exploration routes. At the Mexican border, the Coronado National Memorial marks the most famous of the exploration routes. A Span- ish mission is also located at Patagonia. In southern Arizona about 30 miles north of the U.S.- Mexico border near Tucson, the proposed Great Western Trail would transect the Butterfield Stage Road, an early wagon route used for travel between Yuma, Arizona, and Santa Fe, New Mexico, which also was later used as the Mormon Battalion Trail. East of Phoenix, the proposed trail route parallels west of the scenic Superstition Mountain Wilderness Range. Immediately north, the Salt River and Saguaro Lake are potential scenic opportunities along the proposed Great Western Trail route. The Central Highlands break from the southern volcanic Basin and Range geological district along the trail Grand Canyon, Arizona at Marble Canyon. at Marble Arizona Canyon, Grand

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 31 north of Phoenix. Sonoran Desert saguaro cactus vegetation ends here, while other botanical zones emerge. The Sears-Kay Ruin, an interpretive site at an ancient hilltop Hohokam village, overlooks the proposed Great Western Trail north of the communities of Carefree and Cave Creek. The proposed trail passes through Seven Springs, a lush oasis in the desert, developed as a forest camp by the Civilian Conservation Corps. The Bloody Basin on the Prescott National Forest, where red clay flows into the river, is another important feature in central Arizona. Jerome Historical State Park, home of the Douglas Mansion, is located not far from the proposed trail. From here, the proposed Great Western Trail traverses through chaparral brush before heading into the cool ponderosa pine forest on Mingus Mountain. Another interesting historic route in this area is the United States First Cavalry Trail that connected Fort McDowell to Fort Verde. General George Crook used the trail. West of Flag- staff and north of the Verde River, the proposed Great Western Trail climbs a relatively gentle portion of the Mongollon Rim, location of the world’s largest stand of ponderosa pine trees. White Horse Lake and a vista overlooking Sycamore Canyon and Sycamore Peak are scenic spots along this portion of the proposed trail. Outside Flagstaff, the proposed trail intersects the historic Beale Wagon Road. The Beale Wagon Road crossed Arizona in 1857 and set the route for a later railroad and still later famous Route 66. The proposed Great Western Trail crosses Route 66 in the Williams/Flagstaff area.

We very strongly recommend extending the Great Western Trail to the Canadian border. This would be a very high use trail when complete. –Winthrop, WA Red rocks of southern rocks Utah. Red

32 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 7 Recreation Arizona

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 33 The proposed trail descends down the Coconino Rim into the Navajo Nation and the stark landscape of the Colorado Plateau. Here, west of Highway 89, the red and white sandstone landscapes offer beautiful contrasts. This portion of the trail is located within the Navajo Tribal Reservation. A Tribal backcountry permit is required for hiking and accessing primitive areas. No permit is needed for vehicles staying on established roads and trails. North of the Little Colorado River, the proposed route passes the beautiful Echo Cliffs, Blue Moon Bench, Little Colorado Gorge Navajo Tribal Park, and Shinumo Altar, a prominent landmark just east of the Marble Canyon Gorge. A pedestrian bridge and the Marble Canyon Visitor Center are attractions. Mormons established the route of “The Honeymoon Trail” in 1872. During the early period of Mormon settlement in Arizona the settlers traveled across northern Arizona, crossing the Colorado at Lee’s Ferry, to St. George, Utah, to have their marriages sanctified by the church. The trail was also known as the Mormon Wagon Road and the “Old Arizona Road.” The towering Vermillion Cliffs, red and white limestone formations, dominate the landscape along the proposed trail route. The proposed Great Western Trail ascends the North Kaibab Plateau of the Kaibab National Forest, where increasing populations of gigantic Cali- fornia condor have been reintroduced. From here, the trail would follow a path north into Utah.

UTAH Where the proposed Great Western Trail enters Utah, the route travels through the newly designated Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument at one of the trail’s lowest points of elevation at approximately 4,800 feet. Traveling north into the Dixie National Forest, stands of juniper are found, in sharp contrast to the Navajo sandstone common to the south. The trail leaves the forest at Crawford Pass and travels along the East Fork of the Sevier River to Ruby’s Inn. Stands of aspen and open meadows adorn the trail to Bowns Point and to the highest point on the trail in Utah with elevations above 11,000 feet on the Dixie National Forest. The towering cliffs of Hells Hole and the Red Rock Desert are unique scenic features. Spectacular vistas of the San Rafael Swell, Henry Mountains, LaSal Mountains, Burr Desert, and Waterpocket Fold are present from the proposed trail. On the Dixie National Forest south of the town of Teasdale, the Jubilee Guard Station (built in 1905) is one of the oldest existing forest guard stations in the State of Utah. The station, which is located adjacent to the proposed Great Western Trail, was completely restored in 1989. This landmark was used as a relay unit for the first telephone system in southwestern Utah, connecting Teasdale to Escalante. The next section of the trail through the Fishlake National Forest near Interstate 70 utilizes a combination of trails and roads passing interesting places such as UM Plateau, Wind- storm Peak, Willies Flat Reservoir, and Floating Island Lake. White Rim offers spectacular views of Salina Canyon. An 85-mile segment of the proposed Great Western Trail travels across the Manti-LaSal National Forest from the small town of Tucker along Skyline Drive. This section of trail offers an 11,000-foot elevation bird’s-eye view of the unique desert landscape in the valley to the east. Several parallel trails are being proposed for foot, horse, or mountain bike travel.

34 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L West of the town of Hiawatha, an undeveloped trail runs past the historic Stuart Guard Station constructed by the Civilian Conservation Corps in 1935. The station has been reno- vated and converted to an historic interpretive site. Near Scofield, Utah, the Great Western Trail passes within 2 miles of the historic Winterquarters Mine and Townsite, one of the first coal discoveries and operating mines in Utah (ca. 1878). Winterquarters was also the site of one of America’s largest mining disasters. In 1900, approximately 200 miners (including many young boys) lost their lives in a mine explo- sion. The complex of sites includes building foundations, ruins of the Wasatch Store, mining landscape features, and an historic trail. The disaster victims are buried in the historic The Forest Service has Scofield Cemetery, their graves noted with wooden markers. inadequately funded the Because some of the site components are located on private existing needs of the lands, permission to access these areas would need to be se- recreational system of cured before availability of the entire area could be publi- trails and roads. –Anaconda, MT cized. Scenic Byways Interpretive signing is in place. At the Spanish Fork Canyon, the trail follows along the Tie Fork Drainage. Wildlife is abundant here, including mountain goats, elk, moose, bear, deer, and many small animals and birds. The trail continues up Strawberry Ridge to the South Fork of Provo Canyon, displaying rugged country. On the Uinta National Forest, near Strawberry Reservoir, the original 1864 Old Uinta Indian Reservation Boundary is marked by a series of small stone monuments. The proposed Great Western Trail route parallels this boundary for several miles. This series of markers could be interpreted to reflect the history of reservation reductions and Indian policy reversals. Ridge Trail, adjacent to the Mt. Timpanogos Wilderness, offers trail users opportunities to view waterfalls, glacial cirques, rugged terrain, and abundant wildflowers. As the proposed trail route continues north, the trail enters the Salt Lake City watershed where restrictions are in effect regarding the use of animals. Users climb onto the crest of the Wasatch Range and into Mill and Lamb Canyons. In this vicinity, the trail crosses the historic Mormon Pioneer and Pony Express Trails. Near Hill Air Force Base, the trail makes another climb to the top of the Wasatch Range past Francis Peak. Snow Basin ski area and Mt. Ogden are crossed above the city of Ogden. Beautiful vistas of the Great Salt Lake and the Salt Lake Valley can be observed along the Skyline Trail above Ogden Can- yon. Green River in Utah. River Green

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 35 Cross-country skiing in Wyoming. skiing in Cross-country

The proposed Great Western Trail alignment also intersects the Donner/Reed - Mormon Trail near Salt Lake City. A small monument has been posted to delineate this important historic crossing. One proposed alignment of the Great Western Trail intersects the Howe Flume Historic District on the north slope of the Uinta Mountains along the Mirror Lake Scenic Byway, a National Register of Historic Places-listed site on the Wasatch-Cache National Forest. This site has tremendous potential for explaining the history of tie hacking, the harvesting and manufac- turing of railroad ties used in constructing track for the transcontinental railroad. Passing the small towns of Avon and Paradise, the proposed trail follows the Blacksmith Fork drainage and passes the gravesite of the famous renegade grizzly bear, Old Ephraim.

I enjoy responsible riding with friends and relatives and am concerned that we may have few places and trails to ride in the future. –Gillette, WY

36 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 8 Recreation Utah

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 37 IDAHO The proposed Great Western Trail’s Idaho portion passes through the eastern edge of the Snake River Plain and near the foothills of the Teton Range. In this area, landmarks include historic Mormon settlements, the site of the Bear River Massacre, Mesa Falls, and Harriman State Park. Many southeastern Idaho towns offer evidence of a long Mormon heritage, including Bancroft, Georgetown, Paris, Preston, and Montpelier. Franklin, just over the Utah border, is the oldest non-Indian town in Idaho. The town was established in 1860 at the request of Brigham Young, but it was not until 1872 that a survey placed the town outside of Utah. Close to Preston, just off the Great Western Trail route, the little-known Battle of Bear River took place. This seldom-publicized incident occurred in 1863 and warrants a place in history alongside the Little Big Horn and Wounded Knee. Bear River proved to be the deciding battle in the history of the Shoshone as treaties were signed with five bands of the tribe later that year. The site is located 3 miles northwest of Preston along US Hwy 91. While most of the proposed Great Western Trail follows routes to the east of these small Mormon communities, the National Register site of Chesterfield, Idaho is worth noting. Origi- nally settled in 1879 by Mormons from Bountiful, Utah, the town fell on hard times in the early 1900s, declining into a ghost town by the Depression years of the 1930s. The remains of the town provide a remarkable example of the classic Mormon town site plotted in a standard grid, with streets wide enough - at 99 feet - to turn a wagon around. Of the twenty-three original buildings, only two were built after 1910. The entire complex is now cared for by a group of local citizens, the Chesterfield Foundation Inc. On the Caribou National Forest, the Crow Creek Road was originally an Indian trail and then became the major road from Montpelier to the mines in Wyoming. The unpaved Crow Mesa Falls, Idaho. Falls, Mesa

38 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Creek Road can be followed from its intersection with Idaho Hwy 89 about six miles east of Montpelier all the way to Afton, Wyoming some 30 miles to the north. Associated with the Crow Creek Road is the Halfway House, a stopover area for users of the Crow Creek Road. This landmark reportedly housed Butch Cassidy and his gang the night before they robbed the bank in Montpelier. Mesa Falls Lodge on the Targhee National Forest was a stage stop on the old road to Yellowstone. Northeast of Ashton, the lodge is being restored as an interpretive site for natural and cultural history through a cooperative effort of the National Forests and Idaho State De- partment of Parks and Recreation. Harriman State Park, originally established as the Railroad Ranch by major shareholders in the Oregon Shoreline Railroad, contains many historic structures in a pristine natural setting. Nearby Henrys Lake State Park is located on the route that Major Andrew Henry took in 1810 and Jim Bridger traveled in the 1830s. Henrys Lake is also remembered as an important camp for Nez Perce Chiefs Joseph, White Bird, and Looking Glass during the aftermath of the Battle of the Big Hole in 1877. Once north of the Continental Divide in Idaho, specific routes have not yet been identified for the Great Western Trail. Three separate broad corridors approximately 50 - 100 miles wide have been mapped as potential study routes that could provide access through northern Idaho or western Montana north to the Canadian border. The Bitterroot Route proposed for the Great Western Trail winds through north central Idaho and the State’s panhandle. Targhee Pass, located on the Idaho-Montana border, marks the route of the Bannock Trail used by the Shoshone and Bannock when traveling to the buffalo hunting grounds in Mon- tana. The pass is named for Chief Targhee of the Bannocks, who met with the governors of Idaho and Utah during the turbulent 1860s. The pass was also used by the Nez Perce in 1877 during their epic flight from the U.S. military. North of the Salmon River, the small community of Dixie got its start as a mining camp in the 19th century. An old Forest Service guard station stands in the vicinity, and an auto tour interprets the area’s gold-rush history. Nearby, the Red River Ranger Station serves as the western terminus of the rugged Magruder Corridor Road, which runs more than 100 miles east between the Frank Church-River of No Return and Selway-Bitterroot wilderness areas, across the Continental Divide, and on into Montana’s Bitterroot Valley. Another area scenic route, the 53-mile Elk City Wagon Road, preserves an early route taken by Nez Perce, miners, and home- steaders. The Nez Perce National Historic Park in north central Idaho is unusual because it spans dozens of Tribal sites scattered across several States. Points of interest near the proposed Great Western Trail include the Heart of the Monster, which relates the tribe’s creation legend, and the Weippe Prairie, a major root-gathering meadow where the tribe first encountered the Lewis and Clark Expedition. The western reach of the centuries-old Lolo Trail is nearby. The small town of Pierce is named for the Irish emigrant E.D. Pierce, who made Idaho’s first gold strike here in 1860. What is now Pierce was on the Nez Perce reservation at the time, but the reservation boundaries were later redrawn to exclude the gold find, an event that helped precipitate the Nez Perce War of 1877. Pierce is also known as the first seat of Shoshone County. The county lines have since been redrawn, with the seat moving to Wallace. Still, the original courthouse (dating to 1862) remains in Pierce. Idaho’s oldest standing building, the Cataldo Mission, was built between 1850 and 1853, and it’s now the centerpiece of a State park.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 39 Idaho’s Silver Valley is well known as one of the richest mining districts in U.S. history. Its towns, especially Wallace and Kellogg, have preserved much of this heritage with museums, an underground mine tour, and a memorial to the ninety-one miners who died in the 1972 Sunshine Mine disaster, one of the worst in our nation’s history. The Northern Pacific Depot Rail- Please note that the road Museum in Wallace tells the story of the area’s railroad his- proposed “Trail” is tory. Interstate 90, the modern highway through the Silver Val- really a large road system. I hope you ley, roughly parallels the Mullan Road – an important military will choose to direct route built in the 1860s from Fort Benton, Montana, to Fort vehicle traffic to our Walla Walla, Washington. Among the many recreational trails in state’s beautiful and the area, the Route of the Hiawatha bike path was created atop scenic highway an old Milwaukee Road rail bed from Lookout Pass to Avery, system rather than our forest lands. Idaho. –Harlowton, MT Old Mission State Park, Idaho. Park, State Mission Old

40 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 9 Recreation Eastern Idaho & Wyoming

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 41 WYOMING In Wyoming, the proposed Great Western Trail parallels the Wyoming Range of the Rocky Mountains. This also approximates the Lander Cutoff from the main Oregon/California Trail route. Engineered in the late 1850s by the Federal government as a more direct route to Fort Hall (in Idaho), the cutoff saved about 100 miles over the more southerly main route, yet it never really caught on with pioneers – mainly because emigration was starting to slow by that time. Stretches of the cutoff and several marked emigrant graves are still visible along Forest Road 10128 in the Bridger-Teton National Forest. The Greys River Loop Road is another popular scenic drive through the Bridger-Teton National Forest. It runs north from the Lander Cutoff on Forest Road 10138, winding up in Alpine. The Periodic Spring ranks among the major attractions in Wyoming’s Star Valley and a site sacred to the Shoshone Indians. Located east of Afton in Swift Creek Canyon, the spring runs for 18 minutes, stopping for about as long before flowing again – except in springtime when it flows continuously. The Targhee National Forest straddles the border between Wyoming’s Jackson Hole and Idaho’s Teton Valley, two broad valleys with a long history of use by Native Americans and, later, the mountain men. Nearby interpretive sites in Wyoming include the Jackson Hole Mu- seum and – at Grand Teton National Park – Menor’s Ferry, the Maude Noble Cabin, and Cunningham Cabin, all of which preserve and explain early settlement in Jackson Hole.

MONTANA In Montana, the Swan Valley and Wise River routes of the Great Western Trail run close to some of the Big Sky State’s most notable historic sites, including those important to the Nez Perce, Lewis and Clark Expedition, and the region’s early miners, trappers, and explorers. De- pending on the final route chosen, the Great Western Trail may access many of the sites described below. The area just west of Yellowstone National Park was the site of the 1959 Madison Canyon Earthquake, which shook half a mountain from its foundations, killing twenty-eight people, burying campsites, and damming the Madison River to create Quake Lake. Forty years later, the area still has an eerie feel. The event is interpreted at a visitor center overlooking the land- slide. Clark Canyon Reservoir south of Dillon has inundated the land that Lewis and Clark called Camp Fortunate. It was here in 1805 that the explorers finally were able to meet Shoshone Indians who provided them with horses to cross the Continental Divide. In one of history’s most amazing coincidences, the Shoshone’s chief, Cameahwait, turned out to be the brother of Sacagawea, who had joined the white men’s expedition in North Dakota. Not far west, the Lewis and Clark Trail reaches Lemhi Pass, where the explorers first crossed the divide and realized there would be no easy Northwest passage – a principal goal of their trip. Big Hole National Battlefield commemorates a turning point in the Nez Perce War of 1877. When Chief Joseph and his people arrived here August 7, they thought they were far ahead of the U.S. troops pursuing them. They didn’t know about another group of U.S. troops who had joined the campaign and were camped nearby. A Nez Perce sentry stumbled onto the camp and was killed; the gunfire awoke the Nez Perce, and soon the tribe and infantry were

42 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L locked in two days of fierce battle. About 100 people died, two-thirds of them Nez Perce, including many women and children. An interpretive panel at Lost Trail Pass explains the historic routes through the area, including the Lewis and Clark Trail and the routes used by the Nez Perce and their pursuers in 1877. The southern end of Montana’s Bitterroot Valley includes such sites of interest as Ross’ Hole, named for early trapper Alexander Ross of the Hudson’s Bay Company, who camped here in 1824. The Alta Ranger Station 28 miles south of Conner was the very first of its kind, built in 1899. The Medicine Tree south of Darby is a 400-year-old Ponderosa pine considered sacred by the Flathead Indians. Butte ranked among the nation’s largest sources of silver and copper in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The city’s mining legacy can be seen everywhere from the Copper King Mansion to the World Museum of Mining to the enormous Berkeley Pit. To the northeast, Boulder got its start as a stage stop between Fort Benton and Vir- ginia City in the 1860s. It remains the seat of Jefferson County, with an impressive courthouse built in 1889. Boulder Hot Springs, begun in 1883 as one of Montana’s earliest tourist attractions, is still in operation to- day. The Swan Valley

Horse riding in Utah. Horse route of the Great Western Trail runs through Gallatin Canyon south of Bozeman, then northwest from Bozeman toward Helena. Landmarks close to the trail include several guest ranches and the Gallatin Gateway Inn, built in 1927 along the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad. North of Townsend in the Big Belt Mountains, prospectors struck it rich in 1864 at Confederate Gulch. Almost nothing remains of the resulting boomtown, Diamond City, which once was home to 10,000 people. Another early mining stronghold, Helena, was to enjoy a more favorable fate. The city’s Last Chance Gulch got its name in 1864 when prospectors found gold on what they insisted was their final try. Sights here include the Montana State Capitol, impressive downtown architecture, and many historic homes built during Helena’s boom years. North of Helena, the Gates of the Mountains area is unusually rich in history. Named by Meriwether Lewis in 1805 for the way the canyon walls appeared to open and close as boats passed through, the Gates area later earned infamy as the site of the 1949 Mann Gulch fire. Norman Maclean later recounted the incident where sixteen firefighters perished in his book “Young Men and Fire.’’ Northwest from Helena, the proposed Great Western Trail is not far from another classic Montana ghost town. Garnet, south of Highway 200 via a well-marked road, is among the

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 43 State’s best-preserved mining camps. To the north, the proposed trail runs through the Swan Valley, adjacent to some of the nation’s most extensive wilderness areas, including the Scape- goat, Bob Marshall, and Great Bear Wilderness. Aside from being one of Montana’s favorite playgrounds, the Flathead Lake area is rich in pioneer history. Kalispell got its start as a trading post in 1881 and later prospered with the coming of the Northern Pacific Railroad. The Conrad Mansion, built in 1895, ranks among the finest in the Northwest. To the southwest, near what is now Thompson Falls, Welsh fur trader David Thompson built a trading post, Saleesh House, by 1809 – just three years after Lewis and Clark had opened the West to Anglo exploration. A bit off the proposed Great Western Trail, but still notable, the Ross Creek Scenic Area was the site of two major forest fires in 1890 and 1910. Remarkably, the Bull River Ranger Station survived the later blaze and is now on the National Register of Historic Places. The station was built in 1908 by forest ranger Granville Gordon, who earlier had served as a guide for “Buffalo Bill” Cody. The proposed Great Western Trail would conclude its transcontinental run just west of Glacier National Park. Historic sites in this area include the Hornet Peak Fire Lookout 10 miles north of Polebridge – the last lookout of its type still standing in its original location. It was constructed in 1922. Near the Canadian border, Eureka is best known for the Tobacco Valley Historical Village, a collection of buildings mostly salvaged from the nearby town of Rexford. Surprise Valley, Idaho. Valley, Surprise

44 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 10 Recreation Montana & Northern Idaho

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 45 MAJOR TRAILS IN VICINITY OF GREAT WESTERN TRAIL The proposed Great Western Trail crosses many other recognized historic or recreational trail systems. This link with other trail systems and recreational opportunities is an important Great Western Trail concept. These trail locations and their relationship to the Great Western Trail are illustrated on Maps 7, 8, 9, and 10 and are briefly described below: COOKE’S WAGON ROAD (THE MORMON BATTALION TRAIL) - In 1846, in an effort to move Mormon pioneers westward, Mormon leader Brigham Young outfitted 500 men for transport to reinforce the Army of the West, stationed in California. The Battalion, led by Colonel George Cooke, marched over 2,000 miles of harsh, trackless territory completing the longest and most arduous infantry march in U.S. military history. BUTTERFIELD OVERLAND ROUTE - In 1858, this route was the first reliable transcontinental corridor developed for mail, freight, and passenger service. Dependable transportation for communication, trade, and travel was established that connected areas of the eastern to western United States. LEACH’S WAGON ROAD - Under the supervision of James B. Leach, work was undertaken in 1857 to survey, mark and construct routes to the west utilizing government funds in an effort to improve wagon roads for travelers. The El Paso and Fort Yuma Wagon Roads were generally referred I have been a to as Leach’s Wagon Road. supporter of the GWT for KEARNEY’S GILA RIVER TRAIL - As a Colonel in 1846, Gen- many years. eral Steven W. Kearney led a 2,000-man “Army of the West” from The diversity Missouri to New Mexico to take control of the Southwest and blaze a for different trail to California. After delegating several garrisons of 500 men each trail users is to other routes, he led his forces down the Gila River to Yuma Cross- very unique. The grassroot ing, establishing an important transportation route that provided pre- support for the cious water for travelers and pack stock. trail is growing HIGHLINE TRAIL - This National Recreation Trail, identical every year. My in name to its counterpart in Idaho, runs 51 miles along central Arizona’s family and Mogollon Rim. The rim, the site of many skirmishes between the many friends have spent Apaches and the U.S. Army in the 1800s, runs through the Tonto hours on the National Forest. The trail, which has several spur trails, follows an his- trail both hiking toric route used in the late 1800s to link various homesteads and ranches and building. It on the rim. It stretches between Highway 87 and Highway 260. will be great to GENERAL CROOK TRAIL - The U.S. Army sent General see the various segments George Crook to Arizona to try to bring peace between Apache Indian come together. tribes and settlers living in the territory. In 1871, General Crook and a I hardily en- small group of horseback Army troops blazed a 200-mile long trail dorse further between Fort Apache, Fort Verde, and Fort Whipple. development of THE ARIZONA TRAIL - When completed, this trail will run the trail. –Provo, UT 790 miles south to north through Arizona. All segments of the trail are open to hikers; most to equestrians; and some to cyclists. While some sections of the trail follow paved and dirt roads, the long-range goal is to have a non-motorized trail.

46 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L BEALE WAGON ROAD - Lieutenant Edward Beale, a Naval officer, was ordered to establish a wagon road from Fort Defiance to the eastern frontier of California in 1857. As an experiment in navigating desert terrain, Beale used 25 camels in establishing the route, which was later used by the railroad, then as the Route 66 corridor. OLD ARIZONA ROAD AND HONEYMOON TRAIL - The Old Arizona Road, built by members of the Mormon religion in 1872, was used by newly married Mormon couples who journeyed from northern Arizona north to St. George, Utah to have their marriages sanctified by the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints. PAIUTE ATV TRAIL - Developed in the late 1980s, this 238-mile loop crosses three mountain ranges in central Utah. It was designed specifically for ATV use. In addition to the main loop, there are another 570 miles of designated side trails that link surrounding communi- Grand Falls, Arizona. Falls, Grand ties. Together, these make the Paiute ATV Trail the largest ATV Trail in the country. Most of the trail is on land managed by the Fishlake National Forest and the Richfield District of the Bureau of Land Management. OLD SPANISH TRAIL - Between 1598 and 1821, Spaniards from New Mexico, led by their Indian guides, opened new pathways to the Utah country for trade. By 1830 some of these trails developed into a series of important trade and migration routes reaching as far west as California, eventually creating a vital supply route between Los Angeles and Salt Lake City. A feasibility study to examine the trail’s possible inclusion in the National Trails System is currently being completed by the National Park Service. JEDEDIAH SMITH TRAIL - This trail follows the course Jedediah Smith took in ex- ploring the West in the 1800s. The trail stretches from southern Idaho through Utah and on into California. The trail was considered, but did not qualify, for either National Scenic or National Historic Trail status. AMERICAN DISCOVERY TRAIL - This trail has been proposed as an approximately 6,000 mile long coast to coast national trail from Point Reyes, California to Delaware connecting existing trails, roads and paths. The trail was proposed under a new trails classification called “discovery trails” proposed for inclusion in the National Trails System. A feasibility study report was completed by the National Park Service for the U.S. Congress in January 1996.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 47 DOMINGUEZ-ESCALANTE TRAIL - This trail follows the path taken by Fathers Atanasio Dominguez and Silvestre Velez de Escalante to link Catholic missions in New Mexico and California. It traverses the States of New Mexico, central Utah, and northern Arizona before crossing the Colorado River and continuing through Utah and Nevada into California. This trail was considered, but did not qualify for National Scenic or National Historic Trail status. PONY EXPRESS NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - This National Historic Trail was established in August 1992. It retraces the route Pony Express riders followed to carry mail between St. Joseph, Missouri, and Sacramento, California, in 1860-1861. CALIFORNIA NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - This National Historic Trail was established in August 1992. It follows the route emigrants took to California in the mid-1800s in search of a better life. More than 200,000 people followed the route between 1841 and 1860, many spurred by the gold rush of 1849. MORMON PIONEER NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - This National Historic Trail was designated in 1978. The trail runs from Illinois to the Great Salt Lake Valley, following the 19th-century route used by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to flee religious persecution in the Midwest. BONNEVILLE SHORELINE TRAIL - Proposed to run approximately 150 miles when completed, this north-south trail runs along the western flanks of the Wasatch Range in northern Utah. Designed for both hikers and cyclists, the route closely follows the eastern shoreline of ancient Lake Bonneville. OREGON NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - Designated as a National Historic Trail in 1978, the Oregon Trail was the pathway to the Pacific that helped solidify the U.S. claim to the Northwest. Between the 1840s and the 1860s, an estimated 300,000 emigrants followed this route from the Midwest to Oregon on a trip that took five or six months to complete. HIGHLINE TRAIL - Located in southeastern Idaho in the Caribou National Forest, this 55-mile-long National Recreation Trail runs north to south through the Bear River Mountain Range from Soda Point to Beaver Campground near the Utah border. There are several access points along the route. WYOMING RANGE TRAIL - This National Recreation Trail in the Bridger-Teton National Forest in far western Wyo- ming stretches about 60 miles between Hoback Junction and For- From the point of view of maintaining est Service Route 138 west of Marbleton. It traverses a portion of integrity of the high the Wyoming Range between Alpine and Kemmerer. country, minimizing CONTINENTAL DIVIDE SNOWMOBILE TRAIL - Sepa- stress on wildlife, rate from the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, this snow- preventing exces- mobile route runs 344 miles from Lander, Wyoming, to West sive water erosion, and guarding some Yellowstone, Montana, via Grand Teton and Yellowstone National areas for only Parks. Going north from Lander, the trail follows the Wind River natural sounds of Range and generally parallels the Continental Divide. The trail wind and water takes snowmobilers through thick coniferous forests and moun- allowing a trail with tains with 150-mile views. Near the south gate of Yellowstone motorized vehicles is totally inappro- National Park, riders can choose between heading north into priate. Yellowstone toward West Yellowstone via Old Faithful or proceed- –Madison, WI ing west into Idaho and then north to West Yellowstone.

48 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L NEZ PERCE (NEE-ME-POO) NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - This trail, located near the proposed Great Western Trail in western Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana, honors the heroic and poignant attempt by the Nez Perce Indians to escape capture by the U.S. Army in 1877. CONTINENTAL DIVIDE NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL - Designated in 1978, this National Scenic Trail travels 3,100 miles along the crest of the Continental Divide from Mexico to Canada through five States and twelve congressionally designated wilderness areas. Cur- rently, about 70% of the trail is complete. The trail passes through New Mexico, central Colo- rado, western Wyoming, eastern Idaho, and western Montana. The GREAT DIVIDE MOUNTAIN BIKE ROUTE has been established by the Adven- ture Cycling Association, a nonprofit cycling organization that promotes bike travel. It is a 2,465- mile long bike route from the Mexican border in New Mexico to the Canadian border west of Glacier National Park. The trail passes through New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, eastern Idaho, and western Montana. LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL - In Idaho and western Mon- tana, the routes used by the Meriwether Lewis and William Clark expedition to explore the newly acquired Louisiana Territory in 1804-06 have been designated a National Historic Trail. The entire trail runs from Illinois to its termination near the mouth of the Columbia River on the Pacific Ocean. IDAHO STATE CENTENNIAL TRAIL - Extending about 1,200 miles from Nevada to the Canadian border on a north-south route through Idaho, this trail was designated as part of the 1990 Centennial Celebration using existing trails and some backcountry roads. ROUTE OF THE HIAWATHA - This 13 mile trail located on the Idaho/Montana border in the Bitterroot Mountains, designed for bicycles and hikers, follows the former Milwau- kee Railroad line built between 1907 and 1909. The route includes several cavernous tunnels and tall railroad trestles.

CONNECTOR ROUTES Trail users support linking portions of the proposed Great Western Trail to other existing or proposed long distance trails. Proposals include linking portions of the California Back Country Discovery Trails and the Oregon Back Country Discovery Route to proposed Great Western Trail routes. Others indicate a desire to connect to the proposed transcontinental American Discovery Trail. According to the Great Western Trail Association, State Parks and Recreation officials in the State of Alaska have inquired about linking a snowmobile route from Alaska through Canada that could connect to the Great Western Trail. Backcountry Horsemen of Priest River, Idaho, and Canada have expressed an interest in extending the proposed Great Western Trail north to Calgary, Canada. A connected route could potentially benefit and strengthen international relationships. Restricting the proposed Great Western Trail route to locations south of the U.S.- Canada border would limit such connections.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 49 Planning Process PLANNING PROCESS

The initial task of the study team was to determine what key information was needed, conduct research to gather the information, analyze and present the data. Significant issues and concerns were identified throughout the process. Data on natural and cultural resources and other pertinent information was also compiled. Other tasks were to gather data regarding the purpose for the trail, and to investigate the significance, feasibility, and desirability of including the Great Western Trail in the National Trails System. Members of the team visited areas along the proposed route where possible to get first hand knowledge of the resources, opportunities, potential problems, and issues involved in designating the Great Western Trail a part of the National Trails System. As team members were not able to personally see all aspects of the proposed trail route, they made contact with others who did have field knowledge or experience of the Great Western Trail route and general area. Criteria for feasibility studies was reviewed and included. National Trail classifications were evaluated and alternatives for trail designation were developed. Public opinion and input was solicited throughout the process. The study team initially published and distributed a newsletter to communicate information on the trail study and an Internet website was established that provided basic information about the study. Open houses were subsequently held in several States. Telephone calls, meetings, and information sessions were held with local, State and Federal agencies, with trail and outdoor recreation organizations, and with Congressional delegations. Over 900 public responses have been received either in person at meetings, via letter, electronic mail, or by telephone. A summary of public involvement is included in Ap- pendix C. The next step is publication of the draft study report that is being widely distributed to an extensive mailing list that includes

Wyoming. over 1,200 names of individuals

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 53 and groups developed over the course of the study. Once public comments from the draft study are fully reviewed and analyzed, a final feasibility study report will be prepared. The final study transmitted to Congress by the Secretary of Agriculture will also be made available to the public. Congress will ultimately decide what action to take on the trail.

STUDY SCOPE This feasibility study provides a general assessment of factors pertaining to designation of the Great Western Trail as part of the National Trails System. It presents information on the planning process and background issues, natural and cultural environment, and alternatives for future designation and management of the Great Western Trail. It is important to note that Congress directed that the study provide an assessment of The Great Western Scenic Trail to include — a) the current status of land ownership and current and potential use along the designated route (see pages 104-106, and 112-113); b) the estimated cost of acquisition of lands or interests in lands, if any (see pages 112, 113, and Appendix G); and c) an examination of the appropriateness of motorized trail use along the trail (see pages 94-96).

It is also important to note what the study does not include: a) The study does not provide a detailed mile-by-mile description of the trail alignment. b) The study does not provide decisions for future trail managment. If the Great Western Trail is established as a national trail, a comprehensive management plan shall be completed to address this issue. c) The study does not authorize a specific type of trail use (i.e. non-motorized vs. motorized). If the Great Western Trail is established as a national trail, a comprehensive management plan shall be completed to address this issue. d) Much of the Great Western Trail route in Arizona and Utah is currently in place. These routes and other routes are being studied for inclusion in the National Trails System. e) A specific trail route has not been identified south of Phoenix in southern Arizona. Similarly, a specific trail route has not been identified for the northern-most portion of the trail from the Idaho-Montana border north to Canada. If a national trail is established, local issues, concerns, and opportunities will be significant factors in determining final trail alternatives and trail site selection.

The concept of providing access to our national forests for ATV users, horseback riders, hikers, cross country skiers, etc., is one we encourage. It seems to us to be a “win-win” scenario. Please include our county in the support column for The Great Western Trail project! –Rexburg, ID

54 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Issues ISSUES

At approximately 4,455 miles in length and crossing thousands of acres of public land, the proposed Great Western Trail would become the longest shared use trail corridor in the country. The National Trails System Act, Section 7 (j) states:

“Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian activities, trail biking, overnight and long distance backpacking, snowmobiling, . . . Vehicles which may be permitted on certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles, bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off-road vehicles.”

Several concerns about trail recognition and national designation emerged during the study process. General categories of concern were developed in response to scoping efforts with private landowners, trail users, Tribal governments, and resource managers.

RESOURCE PROTECTION Many respondents expressed concern for protection of natural resources. This category includes ensuring safeguards for maintaining water and air quality standards, and provisions for improving fish and wildlife habitat. There is a concern that national trail designation would result in new trail construction or an increase in overall trail use, which might cause soil erosion or water sedimentation problems. Some stated their concern regarding increased off-trail or off-road impacts, including damage to stream banks, rutting, vegetation loss, and destruction of wildlife habitat. There is also a concern that fish and wildlife migrations or habitat would be negatively affected with increases Information session, Bozeman, Montana. Information

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 57 in trail or road use. Some respondents felt their recreation use was being negatively affected by policies enforced to protect endangered fish, wildlife, or plant species.

TRAIL ACCESS This category includes providing traditional access to both trails and roads and maintaining existing recreation use. There is a concern that a national trails designation may result in changes I am especially concerned about the in management that could restrict access or use of areas of pub- impact of increased lic land. Conversely, many respondents stated their fear that a vehicle traffic on national trail designation would result in increased use of forest roads. backcountry areas. –Phoenix, AZ

TRAIL CONFLICT Many respondents questioned the practicality and logic in establishing a shared use trail system. These respondents stated that different types of trail users are not compatible. They stated that once motorized use is established on a trail or road, non-motorized trail users become permanently displaced. Some were also concerned about potential trail congestion, safety, vehicle noise, or air pollution in popular, heavily used areas.

ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT Many respondents questioned the logic of designating a new trail when adequate trails funding is not currently available to maintain and operate existing trails on public lands. There is a concern that designating a new trail will increase the maintenance burden and costs, further reducing available funding for existing trails. Some commented that resource managers do not have the ability to maintain existing trails adequately. Some cited the potential economic benefit to rural and isolated communities through increased recognition and business associated with the trail. Some felt that designated national trails could add public value and an increased appreciation of trail recreation opportunities. Some were supportive of efforts to provide a unique opportunity for diverse recreation groups, organizations, and agencies to work together increasing trail opportunities for everyone. Some respondents expressed interest in a continuous long distance corridor that could be used by all.

I am an avid snowmobiler and I am strongly for developed trail networks. –Newton, IA

58 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Alternatives ALTERNATIVES

PURPOSE A key point for setting direction for the feasibility study and developing alternatives has been defining the basic purpose for establishing the Great Western Trail. A statement of purpose defines the reason for designation of the trail. It also insures consistency in identifying alternatives for trail use and management. Testimony submitted by U.S. Rep. James V. Hansen and statements provided to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands Commit- tee on Resources from Gray F. Reynolds, Deputy Chief of the Forest Service were reviewed with this purpose in mind. Meetings and correspondence with Great Western Trail Association members, Forest Service units, cooperating partners and Great Western Trail supporters added in- sight to this process. By using this method, the study team has concluded that the following statements represent key concepts for creation of The Great Western Trail.

• To provide a continuous long distance trail route from the border of Mexico to Canada that can be used by the entire trails community.

• To link residents of rural communities and urban areas through a connected trail system.

• To emphasize the richness of our natural and heritage resources along the trail corridor.

• To offer opportunities for economic growth and development to area communities.

• To increase trail opportunities for area residents.

• To provide opportunities for different trail user groups to work together and in partnership with land management agencies for enhancement of recreation trail systems.

• To fulfill a unique recreation niche for a growing segment of recreation users desiring a long distance, backcountry trail experience.

BENEFITS OF NATIONAL TRAIL DESIGNATION Trails that possess certain special characteristics deserve the recognition that inclusion on the National Trails System brings. National Trails are federally protected routes under the administration of the Interior or Agriculture Departments. Comprehensive management planning for the trail corridor is mandatory to insure that a proper course of management and use for the trail has been I oppose the Great Western Trail in its entirety. I oppose sacrificing any acreage of identified. As a National Trail, the checks any national forests in Montana to further and balances for interactive resource plan- destruction from ORVs and ATVs. ning are in place providing for coordi- –Helena, MT

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 61 nated development. Natural and heritage resource inventories are completed and monitoring plans are developed. Adequate mapping, trail signing, trail route identification, and public involvement are key components. Financial incentives include special National Trails funding through Congressional appropriation and inclusion in national publications that result in increased national recognition and visibility. Often times, this results in increased visitation and business for nearby service communities. As National Trails draw interest from a nation-wide audience, they more readily attract a cadre of volunteers to nonprofit supporting trail organizations, such as the Great West- ern Trail Association. Because the Great Western Trail accommodates the entire trail community, a wider audience of trail users may become involved with National Trails, better represent- ing what a National Trails System should offer. In addition to working closely with Federal administrators, these private organizations have other opportunities to raise funds or develop partnerships that can benefit overall trail administrations.

VISION FOR THE TRAIL Future conditions are described through vision statements. Using a similar process to the above, team members have identified conditions necessary for ful- fillment of this vision.

The concept of a trail corridor that recognizes all the various forms of recreational trail use as legitimate would go a long way toward satisfy- ing desires of recreationists for high quality outdoor experiences. –Rio Rancho, NM San Pedro River, Arizona. River, San Pedro

62 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L RESOURCE PROTECTION • Resource inventories are complete. Protection measures are identified and in place. • Natural and heritage resources are protected and interpreted. • Trail signage is effective in providing directions and alerting users to trail conditions. • Information and education systems are effective in keeping trail users on approved paths to protect sensitive resources. • Sensitive areas are monitored. • Mitigation or trail relocation occurs if persistent problems are unresolved.

TRAIL MANAGEMENT • The Great Western Trail is established as a continuous trail. • Adequate levels of shared funding exist to implement the management plan. • Landowners and communities participate in management decisions. • Trail users are active participants.

ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT • Trail access and needed facilities are available. • The trail is clean, maintained, and appropriately used. • The trail accommodates many different trail users. • A supportive community of partners exists.

LIST OF ALTERNATIVES This is a feasibility study, not a management plan. Alternatives were developed that pertain to potential options for designation of the trail route. Three classes of alternatives are examined: 1) a no action alternative that continues existing conditions; 2) an action which would include the trail within the National Trail system; and 3) other reasonable concepts which could achieve the vision for the trail.

As a multi-pur- Ranch, Utah. Springs South of Deer pose recreation trail, the proposed Great Western Trail emerges as a hybrid between the oldest and most traditional National Scenic Trail – the Appalachian Trail – and the newest national trail candidate, the American Discovery Trail, which proposes using a combination of trails, sidewalks, gravel, and

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 63 paved roads to create an east-west trail corridor bridging the United States. As the proposed Great Western Trail comes before Congress, it is important to ask: Would this route fill a niche that has so far gone unmet among the Nation’s long distance trails?

ALTERNATIVE A: NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Establishing a coordinated administration and national recognition for a connected trail route would not occur under this alternative. In place and future designated segments of the Great Western Trail would continue to be administered as they currently are. Agencies, organizations, or property owners would coordinate the management, development, interpretation, use, marking, maintenance, and enforcement of individual trail segments as they become recognized and developed. Lacking a coordinated management structure, establishment of the trail would most likely continue to occur as it currently does, in a fragmented fashion that is largely dependent upon local area initiative and availability of resources. Under this alternative, there would be minimal emphasis on a unified effort to inventory, map, or connect routes. Comprehensive inventories of natural or heritage resources may not be conducted, as there would be no guiding comprehensive management plan. A nonprofit group, such as the Great Western Trail Association, would most likely continue to promote and develop the trail to meet the goal to provide a continuous long distance trail. Even if the nonprofit group assumes responsibility for the identity and administration for portions of the trail, Federal involvement would continue in the provision of technical assistance and trail routing to meet agency goals. On non-Federal lands, the nonprofit group would continue to coordinate with private, Tribal, State, regional, and local managers. Because of strong support and commitment to development of the Arizona segment of the Great Western Trail from Arizona State Parks and the Forest Service, trail segments in Arizona would most likely continue to develop. Strong commitment on the part of the Forest Service in Utah in combination with structural and financial support from Utah State Parks and Recreation would also likely result in continued development and recognition of the Great Western Trail in Utah. Funding through annual State off-highway vehicle allocations (% proportioned to States based upon a combination of national share of fuel use and off-road recreation fuel use) or matching funds partnership projects sponsored through the Federal Recreation Trails Program, is expected to continue. Efforts to designate trail routes in eastern Idaho, Wyoming, and Mon- tana may lose some vitality where supporting partners do not exist or are unable to fully contribute staffing, financial resources, or leadership. If a fully supportive network is not readily available, efforts at establishing new segments of the trail may languish without the structure of a coordinated administration. Lacking a consolidated effort and an accompanying boost in recognition as a nationally designated trail may tend to prolong efforts to establish a continuous long distance route. Because a continuous long distance trail route would not be established, that trail objective would not be met by this alternative. Costs for administration of individual Great Western Trail segments would continue on a forest-by-forest basis. This has been estimated to cost $40,000 in annual operational expenses and $150,000 in annual development and maintenance trailside over the last 10 years. Na- tional Trail allocations would not be available so each affected forest would continue responsi-

64 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L bility for financing their portion of the trail. If funding for the Great Western Trail is being diverted from regular Forest trail program funding, there may be fewer funds available for local Forest trail maintenance in areas of Great Western Trail development.

Feasibility and Desirability Under this alternative, the trail would not be designated a national trail. Nonprofit groups would be responsible for raising funds to develop and coordinate collaborative management efforts. They would continue, as presently occurs, to work in tandem with affected Federal, State, Tribal, or local entities in designating desired trail segments. Great Western Trail segments would continue to be developed in areas where strong public and organizational support was in place. Efforts are expected to continue in Arizona and Utah regardless of the alternative chosen because interest and commitment is strong. Public interest in establishing the Great Western Trail in Idaho and Wyoming does exist, but it is not known if ample support is available to provide development at a rate that is concurrent with the States of Arizona and Utah. Under this no-action alternative, it is not likely that trail development would

I would like to register my absolute and total opposition to the Great Western Trail. It is an outrage that such a proposal as this should be even seriously considered. Were it not for the USFS’s interest in selling recreational access in order to generate income, I doubt such a project would have made it this far. –Bend, OR Harriman State Park, Idaho. Park, State Harriman

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 65 occur in Montana or northern Idaho in the near future. A strong, multi-level base of community support and interest would have to be established first. The no-action alternative, Alternative A, would result in no immediate change in trail management for existing Great Western Trail segments in Arizona and Utah. The trail would not be uniformly administered as part of a national trails system. Over time, new segments may be added if individual States, local communities, and agencies are supportive in developing new trail segments. Although this alternative is feasible, it would not serve to acknowledge the national significance of the Great Western Trail.

ALTERNATIVE B: NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL (MEXICO TO CANADA) Under this alternative, Congress would take legislative action to amend the National Trails System Act (NTSA) to add the Great Western Trail. A continuous trail, using existing trails and back roads, would be designated within the conceptual Great Western Trail corridor, an area ranging from 50 to 100 miles wide. The routes, as identified on feasibility study maps, would accommodate normal trail or secondary road traffic. Primary and parallel routes would be established, as determined, to accomplish stated purposes (Please refer to Appendix B for a full description of Scenic Trails). As required by the National Trails System Act, as amended [see Appendix A], Federal segments would automatically become protected components of the trail. Non-Federal trail segments could not be added to the trail without the voluntary permission of the landowner. This alternative would commit the Federal Government, in coordination with the State and local government agencies, to planning, historic interpretation, trail and resource protection, and development along the route under the authority of the NTSA. Under this Act, the Federal Government as- This multiple- sumes responsibility for actions listed below. Other actions, while not use recreation trail is long specifically required, may be undertaken if determined appropriate. Table overdue. 1 summarizes these actions. –Oro Valley, AZ Information Session at Butte, Montana. at Butte, Session Information

66 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF FEDERAL AUTHORITIES UNDER THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT (adapted from the American Discovery Trail Feasibility Study dated January 1996)

SHALL: 5 (d) Establish an advisory council. 5 (e) Complete a comprehensive management plan. 7 (a) Consult with affected State and Federal agencies. 7 (a) Select rights-of-way, minimizing adverse effects to adjacent landowners. 7 (c) Establish a uniform marker and provide to cooperating agencies. 7 (e) Encourage State or local governments to enter cooperative agreements or acquire right- of-way. 7 (h) Provide for development and maintenance on Federal lands. 7 (h) Encourage States to operate, develop, and maintain trails outside Federal areas. 7 (i) Prescribe and publish uniform regulations if issued. 7 (k) Authorize landowners to donate or convey real property interests to qualified organizations.

MAY: 7 (b) Relocate segments on Federal land. 7 (c) Permit public use facilities and provide access. 7 (c) Provide for trail interpretation sites. 7 (d) Use lands within Federal areas. 7 (e) Enter agreements or acquire lands through cooperative agreements, donation, purchase, or exchange to ensure use of the land for a trail. 7 (f) Accept title, exchange land. 7 (h) Enter into cooperative agreements with state, landowners, and private organizations to operate, develop, and maintain any portion of trail. 7 (i) Issue regulations governing use, protection, management, development, and administration. 7 (j) Describe acceptable uses.

As required by the NTSA, the lead Federal agency, most likely the USDA Forest Service in this case, would prepare a comprehensive management and use plan. The Secretary of Agricul- ture would appoint an advisory council comprised of representatives of affected Federal agencies, State government, local agencies, representatives of the communities, corporate and individual landowners, users, and others with an established interest in the trail to advise on matters of trail management. The USDA Forest Service would encourage State and local governments and private entities to obtain cooperative agreements, easements, rights-of-way, and land in fee for the protection and permanency of the portions of the trail outside of State and Federal jurisdiction. Where other entities are not able to protect the trail right-of-way or resources, the Federal government could acquire trail lands through dedications, donation, or purchase from willing sellers. Before considering land acquisition, the Federal agency would encourage cooperative agreements with landowners to certify trail segments and resources as a part of the national trail while maintaining private ownership. A certification process would help assure the public that

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 67 sites and segments are qualified and that protection, interpretation, and facilities meet the standards of quality expected on traditional USDA Forest Service administered lands. The Federal management role would most likely be one of administration, overall coordination, and oversight with State and local agencies, communities, and others as trail and site managers. Local land managers and volunteers would be encouraged to develop, operate, and maintain the trail. Both the NTSA and legislative history suggest that the best management scenario would provide State and local government agencies a major role. The comprehensive management plan would determine more precisely the Federal and State roles in right-of-way protection; interpretation of natural and cultural resources; protection of subsistence rights and traditional uses; development of facilities; and maintenance. Inventoried, protected, managed, and certified portions of the trail would be made available to the public and marked with a uniform marker developed during the management planning process. Relevant Federal laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act, the National His- toric Preservation Act, the Archeological Resources Protection Act, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act would apply to areas under Federal administration and voluntarily certified non-Federal landowners who request Federal assistance. The USDA Forest Service would coordinate compliance with these laws. Federal funding would be required for preparation of a comprehensive management plan, completing resource inventories and protection plans, protecting resources, providing technical assistance and training in resource monitoring and interpretation, and support for other activities related to implementation of the management and use plan. Federal funding for land acquisition is not anticipated or projected in the cost estimate, although Federal funds could be used to acquire easements from willing sellers in limited instances. Initial Federal costs to develop a comprehensive management plan and environmental impact statement required by this alternative is estimated to be $400,000 to $600,000. It is assumed that the Federal government would fund about one-half of the total costs for facility planning and development. Annual Federal operational costs are estimated to be $150,000 to $170,000. Great Western Trail staff would most likely operate from a Forest Service office utilizing existing facilities and support staff. A logical centralized location for trail operations would be in Utah; however, other locations would also be suitable.

Feasibility and Desirability Based on the definitions and requirements for National Scenic Trails described in the Na- tional Trails System Act, the Great Western Trail must meet qualifications for inclusion as a National Scenic Trail as follows: 1) significance, 2) length, 3) accessibility, 4) desirability, and 5) method of trail use (please refer to Appendix B for a detailed description). The proposed Great Western Trail does contain nationally important cultural, historic, natural, recreational, and scenic features are along the trail corridor; the trail is over 100 miles in length and continuous, and the trail provides access to nearby urban areas. The study team has concluded that there is both support and opposition for designation as a National Scenic Trail. Extensive local and regional support is not evident the entire length of the trail corridor. The study team also found that the Great Western Trail does not meet requirements for method of trail use. Section 7 (c) of the National Trails System Act prohibits the use of motorized vehicles on National Scenic Trails. If the proposed Great Western Trail were designated a

68 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L scenic trail, an exception would be necessary. For the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, the National Trails System Act allows the use of motorized vehicles where trail segments were placed on motorized routes as long as that use does not substantially interfere with the nature and purposes of the trail. The 1978 National Trails Act amendment specifically provides for motorized use on those portions of the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail where such use was in existence at the time of designation (sec.551 (9) of P.L. 95-625 (11/10/78) and 16 USC 1246 (c)). These Continental Divide National Scenic Trail sections must meet administrative regulations for motorized use at the time of designation. A 1989 Forest Service Region 1 and Region 4 Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail - Montana/Idaho Section included 160 miles of roads from 795 miles of designated trail. The 1993 Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision for the Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region in Wyoming and Colorado also included 152 miles of motorized trail or road from a total 753 miles of designated trail. This is exciting to see something being done to Even if Congress would authorize an amendment that connect people with the exempts the trail from the no motorized use requirement on outdoors. They will take National Scenic Trails, the suitability of designating a Na- better care of it if they are tional Scenic Trail along hundreds of miles of motorized a part of it. routes is questionable and may conflict with National Sce- –Pleasant Grove, UT nic Trail purposes. Also, although the Great Western Trail is supported by a competent volunteer-based organization, this organization does not currently have full trail wide support throughout northern Idaho and Montana. The study team has concluded that Trail riding in Utah. Trail

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 69 this alternative is not feasible at the present time because there is insufficient trail wide support along the northern trail corridor. Opportunities for feasibility could be evaluated in the future, however, if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge.

ALTERNATIVE C: NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL (ARIZONA, UTAH, EAST- ERN IDAHO AND WESTERN WYOMING)

Under this alternative, the Great Western Trail would be designated a National Scenic Trail in the States of Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho and western Wyoming. No designation of the trail would be made in northern Idaho or Montana. Opportunities could be evaluated in the future, however, if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge. The Secretary of Agriculture would be available to lend assistance in planning, design, or implementation upon specific request. This alternative was developed in response to comments received opposing a National Trails designation in northern Idaho and Montana. This alternative only differs from Alternative B, a continuous National Scenic Trail from border to border, in the omission of trail routes crossing Montana and northern Idaho. Federal costs would be similar or slightly less than those proposed in Alternative B, however, as there would be fewer miles of trail under administration.

Feasibility and Desirability A continuous route from Mexico to Canada would not be achieved with this alternative. The designated route would end at the Continental Divide in Idaho, short of the Canadian border. Individuals wanting to complete a long distance route to Canada would be responsible for researching and designing their own travel routes from eastern Idaho to Canada, using existing road and trail maps. The study team has determined that the alternative to develop a National Scenic Trail in Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho and western Wyoming is possible only if an amendment to the National Trails System Act authorizes motorized use. An exception to Section 7 (c) of the National Trails System Act, which prohibits the use of motorized vehicles on National Scenic Trails, would be necessary. The study team has concluded that this alternative is possible and has strong public support. However, the suitability of designating a scenic trail along hundreds of miles of motorized routes is questionable and may conflict with National Scenic Trail purposes. The team has concluded that although this alternative is possible, a National Scenic Trail designation is not well suited for Great Western Trail purposes.

ALTERNATIVE D: NO NATIONAL TRAILS DESIGNATION - COORDI- NATED ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT Under Alternative D, a national trails designation would not be made. The Forest Service would, however, emphasize completion of a comprehensive management plan on the routes currently in place as well as proposed trail routes on the southern portion of the trail in Arizona, Utah, eastern Idaho, and western Wyoming. Northern Idaho and Montana would be excluded. Opportunities could be evaluated in the future, however, if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge. This alternative was developed in

70 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L response to comments opposing a National Trails designation in northern Idaho and Montana. Planning and inclusion of non-Federal lands would only occur with the permission of the landowner. Emphasis would be on a shared, coordinated administration and management of current Great Western Trail segments. Federal expenses are estimated to cost from $400,000 to $600,000 to complete the management plan. Annual operating costs would be similar to Alternative A, where management and development costs are assumed on a forest-by-forest basis dependent on their involvement in Great Western Trail development.

Feasibility and Desirability Although not allotted the full provisions of the National Trails System Act, this option would address natural resource concerns for the length of the existing and proposed southern Great Western Trail corridor. This option would ensure that comprehensive natural and heritage resource inventories are completed for the southern trail corridor. Necessary monitoring, mitigation, or trail relocation needs would be identified. A range of management options guiding current and future trail use would be analyzed with emphasis on shared responsibilities with competent volunteer-based organizations. The study team has concluded that this option is possible and could be an improvement over current conditions. However, without a National Trails designation it is not likely that completion of this plan would take high priority for agency funding or personnel. Also, this option does not afford the full provisions of National Trail status. Battleaxe Mountain at White Canyon, Arizona. White Canyon, at Mountain Battleaxe

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 71 OTHER ALTERNATIVES TO BE CONSIDERED IF A NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAIL CATEGORY IS CREATED

ALTERNATIVE E: NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAIL (MEXICO TO CANADA) Under Alternative E, the Great Western Trail would be designated a National Discovery Trail from Mexico to Canada. If the proposed Great Western Trail were to be authorized under a National Discovery Trail classification, Congress would need to amend the National Trails System Act to include National Discovery Trails as a class of trails in the National Trails System (please refer to Appendix B for a full description of Discovery Trails). This new class of trails was examined in the feasibility study completed in January 1996 by the National Park Service for the proposed American Discovery Trail, a 6,000-mile east to west coast route incorporating local, regional, and national trails together. If passed into law, this would allow a new class of trails to be located along roadways, if necessary, in order to make trails continuous. National Discovery Trails, the study states, would link existing national, regional, and local trails into an integrated system, connecting urban areas with rural and backcountry areas. The purpose is for trail users to experience and learn (discover) about all aspects of American life and history. This includes the opportunity to learn about industry, agriculture, cultural settlements, Native American societies, historic sites and otherwise better understand this country and its diversity. This is a different purpose than just “scenic” as experienced on a National Scenic Trail, “historic” as experienced on a National Historic Trail, or “recreation” as experienced on a National Recreation Trail. Emphasis would shift toward Fed- eral land management agencies sharing comprehensive trail planning, administrative operation, and maintenance of discovery trails with interagency groups and at least one competent trail wide volunteer-based organization. Although the Secretary charged with administration of a trail retains ultimate responsibility and accountability, strong State and local grassroots support, partnered with private support is an important component of this proposed trail category. Any legislative amendment would need to specify the role of the Federal Government in the administration of National Discovery Trails and provide Federal authorities for implementing regulations. Table 2 lists the primary differences between a National Scenic Trail, the proposed National Discovery Trail, and the Great Western Trail.

Isn’t it wrongful enough that ATV’s are continually used in places where they are banned from, yet very little to nothing is done about this? This doesn’t sound like a trail system at all. It sounds like an off-road interstate proposal, which borders ridiculous to me. –Pontotoc, MS

72 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L TABLE 2 PRIMARY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL, THE PROPOSED DISCOVERY TRAIL, AND THE GREAT WESTERN TRAIL

A NATIONAL SCENIC TRAIL A POTENTIAL NATIONAL GREAT WESTERN TRAIL DISCOVERY TRAIL does not allow motorized uses and would include existing trails that would include existing trails that does not follow motorized routes. permit motorized recreational uses permit motorized recreational uses and could be located along and could use roadways if roadways if necessary to make the necessary to make the trail trail continuous. continuous. intended as a hiking and equestrian intended as a hiking trail, but can intended as a multi-purpose trail trail accommodate other uses as well. that accommodates different users. emphasizes a continuous route for would emphasize a continuous would emphasize collaborative hikers and equestrians. route, collaborative trail use and trail use and management. management secondary. does not specifically emphasize would specifically emphasize would emphasize relationship to linkages and other national, linkages with other national, nearby communities and regional, and local trails. regional, and local trails. opportunities for local economic benefit. does not emphasize connections would emphasize connections with would emphasize connections to with urban areas. urban areas. urban and rural areas. emphasizes access to outstanding would emphasize a continuous would emphasize a continuous examples of America’s natural pathway; access to outstanding route; access to outstanding heritage and stimulates the resources and stimulating the resources and stimulating the conservation of nationally conservation of resources would be conservation of resources would important resources associated of secondary importance. be of secondary importance. with the trail corridor. must be at least 100 miles long generally would be at least 500 would be at least 500 miles long, (the minimum specified by law). miles long, pass through more than pass through more than one State, one State, and at a minimum be a and at a minimum be a continuous continuous, walkable route. route. gives the primary role in overall would emphasize shared would emphasize shared administration of the trail to the management of the trail with a management of the trail with Federal government. nonprofit group. competent volunteer-based organizations.

Initial Federal expense to develop a comprehensive management plan and environmental impact statement required by this alternative are estimated to cost from $400,000 to $600,000. It is assumed that the Federal government would fund about one-half of the total costs for facility planning and development. Annual Federal operational costs are estimated to be $150,000 to $170,000. Great Western Trail staff would most likely operate from a Forest Service office utilizing existing facilities and support staff. A logical centralized location for trail operations would be in Utah; however, other locations would also be suitable.

Feasibility and Desirability Although not yet incorporated into law, criteria for National Discovery Trails includes: 1) linking to a metropolitan area, with other trails, and significant recreation and resource areas; 2) support by a competent trail wide nonprofit organization having public, user group, and affected government support; and 3) being an extended continuous route that passes through more than one State. The Great Western Trail does serve as a link to metropolitan areas, other

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 73 trails, recreation, and resource areas and is an extended continuous route that passes through more than one State. The Great Western Trail is supported by a competent volunteer-based organization but this organization does not currently have full trail wide support in northern Idaho and Montana. The study team believes that this alternative, establishing a border-to- border National Discovery trail, is not suitable at the present time because there is insufficient trail wide support along the northern trail corridor in northern Idaho and Montana. Opportu- nities could be evaluated in the future, however, if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge.

ALTERNATIVE F: NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAIL (ARIZONA, UTAH, EASTERN IDAHO AND WESTERN WYOMING) Under this alternative, the proposed Great Western Trail would be included in the Na- tional Trails System under the National Discovery Trail category. No designation of the Trail will be made in northern Idaho or Montana. This alternative was developed in response to comments opposing a National Trails designation in northern Idaho and Montana. Portions of the trail located north of the Idaho-Montana border near West Yellowstone, Montana would be designated only upon application from the State or local governments, if such segments meet the requirements of the National Trails System Act. The Secretary of Agri- culture would be available to lend assistance in planning, design, or implementation upon specific request. This alternative only differs from Alternative E, a continuous National Discov- ery Trail from border to border, in the omission of trail routes crossing Montana and northern Idaho. An amendment to the National Trails System Act authorizing a new category of National Discovery Trail to the National Trails System would be needed to implement this alternative, as a National Discovery Trail category does not currently exist. Federal costs would be similar or slightly less than those projected for Alternative E, a continuous border-to-border National Discovery Trail corridor, since the overall trail distance is less.

Feasibility and Desirability A continuous route from Mexico to Canada would not be achieved with this alternative. The designated route would end at the Continental Divide in Idaho, far south of the Canadian border. Individuals wanting to complete a long distance route to Canada would be responsible for researching and designing their own travel routes from eastern Idaho to Canada, using existing road and trail maps. In order to implement this alternative, Congress would need to amend the National Trails System Act to include discovery trails as a category of trails in the National Trails System. The study team has concluded that this alternative is feasible and desirable as it best meets the purpose and vision of the Great Western Trail in accommodating the entire trails community. This alternative would afford the Great Western Trail protection as a National System Trail, provided a discovery category is added, and has strong Federal, State, local government, community, and grassroots support. Opportunities for including portions of northern Idaho or Montana could be evaluated in the future if a strong base of support from State, local government, or a grassroots organization does emerge.

74 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM FURTHER STUDY National Recreation Trail – Much of the proposed Great Western Trail could satisfy the requirements in the National Trails System Act for this designation. However, National Recre- ation Trails must exist prior to designation. In the case of the Great Western Trail, some segments of the route have been designated but many follow existing roads that are not currently recognized as a part of the trail. There is not current strong support for adding the Great Western Trail as a National Recreation Trail because the benefits of such a designation are not as tangible. However, one option could be to fully designate additional segments with the future goal of applying for National Recreation Trail status. National Historic Trail – In order to be designated a National Historic Trail, the Great Western Trail must meet three criteria: a) as a route or trail established by historic use and historically significant as a result of that use, b) of national significance in respect to any of several broad facets of American history; such as trade and commerce, exploration, migration and settlement, or military campaigns, and c) have significant potential for public recreational use or historical interest based on historic interpretation or appreciation. The Great Western Trail does partially meet stated criteria but fails to meet national significance as a continuous historic route because it is a composite of many different historic and modern travel routes, often isolated from each other. Therefore the trail does not meet requirements for inclusion as a National Historic Trail and this alternative was not explored. National Scenic Trail (discontinuous to include Federally administered land only) – This alternative differs from the continuous National Scenic Trail alternative by including land administered by the Federal government only. State, county, or privately owned segments of the proposed Great Western Trail corridor would be designated only upon application from the States or local governmental agencies involved, if such segments meet the criteria of National Trails System Act and are administered by such agencies. The Secretary of Agriculture would be available to lend assistance in planning, design, or implementation upon specific request. Implementation of this alternative would significantly affect continuity of the trail system by segmenting and This is a big government isolating Federally administered parcels of land. This would under- solution to no mine effectiveness and defeat the main purpose for establishing the problem. There Great Western Trail: to provide a continuous long distance trail sys- are already roads tem. Therefore, this option was rejected from further analysis. to do what this National Discovery Trail (discontinuous to include Federally system proposes to do. administered land only) – Similar to the alternative listed above, –Bozeman, MT with the exception that the designation consists of a National Dis- covery Trail, this alternative would include establishing the Great Western Trail solely on Federally administered land. As such, it does not meet the original intent and purpose to establish a long distance trail route and is therefore rejected from further analysis.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 75 Affected Environment AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

INTRODUCTION The proposed Great Western Trail would begin at the Arizona-Mexico border and travel northward through the States of Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, through the heart of the Intermountain West. Stretching approximately 4,455 miles, the trail would end at the Montana-Canada border. The Great Western Trail corridor traverses some of the most spectacular scenery that our nation has to offer.

NATURAL RESOURCES OVERVIEW The proposed Great Western Trail corridor crosses a variety of ecoregions ranging from the Chihuahuan semi-desert of playa lakes and mesquite-tar brush desert of southern Arizona north to the magnificent Northern Rocky Mountains that are home to the Douglas fir, hemlock and cedar forests. The proposal spans seven separate ecological unit provinces. The southernmost extent of the trail corridor is located in southeastern Arizona, which is desert. Vegetation is comprised mostly of shrubs, many of which are thorny. Cacti are also abundant. No permanent streams exist, only washes and basins that fill following rains. As the trail continues north, east of Tucson and the American semi-desert province the topography consists of extensive undulating plains. A large portion of this province drains to the Pacific Ocean through underground seepage or dry washes. Vegetation is sparse, and bare ground between existing plants is common. Cacti and thorny plants are conspicuous. Shallow playa lakes are present. Soils near these playas contain alkali in varying quantities. Watershed management is extremely important to the desert city of Tucson, which depends entirely on underground water supplies. To the north, the proposed trail corridor enters the mountain semi-desert province of central Arizona, characterized mainly by steep foothills and mountains. Elevations range between 5,000 feet and 10,000 feet but are generally less than 8,000 feet. Temperatures are high the entire year. This area is the primary watershed for much of Arizona. Several large streams are perennial. Much of the water is stored in reservoirs and small artificial lakes. Ground water is

I believe this trail is a great addition to the national trails network. Its need is currently not realized, but the demand for trails, such as this, will be in great demand. I am interested in off-road motorcycle riding for my family and friends. Currently there are three generations of my family that ride together. This trail will afford us a protected place to ride and be available for generations to come. –Clancy, MT

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 79 limited and usually found only at great depths. Because elevations are generally less than 8,000 feet and average temperatures are warm all year, the region enjoys abundant outdoor recreational activities in both desert and alpine settings. The foothills zone contains mixed grasses, chaparral, and pinyon-juniper woodlands. The pine forests are diverse with species such as the Chihuahuan and Apache pine. Douglas-fir and aspen can be found at mid-level elevations, while limber and bristlecone pines are located in rockier places at the highest elevations. Moving north, the Great Western Trail corridor reaches into northern Arizona, the Colo- rado River, and the southern edge of Utah. This province consists of tablelands ranging from 5,000 feet to 7,000 feet, with local re- lief ranging from 500 feet to more than 3,000 feet in the Grand Canyon of the Colorado River. Due to the high altitude, winters

are cold and summer days are Utah. Pine Valley, warm. Summer rain typically occurs in brief passing thunder bursts. During the winter months, ordinary rain is typical, in contrast to the dry semi-desert provinces to the south. Vegetation zones in this region are not uniform. Arid grasslands with many bare areas can be found in the lowest elevation zones. Xeric shrubs do grow among the grasses, but sagebrush is dominant. At the lower elevations to the south, several kinds of cactus and yucca are common. Cottonwoods grow mainly along the more perennial streams. The woodland zone is the most extensive and is dominated by open stands of pinyon-juniper and shrubs including big sage and cercocarpus. The montane zone is smaller in size but covers the high plateaus and mountains with ponderosa pine and some Douglas-fir. Continuing north into south-central Utah, the trail corridor follows the plateau north of the Grand Canyon that gains in elevation as the trail continues north. The high-elevation tablelands are primarily fault controlled and aligned in a northeast direction. These high mesas are gently rolling on top but rise steeply from the valley bottoms. Precipitation here ranges widely, from 14 inches to 35 inches distributed annually throughout the year. Sagebrush domi-

80 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L nates the lower elevations. The woodland belt above the sagebrush zones consists mainly of pinyon-juniper. As elevations rise, Past experiences affirm my belief that ponderosa pine and Douglas-fir stands emerge. Alpine fir and there is no such Engelmann spruce are common on the highest ground. The Great thing as a “multi- Basin bristlecone pine, which can live more than a thousand years, use” trail. People is located among the widely scattered peaks of this region. who hike do so for a In northern Utah, southeastern Idaho, and the western edge quiet, low-key experience. This is of Wyoming, the trail corridor crosses the Southern Rocky Moun- impossible on a trail tain Steppe ecological province. The vegetational zones found here shared with motor- are quite distinct and generally dependent upon location. East- ized ATVs. While and north-facing slopes and ravines found in the higher eleva- community eco- tions are subject to cold air drainage, resulting in more species nomic gain is viewed as a vital part of this diversity. Mountain mahogany and scrub oak shrubs are more plan, the most common in the dry and rocky foothills at lower elevations. Sage- residents could brush, antelope bitterbrush, and other shrubs will also be found expect are minimum in this zone. Ponderosa pine is located on the lower, drier slopes, wage jobs at the while Douglas-fir can be found on the higher, moister sites. The expense of precious natural resources. sub alpine zone is dominated by Engelmann spruce and sub al- –Livingston, MT pine fir. The alpine zone is a tundra setting distinguished by an absence of trees. The Middle Rocky Mountain Steppe province of southwestern Montana is characterized as a basin-and-range area. Alluvial fans and floodplains at the base of the mountains drain into the valleys. Elevations range from 2,500 feet to 6,500 feet in the basins and from 3,000 feet to 10,000 feet in the mountains and alpine areas. Despite the northerly latitudes and high alti- tudes, climates are surprisingly mild as a result of the effect of the Pacific Ocean wind streams. The vegetation is classified as predominantly Douglas-fir and western ponderosa pine forest with prairie foothills adjacent to the valleys. Common tree species include western larch, Dou- glas-fir, sub alpine fire, and ponderosa pine. Grassland species include blue bunch wheat grass, Idaho fescue, and rough fescue. In northwestern Montana and northern Idaho, high rugged mountains rise more than 9,000 feet. Most of this region is glaciated with nearly flat valleys, some of which are several miles wide. The landscape is a mixed evergreen-deciduous forest characterized by Douglas-fir, cedar, hemlock, and grand fir. The sub alpine zone is dominated by Engelmann spruce and sub alpine fir. Western red cedar and western hemlock typify the montane belt. In forested areas that have been burned or cut, western larch is the first species to reappear, followed by hemlock, red cedar, and lowland white fir. Depending on the latitude, the lower part of the montane belt may be interspersed with grass and sagebrush.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 81 Map 11 Physiographic Regions in Great Western Trail Vicinity

82 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES The entire proposed Great Western Trail corridor has abundant wildlife and plant diversity. Species present along various sections of the route include grizzly bear, wolf, moose, elk, bighorn sheep, mountain goats, mountain lions, pronghorn antelope, eagles, trumpeter swans, geese, condors, and falcons. Appendix H lists information collected in consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to identify Federally threatened and endangered species that occur in the proposed Great Western Trail corridor. A total of 77 threatened and endangered species are identified within the proposed corridor, including mammal, bird, rep- tile, amphibian, fish, and plant species. Other species are proposed for listing and will likely be formally designated as threatened or endangered in the near future. Because the exact trail alignment has not been determined for all segments of the proposed trail, State lists of threatened and endangered or rare species have not been included in the appendix. These listings would also be considered before any action is taken to designate or manage specific trail segments.

HERITAGE RESOURCES

PREHISTORY American Indians have occupied lands in the vicinity of the proposed Great Western Trail for thousands of years. In harmony with the patterns of the seasons, American Indians lived a primarily nomadic lifestyle adapting to regional and local sources of food and other resources. They fished, hunted, and gathered necessary materials for survival and comfort. When Europe- ans arrived to settle in these areas, many different American Indian cultures and language groups occupied them.

TABLE 3 LISTING OF AREA TRIBAL GROUPS

Ancient Cultures Modern Tribal Groups Cochise Tohono O’odam Oshara Apache Hohokam Havasupai Mogollon Hopi Anasazi Navajo Fremont Maricopa Avish San Carlos Ute Goshute Paiute Shoshone Coeur D’Alene Bannock Nez Perce Crow Salish-Kootenai

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 83 HISTORY The proposed Great Western Trail links existing roads, trails, backcountry paths, scenic byways, and travel routes. Some of the routes are historic and have been used continuously for centuries. Other routes were predominantly used during specific historic periods of time. Some of the roads or trails are more modern in origin. Travel and trade from the eastern regions of the Nation to the west dominate American exploration history. Modern transportation systems follow many of these east-west routes that were initially established by native peoples, explorers, military scouts, immigrants, miners, freight- ers, and railroads. No predominant single historic route traverses the country from south to north. In some segments, the proposed Great Western Trail route does cross or follow an historic north-south route. The Honeymoon Trail in northern Arizona is one example where both early travelers and modern Great Western Trail travelers use the same route to detour around the Grand Canyon of the Colorado. Along the San Pedro River in Arizona, American Indians established south to north trade routes more than 700 years ago. These routes connected major agricultural areas in Mexico to isolated outposts in central Arizona. Only traces of roadway, sporadic ghost towns, and the ruins of Hohokam villages now remain to mark these abandoned routes.

TABLE 4 MAJOR HERITAGE THEMES (on the Great Western Trail Corridor)

1. Native American History and Culture 2. Euro American Exploration 3. Immigrants, Settlers, and Mormons 4. Miners, Mining, and Commerce 5. Military Campaigns 6. Cattlemen and Woolgrowers 7. The Depression 8. World War II 9. Federal Land Management

HISTORIC SITES Transportation, typified by a network of historic trails and wagon roads, is one major theme that epitomizes and unifies the entire Great Western Trail corridor. Many historic trails will only be crossed in passing, but each crossing provides an opportunity for interpretation and an increased understanding of local history. Traveling along the Great Western Trail route, visitors would also encounter historic sites in each State and in each geographic region. The oldest sites are those that mark the activities of American Indian peoples.

84 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L TABLE 5 HISTORIC ROUTES IN VICINITY OF GREAT WESTERN TRAIL

Arizona Utah Idaho Wyoming Montana Butterfield Mormon Pioneer California NHT California NHT Nez Perce (Nee- Overland Route NHT Me-Poo) NHT Mormon Oregon NHT Lewis and Clark Battalion Trail NHT U.S. First Pony Express Nez Perce (Nee- Cavalry Trail NHT Me-Poo) NHT General Crook Old Spanish Trail Trail Beale Wagon California NHT Road Arizona Road/ Dominguez- Honeymoon Escalante Trail Leach’s Wagon Road Jedediah Smith Kearney’s Gila River Trail

SCENIC AND VISUAL RESOURCES The proposed Great Western Trail corridor captures the rugged beauty of the region’s deserts, basins, and mountains. The trail crosses the Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona, skirts the Grand Canyon of the Colorado River, and accesses a red-rock landscape of slot canyons, hoodoos, and arches in southern Utah. In the mountains to the north, the trail climbs and descends 11,000-foot-plus peaks, provides panoramic views, parallels trout streams and lakes, and passes by glacial cirques in Wyoming and Montana. Traveling through five States, the trail would bisect a multitude of ecosys- tems, crossing high desert in Arizona and southern Utah and running through dense coniferous forests in northern Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. As it passes through western Wyo- Four Peaks, Arizona. Peaks, Four

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 85 ming, the proposed Great Western Trail would enter the greater Yellowstone ecosystem, which encompasses the largest remaining swath of undeveloped lands in the lower forty-eight States. It obviously is not possible to list in detail the measure of scenic values and their importance along the Great Western Trail corridor, although this has been done using the USDA Forest Service “Scenery Management System” (SMS) analysis and planning process in each National Forest Management Plan. The SMS examines the close-up, immediate environment through which a trail passes, as well as the middle and distant views that are so valuable. It acknowledges that each landscape scene has its own character and intrinsic qualities that give it meaning to the viewer. The Great Western Trail corridor passes through landscapes of natural, rural, and urban environments. The Trail often is located in more natural appearing settings on public lands, pastoral or agriculture settings on adjacent private or county lands, and more urban settings closer to population centers. As much of the Great Western Trail is located on public lands, much of the trail foreground and middle ground views, as well as some of the background views can be found in more natural appearing settings. Managing the scenery views from Great West- ern Trail routes located on county or private lands may require a more concerted cooperative effort from trail partners. The area of scenery management would need to be addressed more fully if the Great Western Trail receives National Trail status.

TABLE 6 NATIONAL FORESTS, NATIONAL PARKS AND MONUMENTS AND MAJOR TRAILS IN VICINITY OF GREAT WESTERN TRAIL

Arizona Utah Idaho Wyoming Montana National Coronado, Dixie, Fishlake, Caribou, Bridger-Teton Gallatin, Forests Tonto, Manti-LaSal, Bridger-Teton, Beaverhead, Prescott, Uinta, Targhee, Deerlodge, Kaibab, Wasatch-Cache Salmon-Challis, Bitterroot, Coconino, Bitterroot, Lewis and Apache- Nez Perce, Clark, Flathead, Sitgreaves Clearwater, Lolo, Kootenai Idaho Panhandle National Grand Zion NP, Cedar Grand Teton Glacier NP Parks or Canyon NP Breaks NM, NP, Monuments Capitol Reef NP, Yellowstone NP Bryce Canyon NP, Grand Staircase- Escalante NM Major Highline Paiute ATV, Highline Wyoming Continental Trails National Bonneville National Range, Divide National Recreation Shoreline, Recreation Continental Scenic Trail, Trail, American Trail, Idaho Divide Great Divide Arizona Discovery State Snowmobile, Mountain Bike Trail Centennial Continental Route Trail, Route of Divide National The Hiawatha Scenic Trail

These are theoretical; actual forests, parks and trails the proposed Great Western Trail crosses will be dependent on site location of final trail route.

Source: USDA maps, State Trail Coordinators in Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana.

86 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

DEMOGRAPHICS Information concerning present socio-economic conditions along the trail corridor proposed for the Great Western Trail has been included in the study. Data collected from the five potential Great Western Trail States–Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana–have been included in this section. The Rocky Mountain region is the fastest-growing part of the United States1. Between April 1990 and July 1998, the population rose 23.1% to 16.8 million. Arizona claims the region’s greatest population with 4.7 million residents, followed by Utah (2.1 million), Idaho (1.2 million), Montana (880,453), and Wyoming (480,907). The region’s population tends to be clustered around the cities of Boise, Idaho; Billings and Missoula, Montana; Salt Lake City, Utah; and the communities of Phoenix and Tucson, Arizona. Southwestern and intermountain residents prize the outdoor opportunities available nearby, but the region’s scenic and recreational riches are also a great attraction to visitors from throughout the nation and the world.

TABLE 7 RESIDENT POPULATION2

Arizona Utah Idaho Wyoming Montana Population 4,668,631 2,099,758 1,228,684 480,907 880,453

VISITOR USE Information concerning the amount of recreation use on various National Forests can be estimated from existing data. The following National Forests nearby the proposed Great West- ern Trail were ranked in 1995 in terms of amount of visitor use from forests nationwide.

I feel that multiple use trails promote understanding between the various groups of trail users; be they motorized OHV users, equestrians, hikers, mountain bikers, skiers, or snowmobilers. –North Logan, UT

1 According to Census Bureau’s State Population Estimates and Demographic Components of Popu- lation Change: April 1, 1990 to July 1, 1998. 2 U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/State

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 87 TABLE 8 NATIONAL FOREST VISITOR USE

Rank State Forest Name RVD’s3 Visits4 1 Utah Wasatch-Cache/Uinta 10,518,000 32,520,000 2 Arizona Tonto 10,507,000 38,184,000 3 Arizona Coronado 9,903,000 11,305,000 10 Arizona Coconino 6,628,000 8,500,000 26 Utah Dixie 4,412,000 6,709,000 30 Montana Gallatin 3,954,000 4,943,000 62 Idaho Targhee 1,739,000 3,509,000 74 Montana Kootenai 1,617,000 4,045,000 89 Montana Deerlodge/Beaverhead 1,490,000 4,345,000

RECREATION TRENDS A discussion of current recreation use, future trends, and recreation needs in the areas affected by the proposed Great Western Trail is pertinent to this study. An examination of these factors will help in determining long-term viability and future projected use if a national trail designation is made. Nationally, demand for outdoor recreation is growing. Health and fitness movements, as well as technical improvements in lightweight footwear, fashionable and functional sportswear, and bicycle/mountain bike architecture and materials have resulted in tremendous growth in trail-related outdoor recreation activity. According to a study prepared for the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA),5 42.6 million Americans ages six and older went tent camping at least once in 1998 and 80.9 million were recreational walkers. Between 1983 and 1995, participation in hiking grew by 94%, backpacking by 73%, and off-highway driving by 44%, according to the 1997 State of the Industry Report prepared for the Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America (ORCA) and the SGMA. A look at outdoor recreation participation by ORCA found that in 1997 the United States could count 65 million people who went hiking at least once that year and nearly 9 million “enthusiasts,” who went hiking at least nine times. Recreation attitudes may be somewhat influenced by the large contingent of aging “baby boomers.” A momentous change is taking place in U.S. and world population demographics as boomers will continue to turn age 50 at the rate of 11,000 per day for the next 20 years, outnumbering 25-34 year olds by a staggering 18 million6. Many people are retiring from the work force at a young age, are physically active, have leisure time to pursue recreational activities, and enjoy the outdoors and natural environment.

3 A recreation visitor day (RVD) is a statistical reporting unit consisting of 12 visitor hours. A visitor hour is the presence of a person visiting the forest for a time period of 60 minutes. 4 Visits are defined as the entry of one person upon a national forest for the purpose of one or more recreational activities for an unspecified period of time. 5 SGMA Superstudy conducted by American Sports Data Inc., and released April 8, 1999. 6 1999 Coming of Age in the New Millennium, published in On-Site Fitness, Austin, Texas.

88 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L More specific to the western States included in the Great Western Trail proposal, a survey compiled during 1994-1995 by the Forest Service and SGMA found that 36.1% of those over 16 years old that live in Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana were active hikers. Another 16.9% of those surveyed took part in off-highway driving; 12.8% participated in backpacking; 8.7% participated in horseback riding; 4% took part in cross-country skiing, and 2.9% took part in snowmobiling. Even with the use of survey results, it is difficult to fully grasp the recreation effects of people living in States along the proposed Great Western Trail, since the amount of information available varies considerably by State. In some States there is no recent data; in others, no data has been compiled. Based on other national trails, 80% of use on national trails is generated from within the trail State, with 20% of the users residing in outside States and foreign countries. The section below includes data relating to recreation trends available at the time this study was prepared.

Arizona Many recreation participation levels are increasing even faster than the population. The fastest-growing activities are bird watching, hiking, backpacking, primitive area camping, and off-highway vehicle driving.7 According to 1997 survey information, more than 85% of all trail users in Ari- zona used a trail dur- Arizona. River, Verde Rock at Needle ing the previous 12 months, which translates to approximately 3 million Arizonans on the State’s trails and back roads during that year. Older trail users and people with disabilities increasingly seek outdoor experiences, and this is affecting recreation management and facility design. Ease of access and motorized recreation are especially important to these trail users. In the draft Arizona Trails 20008 survey published in April 1999, 56% of those surveyed identified themselves as non-motorized trail users; 21% said they regularly participate in off- highway vehicle activities; 19% said they regularly backpack; 13% said they are regularly involved in equestrian activities; 3% said they snowmobile; and 23% identified themselves as non-users of trails. On average, according to the survey, Arizonans spend 21 days a year on

7 1997 USDA Forest Service Assessment of Outdoor Recreation and Environment. 8 Prepared by Arizona State Parks.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 89 trails. Of the non-motorized trail users, 92% voiced support for developing new trails in the State, with 72% in support of developing new trails for motorized use. All trail users responded that they “enjoy remote areas more” but most often participate in trail activities “in the city” and “just outside the city.” The four main funding priorities identified for all trail users in this State are to maintain existing trails, develop trail information, develop support facilities, and develop new trails. When asked “Do you drive vehicles off- highway (on unpaved roads) for other recreational activities such as sightseeing or accessing trails?” 52% of all respondents replied that they did. For motorized trail users, the percentage was 71%; for non-motorized trail users, 60%; and non-users, 16%. The majority of respondents said that trails should be designated for multiple activities as long as motorized uses were separated from non-motorized uses. Non-motorized trail users (24%) were more likely to say that trails should be designated for a single activity; motorized trail users (17%) were more likely to favor combining uses on trails9. The 1990 Arizona OHV Fuel Study estimated that there were over 500,000 off-highway vehicles in Arizona at that time. A vehicle ownership study has not been conducted since then, but there are several indications that the number of OHVs is increasing. Nationwide, industry experts report that slightly more than half of all vehicles sold are sport utility vehicles or light pick-ups. In Arizona, sales reports show a steady increase in new ATVs sold between 1995 (3,518) and 1998 The whole thing 10 appears to be a (7,531), an average increase in sales of 28.8% . The 1990 study road geared estimated that there were 280,000 4x4 vehicles; 127,000 motor- toward a back cycles; 72,000 ATVs; 16,000 dune or sand buggies; and 11,318 country road snowmobiles in use in the State. experience. I have no objection to this idea, in fact, it Utah seems like a good Utah’s latest outdoor recreation data is based on the Statewide one, as long as Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) prepared in the funding comes 1992. Public meetings were held throughout the State to help de- from the proper termine the sense and direction of outdoor recreation. The ten top source. –Phoenix, AZ statewide recreation issues identified were:

1. Establishment and provision of new stable funds source. 2. Improvement of outdoor recreation ethics. 3. Comprehensive planning, allocation, and use of natural resources. 4. Recreation activity conflicts. 5. Tourism’s link with recreation resources. 6. Interagency coordination, communication, and cooperation. 7. Designated wilderness. 8. Protection and preservation of cultural, historic, prehistoric sites, and resources. 9. Water-based recreation accessibility. 10. Development, integration, and improvement of trail systems for motorized and non- motorized transportation.

9 1998 Draft Highlights of Survey Results, Arizona Trails 2000, pg. 5. 10 1998 Motorcycle Industry Council.

90 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L The SCORP found that fishing, hunting, golf, walking, and driving/ sightseeing were preferred “individual activities” whereas camping, fishing, and picnicking were the most popular “family activities.”11 Two other items were identified during the study that relate to

proposed Great West- Wyoming. skiing in Cross-country ern Trail designation. A critical need was recognized to develop and fund State sources of revenue for leisure developments. The SCORP report also recognized that while volunteerism and private enterprise support has grown, restoring government support for leisure services and facilities would assist in handling the burgeoning demand and overburdened recreation structure12. Visitor trail counts on the Paiute ATV Trail and adjacent Great Western Trail areas in southern Utah are also on an upward trend. Approximately 41,000 trail users were documented in 1998, compared with 51,000 users in 1999, an overall increase of 29%. Utah data lists 22,543 snowmobiles registered in the State. Many of the groomed snowmobile trails are located on Forest Service lands. There are over 750 miles of snowmobile trails in Utah. The number of individuals participating in OHV recreation continues to increase substantially each year. In 1998, 68,694 ATVs and motorcycles were registered, showing a marked increase from 49,000 during 198613. OHV use is recognized as a legitimate recreational activity on public lands. The need for proper management to improve resource protection, monitor trail use, and improve safety was noted in the 1992 Utah SCORP. It was noted With limited resources, why are we that many communities are now marketing for OHV opportuni- trying to find new ties (winter and summer) to both residents and non-residents. ways to spend more The State supports implementing a statewide master plan for trails money? designated for motorized transportation as well as non-motor- –Gooding, ID ized transportation. Since the Great Western Trail runs through the length of the middle of the State, the 1992 SCORP notes that it is desirable to have as many trails as possible supporting or complementing the Great Western Trail. In all cases, the goal is to have trail managers working cooperatively in an organized and consistent manner throughout the State14.

11 1992 Utah State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, State of Utah Natural Resources, pg. 147. 12 Ibid, pg. 99. 13 Utah Division of Parks and Recreation. 14 1992 Utah State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, State of Utah Natural Resources, pg. 252.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 91 Idaho The Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Plan (SCORTP)15 published in Idaho in May 1997 reported that about 60% of the State’s outdoor recreation participation is attributed to out-of-State visitors. According to an earlier study during 1986-1987, 38.4% of Idaho households had at least one person participate in day hiking, 18.5% in horseback riding, 16.7% in off-highway motorcycling, 13% in ATV, 11.7% in overnight hiking, 11.4% in snowmobiling, 8.9% in mountain biking, 3.8% in horse camping with stock, 2.9% in horse camping without stock, 2% in 4x4 off-highway driving, and 1% in dune buggy riding. While the 1997 SCORTP did not break out household participation, it noted a need for maintaining the State’s existing trail system, which reportedly lost about 1,340 miles of summer trails between 1978 and 1990 as a result of a lack of trail maintenance staff and funding. Additionally, the study noted a short supply of semi-primitive motorized recreation and that there is great demand for trails throughout the State. Specifically, the study noted that there are few opportunities for four-wheelers and ATVs in Idaho and that more need to be created. In 1998 in the State of Idaho, 14,829 trail bikes were registered. ATV registrations increased 94% in Idaho from 1995 to 1998, from 11,327 registrations in 1995 to 21,928 in 1998. Snowmobile registrations increased about 9%, from 31,869 registrations in 1995 to 34,647 registrations in 199816.

Wyoming Wyoming has no participation figures available to track numbers of hikers, equestrians, or backpackers. Off-highway vehicles are not registered, and Wyoming officials do not have available information for how many there are in use in the State. Snowmobile use is tracked through a decal program. During the winter of 1997-98, the State sold 17,800 decals to State residents, 10,448 to non-residents, and 951 to outfitters17.

Montana The 1994 Montana Trail Users Study18 indicated that 70% of the State’s residents participate in walking or day hiking each year, while 19.6% participate in four-wheeling, 17.5% in horseback riding, 15.3% in snowmobiling, 14.4% in mountain biking, 14.4% in cross-country skiing, 14.4% in backpacking, 11.8% in ATV use, and 9.1% in motorcycling. Of the mountain bikers, 9.9% cited a lack of trails for not pursuing their sport more often. More recently in 1998, Montana registered 18,953 off-highway vehicles - an increase of 12.2% from 1997 and a sharp rise from 7,399 in 199019. In 1998 the State registered 20,401 snowmobiles, up from 15,142 in 1991, showing an increase of 35%20. Of those who reported an interest in motorcycling for the 1994 users study, 14.2% said a lack of access and restrictions prevented them from participating more often, while 16.9% of the ATV users said restrictions prevented them from participating more frequently. Nearly

15 Prepared by the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation. 16 Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation. 17 Wyoming Division of State Parks and Historic Sites. 18 Prepared by the University of Montana’s Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research. 19 Montana Department of Justice, Title and Registration Bureau. 20 Ibid.

92 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 70% of the snowmobilers contacted for the survey said they preferred backcountry trails, as opposed to dirt road and public trails, for their sport. There is also interest in establishing long distance mountain bike routes. Adventure Cy- cling Association, a nonprofit national cycling organization based in Montana, reported that map sales for the multi-State Great Divide Mountain Bike Route have totaled around 9,600 since 1996. They estimate that around 4,000 mountain bikers have ridden at least parts of the border-to-border bike trail. Under the 1996 draft Montana State Trails Plan21, currently being finalized, officials noted a need for both more urban and backcountry trails and expressed a desire to have “one of the best long distance trail systems in the country, a well-balanced network which provides opportunities for all types of users.”22 The report also encouraged working with neighboring States on trail connections.

SUMMARY In conclusion, demand for outdoor recreation is rising. Recreation participation levels are increasing and there is increased demand and interest in recreation opportunities, especially close to home. Hiking continues to be one of the most popular outdoor recreation activities. There has also been a steady increase in the use of off-highway vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, motorcycles, and snowmobiles and this trend is expected to continue into the future.

ANTICIPATED TRAIL USE The existing Great Western Trail has so far assumed the characteristics of a chameleon, maintaining flexibility and chang- ing form to best adapt to specialized, local conditions and needs. We all may need to This characteristic of flexibility could be considered an impor- compromise on some tant trail asset. things. But we must In Arizona the existing and proposed routes can accommo- all respect each other date hikers, bicyclists, equestrians, and off-highway vehicle us- and our environment. I would encourage ers and there is much interest and support for maintaining mo- designation of the torized trails. Many of the primary users of a designated Great Great Western Trail as Western Trail route in Arizona would continue to access the a National Trail Sys- trail using motorized means of transportation, followed closely tem. by bicyclists and equestrians. A primary trail corridor with side –Hyrum, UT connector trails – rather than a network of trails with separate trail use designations – is well accepted and supported in Ari- zona. In contrast, in Utah, Idaho, and Wyoming, a multiple trail corridor concept is popular. Trail user groups have shown confidence in this approach and support its ability to succeed. Under this scenario, no one specific trail user type is dominant. Most likely, trail use would continue to be well diversified among hikers, bicyclists, equestrians, cross-country skiers, snowmobilers, and other motorized users.

21 Prepared by Parks Division, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. 22 Draft Montana State Trails Plan, page 33.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 93 In Montana and northern Idaho, the Great Western Trail shared-use concept has only recently been introduced. While many users have submitted comments in support of the Great Western Trail, others are strongly opposed. Emphasis on upcoming Lewis and Clark bicenten- nial celebrations in the State may be affecting interest in pursuing designation of the Great Western Trail. The Great Western Trail will, most likely, continue to see a gradual increase in popularity as segments are added and publicized regardless of national designation. If added to the Na- tional Trails System, however, the notoriety and uniqueness of this trail could provoke widespread curiosity and interest.

TRAIL CONFLICT According to trail user studies, trail conflict most often occurs when issues of user safety or protection of natural resources go unresolved. Two of the most serious threats to quality trail experiences on shared-use trails are crowding and conflict, and each of these depends on individual interpretations of past, present, and future contacts with others. Jacob and Schreyer23 theorize that the level of intensity of participation, personal sensitivity to resources, expectations of the natural environment, and lifestyle tolerance for diversity are major factors affecting individual experiences in an outdoor recreation setting. Most people who participate in outdoor recreation activities naturally hope to gain certain rewards or outcomes,24 including expe- riencing solitude, challenge, being with friends or family, testing skills, enjoying nature, or other outcomes. People participating in the same types of activities, or even the same individual on different outings may have different expectations. A shared-use trail is typically defined as any trail that is used by more than one user group, for more than one trail activity, or for different modes of transportation. Even single-use trails may be used for more than one style of a single activity. Hikers, backpackers, trail runners, skiers, or snowshoers may use a trail designated for pedestrians. Conflict is possible among any or all of these trail users. Therefore, in the broadest sense, all trails are multiple-use trails that are being shared to some extent25.

APPROPRIATENESS OF MOTORIZED USE Many segments of the established Great Western Trail in Arizona and Utah are located on existing roads and trails that are currently open to motorized use. The Arizona State Parks has taken a lead role in coordinating with other land management agencies in responding to the interest and need for trails, including motorized trail routes. Utah State Parks and Recreation has also taken a pro-active position in meeting demand for development of a wide base of recreation opportunities that includes motorized uses. Public land management agencies also recognize the need to provide a balanced recreation base that encourages good stewardship of

23 Jacob, G. R. & R. Schreyer (1980) Conflict in Outdoor Recreation: A theoretical perspective. Journal of Leisure Research, 12; 368-380. 24 Vroom, V. H. (1964) Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 25 Conflicts on Multiple-Use Trails: Synthesis of the Literature and State of the Practice, North Carolina State University at Raleigh, Dept. of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, 1994.

94 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L the land while serving the public need. As the vision for the Great Western Trail includes accommodating a wide variety of trail users, some motorized use is inherently intended.

Off-Highway Vehicles The use of all-terrain three or four wheeled vehicles (ATV’s), motorcycles, trail or dirt bikes, snowmobiles, and off-trail vehicles (4x4’s) are all included in a class of vehicles termed off-highway vehicles (OHV’s). These are motor vehicles designed primarily for non-highway travel in natural terrain. Most States have OHV programs to guide outdoor recreationists and public land managers in making responsible choices to enhance OHV recreation. OHV recreation on public lands has increased significantly during the past 30 years. The mission of State and Federal OHV programs is to develop educational programs that promote resource protection, social responsibility, and interagency cooperation. State motor vehicle laws apply on many Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management roads, meaning that vehicles must be registered and drivers licensed. A general rule of thumb is if a passenger car can use the road, the vehicle needs to be “street legal” i.e. registered and licensed. ATVs are not designed for operation on paved surfaces and it is unsafe to operate them on paved roads. Some public roads and trails, however, are open to unlicensed recreational motor vehicles. Each agency that manages public land has separate rules, regulations, and laws to enforce and these may differ dependent on the area. Most OHV use on public land is restricted to established roads and trails. Motor vehicles cannot be operated cross-country on public lands where prohibited by rule or regulation, or on private lands where closures are posted. Some areas have seasonal closures to protect wet roads, wildlife breeding, or nesting areas. The operation of an off-highway vehicle requires skill and good judgment. If the Great Western Trail were designated as a new National Trail, travel along the route would adhere to local regulations and rules.

National Trail System and Motorized Use The National Trails System Act, Section 7 (j) states:

“Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian activities, trail biking, overnight and long distance backpacking, snowmobiling.... Vehicles which may be permitted on certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles, bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off- road vehicles.”

The National Trail System Act (Section 7 (c)) specifically prohibits motorized use on Na- tional Scenic Trails. Several exceptions to this condition have been included in legislative amendments over the years to accommodate temporary We believe the primary purpose of trail routes for National Scenic Trails on existing such an effort is to make it easier roads until alternate non-motorized trail routes are for motorized vehicles to damage completed. Other amendments have authorized yet more of our mountains and winter snowmobile use on designated National valleys. Please go away. –Logan, UT Scenic Trails to accommodate pre-existing condi-

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 95 tions or address local concerns. With or without exception, however, the intent was to provide a non-motorized use for National Scenic Trails. The National Trail System Act does allow for pre-existing motorized use on designated National Historic Trails. Also, the Na- tional Trail System Act does not prohibit motorized use on National Recreation Trails. Because the focus of the newly proposed National Discovery Trail classification is to link existing trail and road discovery routes for long-distance recreational use, motorized use would most appropriately be incorporated within this category of trails. As the purpose of the Great Western Trail is to provide non- exclusive opportunities for all types of trail users, it is logical that the Great Western Trail would be classified in a trail category that accommodates both non-motorized and motorized use, such as a National Discovery Trail. The more important consideration would be whether a new trail classification, such as a in Idaho. trail Nature National Discovery Trail, would provide a means for meeting a national trail need that could withstand the test of time. In light of the nationwide interest in trail development and steady increase in motorized recreation use, a National Discovery Trail concept that incorporates long-distance motorized recreation routes has merit.

ECONOMICS OF TOURISM As more and more Americans head outdoors for vacations and recreation retreats, attracting tourism and capturing a recreation market becomes economically more valuable for States.

Arizona In Arizona, tourism generated $9.2 billion in 1993 and $11.4 billion in 1997, according to the Arizona Hospitality Research and Resource Center at Northern Arizona University26. While national and State parks attracted 16% of the State’s 27 million visitors in 1997, hiking and biking activities lured 11%27.

26 Arizona Hospitality Research and Resource Center, Northern Arizona University, with data from D. K. Shifflet, U.S. De- partment of Commerce, National Park Service Statistical Abstract and the Arizona Department of Economic Security. 27 Ibid.

96 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Data collected by the Travel Industry Association of America shows that in 1996, tourism in Arizona supported 138,000 jobs providing nearly $2.4 billion in wages and salaries, while travel spending generated more than $1.2 billion in tax revenue for Federal, State, and local governments28.

Utah In 1996, tourists spent $3.6 billion in Utah. This provided for nearly 61,000 jobs generat- ing wages and salaries of nearly $959 million and nearly $618 million in Federal, State, and local tax revenues29. While Utah’s ski resorts lured 3.1 million visitors during the winter of 1997-1998, the State’s national parks, national monuments and recreation areas drew an estimated 9.5 million visitors30.

Idaho In Idaho, domestic and international travel spending reached nearly $1.9 billion in 1996 and generated nearly 24,000 jobs with I sacrifice a significant amount of $297 million in wages and salaries. $260 million was generated in income to live in 31 Federal, State, and local tax revenues . Tourism is currently Idaho’s Montana close to third-leading industry, according to the State travel department. land unspoiled by man’s intrusions. I Wyoming am adamantly Domestic and international travel in Wyoming in 1996 to- opposed to any promotion of ORV taled $1.5 billion, which provided for 25,000 jobs. Wyoming tour- use, except on ism generated wages and salaries totaling more than $282 million existing roads. and nearly $149 million in Federal, State, and local tax revenues32. Montana does not need the Great Montana Western ATV Trail. –Helena, MT Domestic and international travel in Montana in 1996 totaled more than $1.7 billion, providing for 26,400 jobs generat- ing $297.3 million in wages and salaries. Another $188 million in Federal, State, and local tax revenues was generated33.

28 1996 Impact of Travel on State Economics, pp. 21, prepared for the Travel Industry Association of America, Washington, D.C. 29 Ibid., pp. 62. 30 1999 Economic Report to the Governor, Tourism, Travel and Recreation, Utah Division of Travel Development, www.ce.ex.State.ut.us/travel/Facts/facts.html. 31 1996 Impact of Travel on State Economies, pp. 30, prepared for the Travel Industry Association of America, Washington, D.C. 32 Ibid., pp. 68. 33 Ibid., pp. 44.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 97 Nearby Community Populations

ARIZONA Apache Junction 18,100 Cameron 493 Camp Verde 6,243 Carefree 1,666 Cave Creek 2,925 Clarkdale 2,144 Cottonwood 5,918 Dudleyville 1,356 Flagstaff 45,857 Florence 7,510 Fountain Hills 10,030 Fredonia 1,207 Hayden 909 Kayenta 4,372 Kearny 2,262 Lochiel n.a. Mammoth 1,845 Nogales 19,489 Phoenix 983,403 San Manuel 4,009 Sedona 7,720 Sierra Vista 32,983 Tuba City 7,323 Tucson 405,390 Williams 2,532 Winkelman 676

UTAH Avon n.a. Cannonville 131 Cedar City 13,443 Duchesne 1,308 Ephraim 3,363 Escalante 818 Garden City 193 Hanksville n.a. Heber 4,782 Helper 2,148 Hiawatha 43 Kanab 3,289 Loa 444 Logan 32,762 Nephi 3,515 Ogden 63,909 Panguitch 1,444 Paradise 561 Park City 4,468 Pleasant Grove 13,476 Price 8,712 Provo 86,835 Richfield 5,593 Salina 1,943 Salt Lake City 159,936 Scofield 43 Spanish Fork 11,272 Teasdale n.a. Tucker n.a.

IDAHO Ashton 1,114 Bancroft 393 Franklin 478 Georgetown 558 Island Park 159 Kellogg 2,591 Montpelier 2,656 Paris 581 Pierce 746 Preston 3,710 Soda Springs 3,111 Victor 292

WYOMING Afton 1,394

MONTANA Boulder 1,316 Bozeman 22,660 Butte 33,336 Darby 625 Dillon 3,991 Eureka 1,043 Helena 24,569 Kalispell 11,917 Rexford 132 Townsend 1,635 Virginia City 142

Source: 1990 Government Census Population Data

98 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L SUMMARY Outdoor recreation based tourism can generate economically significant results. Designa- tion of the Great Western Trail as a National Trail may provide additional opportunities for growth or economic health of nearby service communities.

This is a great proposal. I am a handicapped person and the only way I have to enjoy our public land is by motorized trail vehicles. –Ulm, MT Devils Canyon, Arizona. Canyon, Devils

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 99 Map 12 Nearby Communities Arizona

100 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 13 Nearby Communities Utah

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 101 Map 14 Nearby Communities Eastern Idaho & Wyoming

102 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Map 15 Nearby Communities Montana & Northern Idaho

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 103 LAND OWNERSHIP The calculations of total trail mileages and their land ownership profiles were extracted from forest-wide and State-level computerized geographic information maps created by the Forest Service Intermountain Region Geometronics Team and the National Center of Excel- lence in GIS and Remote Sensing for the proposed Great Western Trail study. Landform characteristics, land ownership classifications, and geographic locators were projected onto a map base, and potential proposed Great Western Trail routes were then superimposed. Identifica- tion of potential routes was a coordinated effort that included State officials, forest service personnel, resource managers from several agencies, Tribal governments, organizations such as the Great Western Trail Association, and members of the public. In Arizona, one main trail route, two alternate routes, and one snowmobile route have been included in the study. Approximately 266 miles of trails are established as the Great West- ern Trail in Arizona. Another 108-mile segment that includes State trust lands, Forest Service, and private land in northern Arizona is proposed for signing in 2000. The area proposed for signing will include about 20 miles of non-Federal land where private landowners are working cooperatively with resource managers on Great Western Trail designation. Although no specific trail route has been determined south of Phoenix, a study area corridor has been identified. The study corridor includes a mix of Federal, State trust lands, county, and private lands. A southern Arizona Great Western Trail steward position, funded and super- vised cooperatively by the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and Arizona State Parks has recently been established to coordinate Great Western Trail efforts in southern Ari- zona. A cooperatively funded northern Arizona Great Western Trail steward position has been successfully coordinating Great Western Trail activities in northern Arizona for several years. The stewards work with local communities, agencies, and area private landowners to determine appropriate routes for the Great Western Trail. In the Parks and Jerome areas, for example, as in other areas, citizens and officials are working collaboratively to insure that community issues regarding Great Western Trail development are addressed. In Utah and eastern Idaho, a larger system of interconnected trail and road routes has been included in the study. Over 1,600 miles of trails are established as the Great Western Trail in Utah. Existing Great Western Trail routes are located on both trails and roads in Utah. These routes cross private, county, State, and Federally administered lands. Several options have been used successfully to provide access for trail use on non-Federal lands. These have included entering into agreements with counties and private landowners, purchasing rights-of-way, and in some isolated instances, relocating portions of the trail. In western Wyoming, the proposed trail route provides connections to popular existing trails and roads. Although no specific trail routes have been determined in Montana or northern Idaho, three broad trail corridors are included in the study. The study routes are located on Federal, State, county, Tribal, and private lands. The reader will note that the miles of trails illustrated in Table 9 in Utah are significantly greater than those of adjacent States with approximately the same land area. This is because the system of parallel or braided trails proposed for Utah and eastern Idaho results in a marked increase in the total number of trail miles. Three separate study corridors were identified in Montana and northern Idaho. The mileage from only one of the three study corridors in Mon-

104 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L tana and northern Idaho was used for calculation purposes, as the intent was to recommend one final single route rather than all three. In all, a total of 4,455 miles of trail have been proposed for inclusion in the Great Western Trail study. Tables 9, 10, and 11 follow which summarize trail miles for each State and separate trail miles by land ownership category. As these figures are derived from base maps of different scales, these mileages are approximate.

TABLE 9 GREAT WESTERN TRAIL MILES (BY STATE)

Proposed for Total Alternative Existing Year 2000 New State Miles+ Routes GWT Miles Dedication Proposed Arizona 1109 313 266 108 422 Utah 1860 1635 225 Idaho 796 796 Wyoming 315 315 Montana 375 *375 Swan Valley Route 425 Montana Wise River Route Montana & 540 N. Idaho Bitterroot Route

TOTAL 4455 313 1901 108 2133

+ Combines existing and proposed total miles * One Montana alternative was used in total calculation ATV rider in Utah. ATV

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 105 TABLE 10 TOTAL LAND OWNERSHIP PERCENTAGES

National Forest 64% Private 20% State/Other 5% B.L.M. 8% Tribal 3%

TOTAL 100%

TABLE 11 LAND OWNERSHIP MILES (BY STATE)

National State Forest Private State/Other BLM* Tribal TOTAL

Arizona 611 213 102 60 123 1109 Utah 1268 272 47 273 - 1860 Idaho 505 243 41 7 - 796 Wyoming 284 30 1 - - 315 Montana 203 154 18 - 375

TOTAL 2871 912 209 340 123 4455

* Includes Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument managed by the BLM.

106 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Environmental Consequences of the Alternatives ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ALTERNATIVES

This section examines potential effects of a national trail designation for the Great Western Trail on natural resources, heritage resources, the socio-economic environment, visitor experience, and trail administration. These effects provide a basis for comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives. Because of the conceptual nature of the alternatives, the length of the trail, and the uncer- tainty of the trail location in certain areas, particularly in northern Idaho and Montana, the potential consequences can only be addressed in general terms. The impact analysis primarily focuses on the effects of trail use should the Great Western Trail be designated a national trail. Under all alternatives, the Great Western Trail would generally follow existing roads and trails. Therefore, impacts resulting from new trail or road construction are not addressed in this study. If a Federal action, such as road or trail improvement or visitor facilities are proposed in con- junction with Great Western Trail designation, the responsible land management organization will assess these site-specific impacts in a management planning document. There would be no measurable cumulative impacts at this general planning level. Environmental consequences, as identified during preparation of a trail management plan, would be evaluated when management alternatives are analyzed.

NATURAL RESOURCES Under all alternatives, impacts to natural resources are not expected to be significant as the proposed trail would follow existing roads and trails. Using existing trails and roads would minimize the potential for impacts resulting from new construction. Potential adverse impacts on air quality, however, could occur with a significant increase in motorized trail use. Develop- ment of paths off the marked trail could damage fragile soils or vegetation, and unmonitored trespass on closed areas for resource protection could have a negative effect. These effects could be mitigated through measures identified in the trail management plan. With a national trail designation, a trail management plan would address specific resource and use issues on established trail routes, including issues associated with overnight use, increased trail use, or visitor requirements. Under a trail management plan, there is greater potential for monitoring and treatment of current resource problems. Regardless of trail designation, land management agencies and interested organizations will continue to actively resolve natural resource issues or concerns that arise through use of popular trail systems.

HERITAGE RESOURCES Heritage resources that might be affected by use of the trail include archaeological sites, structures, or artifacts. Traditional cultural properties, sacred American Indian sites, or special resource gathering areas may also be affected. Heritage resources could be inadvertently des-

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 109 ecrated by unknowing trail users. Vandalism and looting by artifact hunters could also occur. These impacts could be more severe with added public use on existing trails or roads or by making areas more accessible. Any activity related to trail use that harms important heritage resources would be considered a significant adverse impact. However, the inventory and protection of heritage resources along the trail corridor would result in a beneficial effect.

POTENTIAL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ADVERSE IMPACTS Measures can be recommended for all portions of the trail under all action alternatives. To protect fragile, sensitive, or sacred heritage sites, the proposed trail would avoid known sites. Protection plans or alternate routes would be developed to protect sensitive areas near the Great Western Trail. Archaeological and historical surveys should be completed to document features along the trail. Trail administrators could encourage inventories on private lands. Outreach in the areas of heritage education and interpretation could be made to encourage increased public stewardship of heritage sites. Trail management plans and enforcement of Federal laws and regulations would continue to protect heritage resources under all alternatives. With proper planning and implementation of necessary mitigation measures, impacts to heritage resources will be minor. If designated a national trail, completing comprehensive heritage inventories to identify locations of heritage sites would be a critical component of management planning. Segments of the trail should not be promoted for public use until heritage inventories for that segment are documented, sensitive areas determined, and a management plan describing culturally appropriate treatments for artifact and site feature presentation prepared. Sensitive archaeological areas could be monitored and maintained at low cost through volunteer programs.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT There are opportunities for economic benefit for major population centers as well as rural communities along the proposed trail corridor. One of the original concepts for the proposed Great Western Trail has been to provide support and encouragement for surrounding communities to increase connector trails and trailheads for community access, thus providing opportunities for economic development. Loop trails affiliated with the National Scenic Appalachian Trail have successful provided a tie and economic boost to local communities. Off- I would not be concerned that this idea has less highway Vehicle Jamborees on the Great Western Trail and support in, for example, Paiute ATV Trail near Fillmore, Utah have attracted hun- Idaho and Montana, than dreds of trail riders annually to the event, providing a sig- in Utah and Arizona. As nificant economic boost to the local economy. The huge the concept becomes expansion in mountain biking has lured bicyclists into smaller more developed and successful in Utah and communities along the Great Divide Mountain Bicycling Arizona, the rest will Trail, for instance, building local business. follow. –Idaho Falls, ID

110 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L VISITOR USE The task of anticipating the change in the amount of visitor trail use in response to a national trail designation and the effect of such use is, of course, somewhat speculative. Ease of trail accessibility; location in relation to significant scenic, natural, cultural or historical attractions; length of season; and the proximity to major population areas are some of the factors that may influence these projections. It can be generally assumed that visitor use would continue to rise. Increased public aware- ness of the trail through the media, the Internet, and other forms of publicity would almost certainly result in some increase in visitor use, as would trail markers, trail maps, and information. As the Great Western Trail Associa- tion and other grassroots organizations maintain a high interest in I am excited to publicizing and promoting use of the trail, they would most likely receive the continue to distribute trail information. The involvement of local outline of the trail organizations and national nonprofit groups, and the level of Great Western media attention and promotion by resource managers, would be Trail idea. As a hiker, skier, off- factors in determining the potential for future trail use. As a Na- road motorcyclist tional Trail, the Great Western Trail would likely receive more use and 4x4 owner, I than an undesignated trail recognized locally or statewide. see a place for all Generally, trail use would be expected to be greatest near more those uses on the densely populated areas and in scenic areas where access is relatively trail. –Helena, MT easy. Such areas include portions of the trail located near Tucson and Phoenix in Arizona, Salt Lake City and vicinity in Utah, West Yellowstone close to Yellowstone National Park, and the city of Hel- ena in Montana. Portions that closely follow popular existing trails – such as the Paiute ATV Trail in Utah, would probably receive higher levels of use than more remotely located portions of the trail corridor. Because of the broad geographic span of the trail corridor and year-round accessibility in the southern region, trail use would likely incorporate both winter and summer seasons. The potential to cross-country ski or snowmobile at higher elevations along the trail will undoubt- edly be a strong attraction to winter sports enthusiasts. Hikers, bicyclists, and off-highway vehicle recreationists using ATVs and motorcycles would be more likely to use the southern sections of the trail year-round and the northern sections solely during the summer months. It is anticipated that the majority of users would take short trips, including day hikes or rides, weekend visits, or possibly trips of up to one week. Although some individuals may attempt to cover longer portions of the trail segment by segment over a period of several years (as occurs along other long distance trail systems), fewer than 100 people per year would be expected to attempt the entire trail nonstop in one year. However, as much of the long distance trail user information is based upon data collected from the Appalachian Trail, the Pacific Crest Trail, or the Continental Divide Trail, a significant difference may be that those trails offer no end-to-end motorized access. Since portions of the proposed Great Western Trail may well be accessible to motor travel as well as non-motorized traffic, it is difficult to gauge the potential increase in use that may result from a national trail designation. Easier access could result in increases above what is normal when compared with traditional non-motorized trail use.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 111 Sycamore Canyon, Arizona. Sycamore

In projecting future use, it is important to note that trail planning may require constant reflection and adjustment as public land managers work to provide for trail user needs and visitor expectations. Backcountry mountain biking, for example, has increased as manufacturers provide improved products with full-suspension bicycles. Lighter, easier-handling snowmobiles that adapt to a wide variety of snow conditions have also spurred increased snowmobile sales and backcountry recreational use. A new invention - the all-terrain skate - is being adver- tised as the in-line skate equivalent to a sport utility vehicle, designed for skaters interested in a trail and backcountry experience. These factors will continue to influence trail use and visitor expectations.

LAND OWNERSHIP The proposed Great Western Trail follows existing trails and low standard roads, many of which are located on Federally administered Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management We are a family oriented club and lands. On Federally administered lands, the impact of linking would like areas that these together to manage as the Great Western Trail is not ex- four wheelers and pected to have a major effect. ATV’s can use. This is Great Western Trail routes will not be located on private a good environment property without the consent and permission of the landowner. to teach our children the values of the Landowner options for designating portions of the Great West- outdoors and their ern Trail on private property may include cooperative mutual own community skills. –Mesa, AZ

112 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L agreements between resource managers, land trusts, and landowners, purchased or donated easements, It is time for the Forest Service to stop allowing small, moneyed, or others means of compensation. special interest groups dictate Federal land acquisitions for National Trails what happens on our public have been limited to willing sellers since 1983. If lands. We need comprehensive purchased easements are acquired from willing land- recreational use plans that take owners, the cost can vary considerably dependent into consideration the fact that 90% of public land users want on the assessed value of the land. Rural or agricul- more trails closed to ORV’s and tural land parcels are generally assessed at lower val- snowmobiles, we want peace and ues, while subdivisions and suburban tracts adja- quiet in the woods, and clean air. I cent to larger metropolitan areas can be assessed at say NO to the Great Western Trail! high land values. These values could range from –Bozeman, UT $250 to $50,000 per acre. In northern Arizona adjacent to the Kaibab National Forest, for example, one rural land parcel assessed for easement acquisition for Great Western Trail use has an established total value of $300 per acre34. In comparison, for the Lolo, Bitterroot, Nez Perce, and Clearwater forests in Montana and northern Idaho, appraisals have been standardized which range from $250 - $500 per acre for unimproved recreation or cut over timber property to $1200 - $1625 per acre for low to high level residential development property. For all alternatives, private landowners can be included on trail advisory councils and in the planning for any segment of trail that affects their property. As is the case with the Appala- chian National Scenic Trail, active local and State protection for non-Federal lands along the trail corridor is preferred. Private property should be clearly marked along the trail. Trail segments should be promoted for public use only after trail maintenance and monitoring plans have been implemented. In instances where private landowners are not amenable to Great Western Trail designation, alternate trail routes will be identified. Approximately 912 miles of Great Western Trail are located on non-Federal lands. If easements were purchased for a recommended trail corridor width of 200 feet for all 912 miles, costs could total upwards of $10 million. However, it is more likely that some easements would be acquired through cooperative agreements or donations. Reduced Federal expense in lands adjustments would also be possible through agreement with counties, State agencies, and private organizations.

Please stop the Great Western Trail. This proposal threatens public wild lands and promotes destructive practices on our national forests. It is a very bad idea. –Helena, MT

34 Arizona State Land Department.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 113 Financial Resources FINANCIAL RESOURCES

Funds to create, operate, and maintain trails in Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Mon- tana come from various sources. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) authorized the Recreational Trail Program as a Federal-aid highway program. Recreational Trails Program funds are apportioned to States to provide and maintain recreational trails for both motorized and nonmotorized trail use. The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) replaced the National Recreational Trails Funding Program. Each State receives an apportionment based on percentage of national off-highway recreation fuel use. Significant funds have already been spent to develop and maintain established Great Western Trail segments.

TABLE 12 TOTAL RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS

FY 1993 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 TOTAL FY State Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation 1993-1999 Arizona $100,632 $270,236 $269,922 $542,088 $722,783 $1,905,661 Utah 108,352 216,166 214,643 430,542 574,056 1,543,759 Idaho 100,504 217,935 218,303 437,986 583,982 1,558,710 Wyoming 91,291 187,300 189,464 385,877 514,503 1,368,435 Montana 129,036 190,017 193,141 392,173 522,897 1,427,264

ARIZONA Arizona State Parks has been a strong financial partner in developing Great Western Trail sections in Arizona. In 1993, $44,000 was allocated through the State Recreational Trail Pro- gram to the Tonto and Prescott National Forests for trail signing. In 1996, $187,000 of State Off-Highway Vehicle Program funding was used to develop interpretation at the Sears-Kay Ruin as part of the Great Western Trail project. In 1997, $360,000 of State Parks-administered funding was used for stabilization and signing of portions of the trail in the Kaibab National Forest. The State Parks Advisory Board has approved a proposal that designates $200,000 toward trail development on the Kaibab National Forest in 1999. Arizona State Parks proposes to fund $22,000 to be split over three years ($7,300 per year) towards a Great Western Trail steward. The Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) funded $20,000 for salary of the part-time Great Western Trail Steward in 1998-1999. The BLM funding may be reduced in future years. The State Parks Advisory Board has approved an additional $100,000 in partnership funds for a southern region Great Western Trail Steward over a two-year pe- riod35. The nonprofit Great Western Trail Association has received over $4,000 in private contributions to help fund trail dedication ceremonies in Arizona36. Including partnership matches

35 Terry Heslin, Arizona State Parks Off-Highway Vehicle Program Coordinator, personal communication, June 30, 1999. 36 Gary Keller, Arizona Great Western Trail Association President, personal communication, June 30, 1999.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 117 in salary, office space, equipment, or supplies, close to $1,000,000 has been invested in the Great Western Trail in Arizona. In Arizona, the Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund and the Off-Highway Vehicle Rec- reation Plan were created by the legislature in 1991. These are funded through annual State motor-fuel tax revenues. The yearly amount allocated to recreation is around $1.6 million. About 30 percent of the money collected every year is used by the Arizona Game and Fish Department for education and law enforcement programs. A small percentage also is used to fund information programs. The rest goes to the State Parks Board for administration of programs and for pilot projects and grants. Eligible applicants include cities, towns, counties, Tribal governments, and Federal agencies. Eligible projects include funding OHV and snowmobile trailheads, restrooms, access improvements, and development of OHV use areas.

TABLE 13 GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FUNDING ARIZONA STATE PARKS

OHV Recreation Fund Awards/Expenditures

PROJECT NAME YEAR FOREST AMOUNT GWT Road Rehabilitation 1996 Tonto 1,100 GWT Sears-Kay Ruin Day Use Area 1996 Tonto 106,000 GWT Signs 1996 Tonto 16,000 GWT Interpretive Signs 1997 North Kaibab 83,906 GWT Route Signs 1997 North Kaibab 3,280 GWT Road Reconstruction 1997 North Kaibab 162,808 GWT Kiosks and Cattle Guards 1997 Tonto 20,350 GWT Dust Abatement 1997 Tonto 38,500 GWT Site Preparation 1998 Tonto 5,000 GWT Water Crossing 1998 Tonto 45,500 GWT Kiosk 1998 Tonto 600 GWT Barricades 1998 Tonto 1,500 GWT Stabilization 1999 Middle Kaibab 269,721 GWT Route Signs 1999 Middle Kaibab 4,626 WT Interpretive Signs 1999 Middle Kaibab 9,486 GWT Southern Arizona GWT Steward 1999 Coronado 100,000

TOTAL $868,377

I believe that such a trail would generate many adverse environmental consequences, not the least of which would be substantial noise pollution from operation of the vehicles. –Dallas, TX

118 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L TABLE 14 GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FUNDING ARIZONA STATE PARKS

Federal Recreational Trails Program Awards/Expenditures

PROJECT NAME YEAR FOREST AMOUNT GWT Signing 1993 Tonto & Prescott 43,000 GWT Decals 1993 Arizona State Parks 1,279 GWT Stabilization, Route Signs, 1996 South Kaibab 118,904 Interpretive Signs GWT Steward 1996 Coconino 3,511 GWT Stabilization, Route Signs, 1997 South Kaibab 60,877 Interpretive Signs GWT Steward 1997 Coconino 18,894 GWT Unallocated 1997 57,889

TOTAL $304,354

GRAND TOTAL (Tables 13 & 14) $1,172,731

UTAH Utah State Parks and Recreation, a division of the Utah Department of Natural Resources, provides a matching funds program for trails construction projects sponsored by public lands agencies. Funds are applied for and granted on a competitive basis. Since 1990, Great Western Trail construction projects have been funded by the State of Utah for a total of $ 460,695 on a 50-50 matching basis on the National Forests in Utah. Total value of all Great Western Trail projects was more than $1,000,000 including the Forest Service 50% match. Projects included trail construction and relocation, new trailheads, bridges, and signing. The Boy Scouts of America’s Utah National Parks Council, headquartered in Provo, Utah, has developed an Adventure Award based on the Great Western Trail. Any registered Boy Scout with the rank of First Class or higher can apply for the Great Western Trail Summer and Winter Adventure Award Program. Each applicant is required to spend at least one night on the Trail, demonstrate “Leave No Trace” skills, and perform a minimum of two hours of service work on the Trail. Two other Boy Scout Councils in Utah are considering the adoption of this program. In Utah, counties may impose a tourism, recreational, cultural, and convention tax, with the revenues used for tourism promotion, development, operation, and maintenance of facilities. Various State funds, such as the Travel Council Destination Tourism Program and the Community Economic Development Fund, also are available in Utah for tourism needs. In 1987, the Utah Legislature also authorized a matching grant program to help Federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service manage the needs of OHV users on public lands. The State Off-highway Vehicle Advisory Council reviews all projects. The Utah Recreational Trails Act of 1991 directs Utah State Parks and Recreation to coordinate development of a statewide network of non-motorized trails, and provides funding for the planning, acquisition, and construction of these trails. The Recreational Trails Advisory Council advises the State Parks and Recreation Division on non-motorized trails. Its members

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 119 represent hikers, cyclists, cross-country skiers, and equestrians, as well as the Forest Service and BLM. This council reviews grant requests and ranks proposed trail projects. In 1997, the Utah Legislature passed the Centennial Nonmotorized Paths and Trail Cross- ings Program that provides matching funds (up to 50%) for State, county, and municipal projects that provide trails and paths around major highways and other substantial impediments for equestrians, hikers, cyclists, and other human-powered vehicles.

TABLE 15 GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FUNDING UTAH STATE PARKS MATCHING FUNDS

Non-Motorized Great Western Trail Funding

PROJECT NAME YEAR FOREST DISTRICT AMOUNT Great Western Trail Phase I 1991 Wasatch-Cache Logan RD 5,000 Great Western Trail Phase II 1991 Wasatch-Cache Salt Lake RD 12,000 Great Western Trail Phase II 1992 Wasatch-Cache Logan RD 5,000 Great Western Trail (Bues Canyon) 1992 Wasatch-Cache Ogden RD 20,000 Great Western Trail (Timponeke Tie) 1992 Uinta Pl Grove RD 2,000 Great Western Trail (Salt Lake Phase II) 1992 Wasatch-Cache Salt Lake RD 32,500 Great Western Trail Logan Phase III 1993 Wasatch-Cache Logan RD 10,000 Great Western Trail (Wheeler Creek) 1993 Wasatch-Cache Ogden RD 25,000 Great Western Trail (Wasatch Crest) 1993 Wasatch-Cache Salt Lake RD 46,500 Great Western Trail Trailhead 1994 Wasatch-Cache Logan RD 18,250 Great Western Trail Statewide Signing 1995 Uinta Pl Grove RD 5,000 Great Western Trail (Lamb to Parleys) 1995 Wasatch-Cache Salt Lake RD 11,500 Great Western Trailhead (Art Norde) 1998 Wasatch-Cache Ogden RD 16,200

TOTAL $208,950

I used to backpack a lot. But for health reasons cannot anymore. I get out to enjoy the outdoors on my ATV. But I find most areas off limits. –Payson, AZ

120 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L TABLE 16 GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FUNDING UTAH STATE PARKS MATCHING FUNDS

Motorized Great Western Trail Funding

PROJECT NAME YEAR FOREST DISTRICT AMOUNT Paiute ATV Trail/Phase I 1989 Fishlake Richfield RD 15,000 Great Western Trail/Fishlake 1990 Fishlake Richfield RD 4,000 Paiute ATV Trail Phase II 1992 Fishlake Richfield RD 20,500 Great Western Trail Johns Valley Trail 1993 Dixie Escalante RD 12,500 Great Western Trail Reroute 1993 Dixie Teasdale RD 48,000 Paiute ATV Trail Phase III 1993 Fishlake Richfield RD 22,000 Paiute ATV Interconnect Trail 1993 Fishlake Beaver RD 3,960 Great Western Trail ATV Cattle Guards 1994 Fishlake Richfield RD 2,750 Great Western Trail Spur Trailhead 1994 Uinta Pl Grove RD 46,000 Great Western Trail Trailhead 1994 Fishlake Richfield RD 13,385 Paiute ATV Trail Phase IV 1994 Fishlake Richfield RD 20,500 Great Western Trail Statewide Signing 1995 Uinta Pl Grove RD 5,000 Paiute ATV Trail 1995 Fishlake Richfield RD 5,000 Paiute ATV Trail Signing 1995 Fishlake Richfield RD 5,000 Great Western Trail Gold Hill/Chicken 1995 Wasatch-Cache Salt Lake RD 11,500 Paiute ATV Data Collection 1996 Fishlake Richfield RD 6,000 Paiute ATV Trail 1996 Fishlake Beaver RD 1,750 Paiute ATV Cattle Guards 1998 Fishlake Beaver RD 3,900 Great Western Trail 1998 Fishlake Loa RD 5,000

TOTAL $251,74

GRAND TOTAL (Tables 15 & 16) $460,695

IDAHO In Idaho, officials formerly used matching grants through their share of Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars for parks and recreation needs. Over the years, more than $33 million in LWCF funding – and a match in private donations of cash, labor, and materials – has been used in I am concerned Idaho for recreation. This could serve as a potential funding source that existing for Great Western Trail projects as projects funded by the grants range non-motorized trails will be- from construction of greenbelts and neighborhood parks to bicycle come motorized and hiking trails. However, no LWCF revenues have been available trails. nationwide for State distribution since 1995. Currently, the State re- –Frenchtown, MT

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 121 lies on Federal Recreational Trails Program funding as well as gasoline tax revenues to fund non-motorized and motorized trails needs.

WYOMING In Wyoming, there are few funding mechanisms in place for trails. However, the State does generate revenues from its snowmobile decal program for grooming and signing programs. Additionally, it applies annually for Federal highway funds to help with grooming, signing, and safety patrols, and receives a share of State gasoline taxes for the snowmobile program.

MONTANA Montana officials use grant programs funded through percentage of gas tax receipts administered through the State Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks for off-highway vehicle and snowmobile projects. The State also uses the Federal Recreational Trails Fund Program for both motorized and non-motorized trails. Much of this money is funneled through the State’s Community Transportation Enhancement Program to projects selected by local communities. Montana officials noted in their 1996 draft State trails plan that there is a lack of funding for non-motorized trails.

We have some concerns about use on the trail; watershed damages, sanitation, and pollution. We would hope these concerns are addressed as the trail is developed. –Preston, ID Trail hiking in Wyoming. hiking in Trail

122 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Appendices APPENDIX A

SELECTED PORTIONS OF NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT

THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM ACT (P.L. 90-543) (16 U.S.C. 1241 et. seq.) as amended through P.L. 104-333, November 12, 1996

AN ACT

To establish a national trails system, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SHORT TITLE

SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as the “National Trails System Act”.

STATEMENT OF POLICY

SEC. 2.(a) In order to provide for the ever-increasing outdoor recreation needs of an expanding population and in order to promote the preservation of, public access to, travel within, and enjoyment and appreciation of the open-air, outdoor areas and historic resources of the Nation, trails should be established (i) primarily, near the urban areas of the Nation, and (ii) secondarily, within scenic areas and along historic travel routes of the Nation which are often more remotely located.

(b) The purpose of this Act is to provide the means for attaining these objectives by instituting a national system of recreation, scenic and historic trails, by designating the Appala- chian Trail and the Pacific Crest Trail as the initial components of that system, and by prescrib- ing the methods by which, and standards according to which, additional components may be added to the system.

(c) The Congress recognizes the valuable contributions that volunteers and private, nonprofit trail groups have made to the development and maintenance of the Nation’s trails. In recognition of these contributions, it is further the purpose of this Act to encourage and assist volunteer citizen involvement in the planning, development, maintenance, and management, where appropriate, of trails.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 125 NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM SEC. 3. (a) The national system of trails shall be composed of the following:

(1) National recreation trails, established as provided in section 4 of this Act, which will provide a variety of outdoor recreation uses in or reasonably accessible to urban areas.

(2) National scenic trails, established as provided in section 5 of this Act, which will be extended trails so located as to provide for maximum outdoor recreation potential and for the conservation and enjoyment of the nationally significant scenic, historic, natural, or cultural qualities of the areas through which such trails may pass. National scenic trails may be ocated so as to represent desert, marsh, grassland, mountain, canyon, river, forest, and other areas, as well as landforms which exhibit significant characteristics of the physiographic regions of the Nation.

(3) National historic trails, established as provided in section 5 of this Act, which will be extended trails which follow as closely as possible and practicable the original trails or routes of travel of national historic significance. Designation of such trails or routes shall be continuous, but the established or developed trail, and the acquisition thereof, need not be continuous onsite. National historic trails shall have as their purpose the identification and protection of the historic route and its historic remnants and artifacts for public use and enjoyment. Only those selected land and water based components of a historic trail which are on federally owned lands and which meet the national historic trail criteria established in this Act are included as Federal protection components of a national historic trail. The appropriate Secretary may certify other lands as protected segments of an historic trail upon application from State or local governmental agencies or private interests involved if such segments meet the national historic trail criteria established in this Act and such criteria supplementary thereto as the appropriate Secretary may prescribe, and are administered by such agencies or interests without expense to the United States.

(4) Connecting or side trails, established as provided in section 6 of this Act, which will provide additional points of public access to national recreation, national scenic or national historic trails or which will provide connections between such trails.

The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with appropriate governmental agencies and public and private organizations, shall establish a uniform marker for the national trails system.

(b) For purposes of this section, the term ‘extended trails’ means trails or trail segments which total at least one hundred miles in length, except that historic trails of less than one hundred miles may be designated as extended trails. While it is desirable that extended trails be

126 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L continuous, studies of such trails may conclude that it is feasible to propose one or more trail segments which, in the aggregate, constitute at least one hundred miles in length.

NATIONAL RECREATION TRAILS SEC. 4.(a) The Secretary of the Interior, or the Secretary of Agriculture where lands administered by him are involved, may establish and designate national recreation trails, with the consent of the Federal agency, State, or political subdivision having jurisdiction over the lands involved, upon finding that -

(i) such trails are reasonably accessible to urban areas, and, or

(ii) such trails meet the criteria established in this Act and such supplementary criteria as he may prescribe.

(b) As provided in this section, trails within park, forest, and other recreation areas administered by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture or in other federally administered areas may be established and designated as “National Recreation Trails” by the appropriate Secretary and, when no Federal land acquisition is involved -

(i) trails in or reasonably accessible to urban areas may be designated as “National Recreation Trails” by the appropriate Secretary with the consent of the States, their political subdivisions, or other appropriate administering agencies;

(ii) trails within park, forest, and other recreation areas owned or administered by State may be designated as “National Recreation Trails” by the appropriate Secretary with the consent of the State; and

(iii) trails on privately owned lands may be designated ‘National Recreation Trails’ by the appropriate Secretary with the written consent of the owner of the property involved.

NATIONAL SCENIC AND NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS SEC. 5.(a) National scenic and national historic trails shall be authorized and designated only by Act of Congress. There are hereby established the following National Scenic and National Historic Trails: [a listing of 20 trails has been deleted]

(b) The Secretary of the Interior, through the agency most likely to administer such trail, and the Secretary of Agriculture where lands administered by him are involved, shall make such additional studies as are herein or may hereafter be authorized by the Congress for the purpose of determining the feasibility and desirability of designating other trails as national scenic or national historic trails. Such studies shall be made in consultation with the heads of other Federal agencies administering lands through which such additional proposed trails would pass and in cooperation with interested interstate, State, and local governmental agencies, public and private organizations, and landowners and land users concerned. The feasibility of desig-

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 127 nating a trail shall be determined on the basis of an evaluation of whether or not it is physically possible to develop a trail along a route being studied, and whether the development of a trail would be financially feasible. The studies listed in subsection (c) of this section shall be completed and submitted to the Congress, with recommendations as to the suitability of trail designation, not later than three complete fiscal years from the date of enactment of their addition to this subsection, or from the date of enactment of this sentence, whichever is later. Such studies, when submitted, shall be printed as a House or Senate document, and shall include, but not be limited to:

(1) the proposed route of such trail (including maps and illustrations);

(2) the areas adjacent to such trails, to be utilized for scenic, historic, natural, cultural, or developmental purposes;

(3) the characteristics which, in the judgment of the appropriate Secretary, make the proposed trail worthy of designation as a national scenic or national historic trail; and in the case of national historic trails the report shall include the recommenda- tion of the Secretary of the Interior’s National Park System Advisory Board as to the national historic significance based on the criteria developed under the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (40 Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 461);

(4) the current status of land ownership and current and potential use along the designated route;

(5) the estimated cost of acquisition of lands or interest in lands, if any;

(6) the plans for developing and maintaining the trail and the cost thereof;

(7) the proposed Federal administering agency (which, in the case of a national scenic trail wholly or substantially within a national forest, shall be the Depart- ment of Agriculture);

(8) the extent to which a State or its political subdivisions and public and private organizations might reasonably be expected to participate in acquiring the necessary lands and in the administration thereof;

(9) the relative uses of the lands involved, including: the number of anticipated visitor-days for the entire length of, as well as for segments of, such trail; the number of months which such trail, or segments thereof, will be open for recreation purposes; the economic and social benefits which might accrue from alternate land uses; and the estimated man-years of civilian employment and expenditures expected for the purposes of maintenance, supervision, and regulation of such trail;

(10) the anticipated impact of public outdoor recreation use on the preservation of a proposed national historic trail and its related historic and archeological

128 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L features and settings, including the measures proposed to ensure evaluation and preservation of the values that contribute to their national historic significance; and

(11) To qualify for designation as a national historic trail, a trail must meet all three of the following criteria:

(A) It must be a trail or route established by historic use and must be historically significant as a result of that use. The route need not currently exist as a discernible trail to qualify, but its location must be sufficiently known to permit evaluation of public recreation and historical interest potential. A designated trail should generally accurately follow the historic route, but may deviate somewhat on occasion of necessity to avoid difficult routing through subsequent development, or to provide some route variations offering a more pleasurable recreational experience. Such deviations shall be so noted on site. Trail segments no longer possible to travel by trail due to subsequent development as motorized transportation routes may be designated and marked onsite as segments which link to the historic trail.

(B) It must be of national significance with respect to any of several broad facets of American history, such as trade and commerce, exploration, migration and settlement, or military campaigns. To qualify as nationally significant, historic use of the trail must have had a far-reaching effect on broad patterns of American culture. Trails significant in the history of Native Americans may be included.

(C) It must have significant potential for public recreational use or historical interest based on historic interpretation and appreciation. The potential for such use is generally greater along roadless segments developed as historic trails and at historic sites associated with the trail. The presence of recreation potential not related to historic appreciation is not sufficient justification for designation under this category.

(c) The following routes shall be studied in accordance with the objectives outlined in subsection (b) of this section. [a list of 38 trails has been deleted]

(39) The Great Western Scenic Trail, a system of trails to accommodate a variety of travel users in a corridor of approximately 3, 100 miles in length extending from the Arizona-Mexico border to the Idaho-Montana-Canada border, following the approximate route depicted on the map identified as ‘Great Western Trail Corridor, 1988,’ which shall be on file and available for public inspection in the Office of the Chief of the Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture. The trail study shall be conducted by the Secretary of Agriculture, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, in accordance with subsection (b) and shall include -

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 129 (A) the current status of land ownership and current and potential use along the designated route;

(B) the estimated cost of acquisition of lands or interests in lands, if any; and

(d) The Secretary charged with the administration of each respective trail shall, within one year of the date of the addition of any national scenic or national historic trail to the system, and within sixty days of the enactment of this sentence for the Appalachian and Pacific Crest National Scenic Trails, establish an advisory council for each such trail, each of which councils shall expire ten years from the date of its establishment, except that the Advisory Council established for the Iditarod Historic Trail shall expire twenty years from the date of its establishment. If the appropriate Secretary is unable to establish such an advisory council because of the lack of adequate public interest, the Secretary shall so advise the appropriate com- mittees of the Congress. The appropriate Secretary shall consult with such council from time to time with respect to matters relating to the trail, including the selection of rights-of-way, standards for the erection and maintenance of markers along the trail, and the administration of the trail. The members of each advisory council, which shall not exceed thirty-five in number, shall serve for a term of two years and without compensation as such, but the Secretary may pay, upon vouchers signed by the chairman of the council, the expenses reasonably incurred by the council and its members in carrying out their responsibilities under this section. Members of each council shall be appointed by the appropriate Secretary as follows:

(1) the head of each Federal department or independent agency administering lands through which the trail route passes, or his designee;

(2) a member appointed to represent each State through which the trail passes, and such appointments shall be made from recommendations of the Governors of such States;

(3) one or more members appointed to represent private organizations, including corporate and individual landowners and land users, which in the opinion of the Secretary, have an established and recognized interest in the trail, and such appointments shall be made from recornmendations of the heads of such organizations: Pro- vided, That the Appalachian Trail Conference shall be represented by a sufficient number of persons to represent the various sections of the country through which the Appa- lachian Trail passes; and

(4) the Secretary shall designate one member to be chairman and shall fill vacancies in the same manner as the original appointment.

130 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L (e) Within two complete fiscal years of the date of enactment of legislation designating a national scenic trail, except for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail and the North Country National Scenic Trail, as part of the system, and within two complete fiscal years of the date of enactment of this subsection for the Pacific Crest and Appalachian Trails, the responsible Secretary shall, after full consultation with affected Federal land managing agencies, the Governors of the affected States, the relevant advisory council established pursuant to section 5(d), and the Appalachian Trail Conference in the case of the Appalachian Trail, submit to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, a comprehensive plan for the acquisition, management, development, and use of the trail, including but not limited to, the following items:

(1) specific objectives and practices to be observed in the management of the trail, including the identification of all significant natural, historical, and cultural resources to be preserved (along with high potential historic sites and high potential route segments in the ase of national historic trails), details of any anticipated cooperative agreements to be consummated with other entities, and an identified carrying capacity of the trail and a plan for its implementation;

(2) an acquisition or protection plan, by fiscal year for all lands to be acquired by fee title or lesser interest, along with detailed explanation of anticipated necessary cooperative agreements for any lands not to be acquired; and

(3) general and site-specific development plans including anticipated costs.

(f) Within two complete fiscal years of the date of enactment of legislation designating a national historic trail or the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail or the North Country National Scenic Trail as part of the system, the responsible Secretary shall, after full consultation with affected Federal land managing agencies, the Governors of the affected States, and the relevant Advisory Council established pursuant to section 5(d) of this Act, submit to the Com- mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, a comprehensive plan for the management, and use of the trail, including but not limited to, the following items:

(1) specific objectives and practices to be observed in the management of the trail, including the identification of all significant natural, historical, and cultural resources to be preserved, details of any anticipated cooperative agreements to be consummated with State and local government agencies or private interests, and for national scenic or national historic trails an identified carrying capacity of the trail and a plan for its implementation;

(2) the process to be followed by the appropriate Secretary to implement the marking requirements established in section 7(c) of this Act;

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 131 (3) a protection plan for any high potential historic sites or high potential route segments; and

(4) general and site-specific development plans, including anticipated costs.

CONNECTING AND SIDE TRAILS SEC. 6. Connecting or side trails within park, forest, and other recreation areas administered by the Secretary of the Interior or Secretary of Agriculture may be established, designated, and marked by the appropriate Secretary as components of a national recreation, national scenic or national historic trail. When no Federal land acquisition is involved, connecting or side trails may be located across lands administered by interState, State, or local governmental agencies with their consent, or, where the appropriate Secretary deems necessary or desirable, on privately owned lands with the consent of the landowners. Applications for approval and designation of connecting and side trails on non-Federal lands shall be submitted to the appropriate Secretary.

ADMINISTRATION AND DEVELOPMENT SEC. 7. (a) (1) (A) The Secretary charged with the overall administration of a trail pursuant to section 5(a) shall, in administering and managing the trail, consult with the heads of all other affected State and Federal agencies. Nothing contained in this Act shall be deemed to transfer among Federal agencies any management responsibilities established under any other law for federally administered lands which are components of the National Trails System. Any transfer of management responsibilities may be carried out between the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture only as provided under subparagraph (B).

(B) The Secretary charged with the overall administration of any trail pursuant to section 5(a) may transfer management of any specified trail segment of such trail to the other appropriate Secretary pursuant to a joint memorandum of agreement containing such terms and conditions as the Secretaries consider most appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this Act. During any period in which management responsibilities for any trail segment are transferred under such an agreement, the management of any such segment shall be subject to the laws, rules, and regulations of the Secretary provided with the management authority under the agreement except to such extent as the agreement may otherwise expressly provide.

(2) Pursuant to section 5(a), the appropriate Secretary shall select the rights-of-way for national scenic and national historic trails and shall publish notice thereof of the availability of appropriate maps or descriptions in the Federal Register; Provided, That in selecting the rights-of-way full consideration shall be given to minimizing the adverse effects upon the adjacent landowner or user and his operation. Development and management of each segment of the National Trails System shall be designed to harmonize with and complement any established multiple-use plans for the specific area in order to insure continued maximum benefits from the land. The location and width of such rights-of-way across Federal lands under the jurisdiction of another Federal agency shall be by agreement between the head of that

132 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L agency and the appropriate Secretary. In selecting rights-of-way for trail purposes, the Secretary shall obtain the advice and assistance of the States, local governments, private organizations, and landowners and land users concerned.

(b) After publication of notice of the availability of appropriate maps or descriptions in the Federal Register, the Secretary charged with the administration of a national scenic or national historic trail may relocate segments of a national scenic or national historic trail right-of- way with the concurrence of the head of the Federal agency having jurisdiction over the lands involved, upon a determination that: (i) Such a relocation is necessary to preserve the purposes for which the trail was established, or (ii) the relocation is necessary to promote a sound land management program in accordance with established multiple-use principles: Provided, That a substantial relocation of the rights-of-way for such trail shall be by Act of Congress.

(c) National scenic or national historic trails may contain campsites, shelters, and related-public-use facilities. Other uses along the trail, which will not substantially interfere with the nature and purposes of the trail, may be permitted by the Secretary charged with the administration of the trail. Reasonable efforts shall be made to provide sufficient access opportunities to such trails and, to the extent practicable, efforts be made to avoid activities incompatible with the purposes for which such trails were established. The use of motorized vehicles by the general public along any national scenic trail shall be prohibited and nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the use of motorized vehicles within the natural and historical areas of the national park system, the national wildlife refuge system, the national wilderness preservation system where they are presently prohibited or on other Federal lands where trails are designated as being closed to such use by the appropriate Secretary: Provided, That the Secretary charged with the administration of such trail shall establish regulations which shall authorize the use of motorized vehicles when, in his judgment, such vehicles are necessary to meet emergencies or to enable adjacent landowners or land users to have reasonable access to their lands or timber rights: Provided further, That private lands included in the national recreation, national scenic, or national historic trails by cooperative agreement of a landowner shall not preclude such owner from using motorized vehicles on or across such trails or adjacent lands from time to time in accordance with regulations to be established by the appropriate Secretary. Where a national historic trail follows existing public roads, developed rights-of-way or waterways, and similar features of man’s nonhistorically related development, approximating the original location of a historic route, such segments may be marked to facilitate retracement of the historic route, and where a national historic trail parallels an existing public road, such road may be marked to commemorate the historic route. Other uses along the historic trails and the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, which will not substantially interfere with the nature and purposes of the trail, and which, at the time of designation, are allowed by administrative regulations, including the use of motorized vehicles, shall be permitted by the Secretary charged with administration of the trail. The Secretary of the Interior and the Secre- tary of Agriculture, in consultation with appropriate governmental agencies and public and private organizations, shall establish a uniform marker, including thereon an appropriate and distinctive symbol for each national recreation, national scenic, and national historic trail. Where the trails cross lands administered by Federal agencies such markers shall be erected at appropriate points along the trails and maintained by the Federal agency administering the trail in

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 133 accordance with standards established by the appropriate Secretary and where the trails cross non-Federal lands, in accordance with written cooperative agreements, the appropriate Secre- tary shall provide such uniform markers to cooperating agencies and shall require such agencies to erect and maintain them in accordance with the standards established. The appropriate Secretary may also provide for trail interpretation sites, which shall be located at historic sites along the route of any national scenic or national historic trail, in order to present information to the public about the trail, at the lowest possible cost, with emphasis on the portion of the trail passing through the State in which the site is located. Wherever possible, the sites shall be maintained by a State agency under a cooperative agreement between the appropriate Secretary and the State agency.

(d) Within the exterior boundaries of areas under their administration that are included in the right-of-way selected for a national recreation, national scenic, or national historic trail, the heads of Federal agencies may use lands for trail purposes and may acquire lands or interests in lands by written cooperative agreement, donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds or exchange.

(e) Where the lands included in a national scenic or national historic trail right-of-way are outside of the exterior boundaries of federally administered areas, the Secretary charged with the administration of such trail shall encourage the States or local governments involved (1) to enter into written cooperative agreements with landowners, private organizations, and individuals to provide the necessary trail right-of-way, or (2) to acquire such lands or interests therein to be utilized as segments of the national scenic or national historic trail: Provided, That if the State or local governments fail to enter into such written cooperative agreements or to acquire such lands or interests therein after notice of the selection of the right-of-way is published, the appropriate Secretary, may (i) enter into such agreements with landowners, States, local governments, private organizations, and individuals for the use of lands for trail purposes, or (ii) acquire private lands or interests therein by donation, purchase with donated or appropriated funds or exchange in accordance with the provisions of subsection (f) of this section: Provided further, That the appropriate Secretary may acquire lands or interests therein from local governments or governmental corporations with the consent of such entities. The lands involved in such rights-of-way should be acquired in fee, if other methods of public control are not sufficient to assure their use for the purpose for which they are acquired: Provided, That if the Secretary charged with the administration of such trail permanently relocates the right-of- way and disposes of all title or interest in the land, the original owner, or his heirs or assigns, shall be offered, by notice given at the former owner’s last known address, the right of first refusal at the fair market price.

(f) (1) The Secretary of the Interior, in the exercise of his exchange authority, may accept title to any non-Federal property within the right-of-way and in exchange therefor he may convey to the grantor of such property any federally owned property under his jurisdiction which is located in the State wherein such property is located and which he classifies as suitable for exchange or other disposal. The values of the properties so exchanged either shall be approximately equal, or if they are not approximately equal the values shall be equalized by the payment of cash to the grantor or to the Secretary as the circumstances require. The Secretary of

134 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Agriculture, in the exercise of his exchange authority, may utilize authorities and procedures available to him in connection with exchanges of national forest lands.

(2) In acquiring lands or interests therein for a National Scenic or Historic Trail, the appropriate Secretary may, with consent of a landowner, acquire whole tracts notwithstanding that parts of such tracts may lie outside the area of trail acquisition. In furtherance of the purposes of this act, lands so acquired outside the area of trail acquisition may be exchanged for any non-Federal lands or interests therein within the trail right-of-way, or disposed of in accordance with such procedures or regulations as the appropriate Secretary shall prescribe, including: (i) provisions for conveyance of such acquired lands or interests therein at not less than fair market value tp the highest bidder, and (ii) provisions for allowing the last owners of record a right to purchase said acquired lands or interests therein upon payment or agreement to pay an amount equal to the highest bid price. For lands designated for exchange or disposal, the appropriate Secretary may convey these lands with any reservations or covenants deemed desirable to further the purposes of this Act. The proceeds from any disposal shall be credited to the appropriation bearing the costs of land acquisition for the affected trail.

(g) The appropriate Secretary may utilize condemnation proceedings without the consent of the owner to acquire private lands or interests, therein pursuant to this section only in cases where, in his judgment, all reasonable efforts to acquire such lands or interest therein by negotiation have failed, and in such cases he shall acquire only such title as, in his judgment, is reasonably necessary to provide passage across such lands: Provided, That condemnation proceedings may not be utilized to acquire fee title or lesser interests to more than an average of one hundred and twenty-five acres per mile. Money appropriated for Federal purposes from the land and water conservation fund shall, without prejudice to appropriations from other sources, be available to Federal departments for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands for the purposes of this Act. For national historic trails, direct Federal acquisition for trail purposes shall be limited to those areas indicated by the study report or by the comprehensive plan as high potential route segments or high potential historic sites. Except for designated protected components of the trail, no land or site located along a designated national historic trail or along the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail shall be subject to the provisions of section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1653(f)) unless such land or site is deemed to be of historical significance under appropriate historical site criteria such as those for the National Register of Historic Places.

(h) (1) The Secretary charged with the administration of a national recreation, national scenic, or national historic trail shall provide for the development and maintenance of such trails within federally administered areas, and shall cooperate with and encourage the States to operate, develop, and maintain portions of such trails which are located outside the boundaries of federally administered areas. When deemed to be in the public interest, such Secretary may enter written cooperative agreements with the States or their political subdivisions, landowners, private organizations, or individuals to operate, develop, and maintain any portion of such a trail either within or outside a federally administered area. Such agreements may include provisions for limited financial assistance to encourage participation in the acqui-

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 135 sition, protection, operation, development, or maintenance of such trails, provisions providing volunteer in the park or volunteer in the forest status (in accordance with the Volunteers in the Parks Act of 1969 and the Volunteers in the Forests Act of 1972) to individuals, private organizations, or landowners participating in such activities, or provisions of both types. The appropriate Secretary shall also initiate consultations with affected States and their political subdivisions to encourage—

(A) the development and implementation by such entities of appropriate measures to protect private landowners from trespass resulting from trail use and from unreasonable personal liability and property damage caused by trail use, and

(B) the development and implementation by such entities of provisions for land practices compatible with the purposes of this Act, for property within or adjacent to trail rights-of-way. After consulting with States and their political subdivisions under the preceding sentence, the Secretary may provide assistance to such entities under appropriate cooperative agreements in the manner provided by this subsection.

(2) Whenever the Secretary of the Interior makes any conveyance of land under any of the public land laws, he may reserve a right-of-way for trails to the extent he deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.

(i) The appropriate Secretary, with the concurrence of the heads of any other Federal agencies administering lands through which a national recreation, national scenic, or national historic trail passes, and after consultation with the States, local governments, and organizations concerned, may issue regulations, which may be revised from time to time, governing the use, protection, management, development, and administration of trails of the national trails system. In order to maintain good conduct on and along the trails located within federally administered areas and to provide for the proper government and protection of such trails, the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture shall prescribe and publish such uniform regulations as they deem necessary and any person who violates such regulations shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be punished by a fine of not more $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. The Secretary responsible for the administration of any segment of any component of the National Trails System (as determined in a manner consistent with subsection (a)(1) of this section) may also utilize authorities related to units of the national park system or the national forest system, as the case may be, in carrying out his administrative responsibilities for such component.

(j) Potential trail uses allowed on designated components of the national trails system may include, but are not limited to, the following: bicycling, cross-country skiing, day hiking, equestrian activities, jogging or similar fitness activities, trail biking, overnight and long-distance backpacking, snowmobiling, and surface water and underwater activities. Vehicles which may be permitted on certain trails may include, but need not be limited to, motorcycles, bicycles, four-wheel drive or all-terrain off-road vehicles. In addition, trail access for handicapped

136 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L individuals may be provided. The provisions of this subsection shall not supersede any other provisions of this Act or other Federal laws, or any State or local laws.

(k) For the conservation purpose of preserving or enhancing the recreational, scenic, natural, or historical values of components of the national trails system, and environs thereof as determined by the appropriate Secretary, landowners are authorized to donate or otherwise convey qualified real property interests to qualified organizations consistent with section 170(h)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, including, but not limited to, right-of-way, open space, scenic, or conservation easements, without regard to any limitation on the nature of the State or interest otherwise transferable within the jurisdiction where the land is located. The conveyance of any such interest in land in accordance with this subsection shall be deemed to further a Federal conservation policy and yield a significant public benefit for purposes of section 6 of Public law 96-541.

STATE AND METROPOLITAN AREA TRAILS SEC. 8. (a) The Secretary of the Interior is directed to encourage States to consider, in their comprehensive Statewide outdoor recreation plans and proposals for financial assistance for State and local projects submitted pursuant to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, needs and opportunities for establishing park, forest, and other recreation and historic trails on lands owned or administered by States, and recreation and historic trails on lands in or near urban areas. The Secretary is also directed to encourage States to consider, in their comprehensive Statewide historic preservation plans and proposals for financial assistance for State, local, and private projects submitted pursuant to the Act of October 15, 1966 (80 Stat. 915), as amended, needs and opportunities for establishing historic trails. He is further directed in accordance with the authority contained in the Act of May 28, 1963 (77 Stat. 49), to encourage States, political subdivisions, and private interests, including nonprofit organizations, to establish such trails.

(b) The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is directed, in administering the program of comprehensive urban planning and assistance under section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, to encourage the planning of recreation trails in connection with the recreation and transportation planning for metropolitan and other urban areas. He is further directed, in administering the urban open space program under title VII of the Housing Act of 1961, to encourage such recreation trails.

(c) The Secretary of Agriculture is directed, in accordance with authority vested in him, to encourage States and local agencies and private interests to establish such trails.

(d) The Secretary of Transportation, the Chairman of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission, and the Secretary of the Interior, in administering the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976, shall encourage State and local agencies and private interests to establish appropriate trails using the provisions of such programs. Consistent with the purposes of that Act, and in furtherance of the national policy to preserve established railroad rights-of- way for future reactivation of rail service, to protect rail transportation corridors, and to encourage energy efficient transportation use, in the case of interim use of any established railroad

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 137 rights-of-way pursuant to donation, transfer, lease, sale, or otherwise in a manner consistent with the National Trails System Act, if such interim use is subject to restoration or reconstruction for railroad purposes, such interim use shall not be treated, for purposes of any law or rule of law, as an abandonment of the use of such rights-of-way for railroad purposes. If a State, political subdivision, or qualified private organization is prepared to assume full responsibility for management of such rights-of-way and for any legal liability arising out of such transfer or use, and for the payment of any and all taxes that may be levied or assessed against such rights- of-way, then the Commission shall impose such terms and conditions as a requirement of any transfer or conveyance for interim use in a manner consistent with this Act, and shall not permit abandonment or discontinuance inconsistent or disruptive of such use.

(e) Such trails may be designated and suitably marked as parts of the nationwide system of trails by the States, their political subdivisions, or other appropriate administering agencies with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.

RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND OTHER PROPERTIES SEC. 9.(a) The Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture as the case may be, may grant easements and rights-of-way upon, over, under, across, or along any component of the national trails system in accordance with the laws applicable to the national park system and the national forest system, respectively: Provided, That any conditions contained in such easements and rights-of-way shall be related to the policy and purposes of this Act.

(b) The Department of Defense, the Department of Transportation, the Interstate Com- merce Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Power Commis- sion, and other Federal agencies having jurisdiction or control over or information concerning the use, abandonment, or disposition of roadways, utility rights-of-way, or other properties which may be suitable for the purpose of improving or expanding the national trails system shall cooperate with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture in order to assure, to the extent practicable, that any such properties having values suitable for trail purposes may be made available for such use.

(c) Commencing upon the date of enactment of this subsection, any and all right, title, interest, and State of the United States in all rights-of-way of the type described in the Act of March 8. 1922 (43 U.S.C. 912), shall remain in the United States upon the abandonment or forfeiture of such rights-of-way, or portions thereof, except to the extent that any such right-of- way, or portion thereof, is embraced within a public highway no later than one year after a determination of abandonment or forfeiture, as provided under such Act.

(d) (1) All rights-of-way, or portions thereof, retained by the United States pursuant to subsection (c) which are located within the boundaries of a conservation system unit or a Na- tional Forest shall be added to and incorporated within such unit or National Forest and managed in accordance with applicable provisions of law, including this Act.

(2) All such retained rights-of-way, or portions thereof, which are located outside the boundaries of a conservation system unit or a National Forest but adjacent to or contiguous

138 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L with any portion of the public lands shall be managed pursuant to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and other applicable law, including this section.

(3) All such retained rights-of-way, or portions thereof, which are located outside the boundaries of a conservation system unit or National Forest which the Secretary of the Interior determines suitable for use as a public recreational trail or other recreational purposes shall be managed by the Secretary for such uses, as well as for such other uses as the Secretary determines to be appropriate pursuant to applicable laws, as long as such uses do not preclude trail use.

(e) (1) The Secretary of the Interior is authorized where appropriate to release and quitclaim to a unit of government or to another entity meeting the requirements of this subsection any and all right, title, and interest in the surface estate of any portion of any right-of-way to the extent any such right, title, and interest was retained by the United States pursuant to subsection (c), if such portion is not located within the boundaries of any conservation system unit or National Forest. Such release and quitclaim shall be made only in response to an application therefore by a unit of State or local government or another entity which the Secretary of the Interior determines to be legally and financially qualified to manage the relevant portion for public recreational purposes. Upon receipt of such an application, the Secretary shall publish a notice concerning such application in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where the relevant portion is located. Such release and quitclaim shall be on the following conditions:

(A) If such unit or entity attempts to sell, convey, or otherwise transfer such right, title, or interest or attempts to permit the use of any part of such portion for any purpose incompatible with its use for public recreation, then any and all right, title, and interest released and quitclaimed by the Secretary pursuant to this subsection shall revert to the United States.

(B) Such unit or entity shall assume full responsibility and hold the United States harmless for any legal liability which might arise with respect to the transfer, possession, use, release, or quitclaim of such right-of- way.

(C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United States shall be under no duty to inspect such portion prior to such release and quitclaim, and shall incur no legal liability with respect to any hazard or any unsafe condition existing on such portion at the time of such release and quitclaim.

(2) The Secretary is authorized to sell any portion of a right-of-way retained by the United States pursuant to subsection (c) located outside the boundaries of a conservation system unit or National Forest if any such portion is -

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 139 (A) not adjacent to or contiguous with any portion of the public lands; or

(B) determined by the Secretary, pursuant to the disposal criteria established by section 203 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, to be suitable for sale.

Prior to conducting any such sale, the Secretary shall take appropriate steps to afford a unit of State or local government or any other entity an opportunity to seek to obtain such portion pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection.

(3) All proceeds from sales of such retained rights of way shall be deposited into the Treasury of the United States and credited to the Land and Water Conservation Fund as provided in section 2 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965.

(4) The Secretary of the Interior shall annually report to the Congress the total proceeds from sales under paragraph (2) during the preceding fiscal year. Such report shall be included in the President’s annual budget submitted to the Congress.

(f) As used in this section -

(1) The term “conservation system unit” has the same meaning given such term in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (Public Law 96-487; 94 Stat. 2371 et seq.), except that such term shall also include units outside Alaska.

(2) The term “public lands” has the same meaning given such term in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.

AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS SEC. 10. (a) (1) There are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands not more than $5,000,000 for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and not more than $500,000 for the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. From the appropriations authorized for fiscal year 1979 and succeeding fiscal years pursuant to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (78 Stat. 897), as amended, not more than the following amounts may be expended for the acquisition of lands and interests in lands authorized to be acquired pursuant to the provisions of this Act: for the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, not to exceed $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1979, $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1980, and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 1981, except that the difference between the foregoing amounts and the actual appropriations in any one fiscal year shall be available for appropriation in subsequent fiscal years.

(2) It is the express intent of the Congress that the Secretary should substantially complete the land acquisition program necessary to insure the protection of the Appalachian Trail within three complete fiscal years following the date of enactment of this sentence.

140 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L (b) For the purposes of Public Law 95-42 (91 Stat. 211), the lands and interests therein acquired pursuant to this section shall be deemed to qualify for funding under the provisions of section 1, clause 2, of said Act.

(c) (1) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to implement the provisions of this Act relating to the trails designated by paragraphs 5(a)(3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10): Provided, That no such funds are authorized to be appropriated prior to October 1, 1978: And 1) provided further, That notwithstanding any other provisions of this Act or any other provisions of law, no funds may be expended by Federal agencies for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands outside the exterior boundaries of existing Federal areas for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, the North Country National Scenic Trail, The Ice Age National Scenic Trail, the Oregon National Historic Trail, the Mor- mon Pioneer National Historic Trail, the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, and the Iditarod National Historic Trail, except that funds may be expended for the acquisition of lands or interests therein for the purpose of providing for one trail interpretation site, as described in section 7(c), along with such trail in each State crossed by the trail.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, there is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to implement the provisions of this Act relating to the trails designated by section 5(a). Not more than $500,000 may be appropriated for the purposes of acquisition of land and interests therein for the trail designated by section 5(a)(12) of this Act, and not more than $2,000,000 may be appropriated for the purposes of the development of such trail. The administrating agency for the trail shall encourage volunteer trail groups to participate in the development of the trail.

VOLUNTEER TRAILS ASSISTANCE SEC. 11. (a) (1) In addition to the cooperative agreement and other authorities contained in this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the head of any Federal agency administering Federal lands, are authorized to encourage volunteers and volunteer organizations to plan, develop, maintain, and manage, where appropriate, trails throughout the Nation.

(2) Wherever appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of this Act, the Secretaries are authorized and encouraged to utilize the Volunteers in the Parks Act of 1969, the Volunteers in the Forests Act of 1972, and section 6 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (relating to the development of Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans).

(b) Each Secretary or the head of any Federal land managing agency, may assist volunteers and volunteers organizations in planning, developing, maintaining, and managing trails. Volunteer work may include, but need not be limited to–

(1) planning, developing, maintaining, or managing (A) trails which are components of the national trails system, or (B) trails which, if so developed and maintained, could qualify for designation as components of the national trails system; or

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 141 (2) operating programs to organize and supervise volunteer trail building efforts with respect to the trails referred to in paragraph (1), conducting trail-related research projects, or providing education and training to volunteers on methods of trails planning, construction, and maintenance.

(c) The appropriate Secretary or the head of any Federal land managing agency may utilize and to make available Federal facilities, equipment, tools, and technical assistance to volunteers and volunteer organizations, subject to such limitations and restrictions as the appropriate Secretary or the head of any Federal land managing agency deems necessary or desirable.

DEFINITIONS SEC. 12. As used in this Act:

(1) The term “high potential historic sites” means those historic sites related to the route, or sites in close proximity thereto, which provide opportunity to interpret the historic significance of the trail during the period of its major use. Criteria for consideration as high potential sites include historic significance, presence of visible historic remnants, scenic quality, and relative freedom from intrusion.

(2) The term “high potential route segments” means those segments of a trail which would afford high quality recreation experience in a portion of the route having greater than average scenic values or affording an opportunity to vicariously share the experience of the original users of a historic route.

(3) The term “State” means each of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

(4) The term “without expense to the United States” means that no funds may be expended by Federal agencies for the development of trail related facilities or for the acquisition of lands or interest in lands outside the exterior boundaries of Federal areas. For the purposes of the preceding sentence, amounts made available to any State or political subdivision under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 or any other provision of law shall not be treated as an expense to the United States.

142 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS AND CRITERIA FOR SELECTED TRAIL CATEGORIES The proposed Great Western Trail must be evaluated by comparing established criteria for national trails, as required by the National Trails System Act, as amended. Eligibility as a Na- tional Scenic Trail, National Historic Trail, National Recreation Trail, and National Discovery Trail are discussed in this section. Steven Elkinton, National Park Service, provided information for this section in September 1998 for the Great Western Trail Feasibility Study.

NATIONAL SCENIC TRAILS From the National Trails System Act (16USC1241-51, section 3):

National Scenic Trails...will be extended trails [over 100 miles long] so located as to provide for maximum outdoor recreation potential and for the conservation and enjoyment of the nationally significant scenic, historic, natural, or cultural qualities of the areas through which such trails may pass. National Scenic Trails may be located so as to represent desert, marsh, grassland, mountain, canyon, river, forest, and other areas, as well as landforms which exhibit significant characteristics of the physiographic regions of the Nation.

The National Trails System Act contains no feasibility criteria for National Scenic Trails. However, some were developed and suggested in the feasibility study for the American Discov- ery Trail (Vol.1, p. 16):

Significance — There should be nationally important cultural, historic, natural, recreational, or scenic features along the trail.

Length — The trail should be at least 100 miles long and continuous.

Accessibility — The trail should complement other trails and recreation areas, and provide access where possible to nearby urban areas.

Desirability — There should be an anticipated need for the trail, and it should be capable of attracting visitors from across the Nation. It should offer a scenic and enjoyable outdoor recreational experience. There should be extensive local and regional support for the project.

Trail Use — National Scenic Trails should be designated for hiking and other compatible non-motorized uses.

NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAILS National Historic Trails are Congressionally authorized routes, including motorized transportation routes that recognize prominent travel routes of exploration, trade, migration, and military action. These trails, which are administered by a Federal agency, generally consist of remnant sites and trail segments rather than continuous trails linked by a motor tour route.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 143 Their purpose is to identify, interpret, and protect nationally significant historic routes and their remnants and artifacts for public use and enjoyment.

NATIONAL RECREATION TRAILS From the National Trails System Act, (16USC1241-41, section 3):

National Recreation Trails...will provide a variety of outdoor recreation uses in or reasonably accessible to urban areas.

They are to be designated by the Secretaries of Agriculture or the Interior. Current criteria for their designation include (from 1983 guidelines):

Readiness — ready for public use.

Availability — accessible to urban areas, or within existing Federal and State parks, forests, and other recreation areas.

Length — any length, but continuous.

Location — on lands and waters featuring significant natural and cultural resources.

Design and Use — must meet accepted design and construction standards.

Certification — administering agency must certify that it will be open to the public for at least 10 years.

Management/Administration — documentation of management practices, including fees charged.

National Recreation Trails are existing trails recognized by the Federal government as contributing to the National Trails System. They provide a variety of outdoor recreation uses and vary in length and accessibility. National Recreation Trails are designated by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture and are managed by public and private agencies at the local, State, and national levels. Congressional action is not required to designate a National Recreation Trail.

NATIONAL DISCOVERY TRAILS This category of trail is not yet incorporated into law. However, Senate-passed language includes the following definition to be added to the National Trails System Act:

National Discovery Trails...will be extended, continuous, interstate trails so located as to provide for outstanding outdoor recreation and travel and to connect representative examples of America’s trails and communities. National Discovery Trails should provide for the conservation and enjoyment of significant natural, cultural, and historic resources associated with each

144 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L trail and should be so located as to represent metropolitan, urban, rural, and backcountry regions of the Nation.

And criteria for National Discovery Trails:

A) The trail must link one or more areas within the boundaries of a metropolitan area (as those boundaries are determined under section 134c or title 23 United States Code). It should also join with other trails, connecting the National Trails System to significant recreation and resources areas.

B) The trail must be supported by a competent trail wide nonprofit organization. Each trail should have extensive local and trail wide support by the public, by user groups, and by affected State and local governments.

C) The trail must be extended [over 100 miles long] and pass through more than one State. At a minimum it should be a continuous, walkable route not including any non-Federal property for which the owner had not provided consent for inclusion and use.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 145 APPENDIX C

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) includes public involvement to identify and address relevant issues related to proposed projects on Federally managed lands. In order to learn of specific concerns regarding the proposal to designate the proposed Great Western Trail a National Trail, public involvement occurred in two separate phases: December 1998 through February 1999 in Arizona, Utah, and Idaho; and September through December 1999 in Mon- tana. Study team members have also been coordinating with various Federal interagency, State offices, and local community groups throughout the study period. The first phase included distribution of a newsletter to a mailing list of 50 interested individuals and groups in December 1998 and creation of a project Internet website. The Great Western Trail Internet website address www.northrim.net/sawtoothnf/ was highlighted in the newsletter and in correspondence. The comment period for the proposed Great Western Trail feasibility study ran from December 1, 1998, to February 19, 1999. During this time, six open houses were held in three States. In Arizona meetings were held in Tucson, Phoenix, and Flag- staff. In Utah meetings were held in Salt Lake City and Logan. A single meeting was held in Idaho at Idaho Falls. Congressional offices in these States were also notified. To notify people of the upcoming open houses, news releases for publication were mailed to media in the meeting locations. A total of 172 people attended the open houses and 116 comments were received. During July, August, and September 1998 members of the Great Western Trail study team met with Forest Service personnel in northern Idaho and Montana to discuss the Great Western Trail in a series of meetings. The team also met with the Montana State Trails Advisory Com- mittee in August 1998. The Montana State Trails Advisory Committee, established by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, is a statewide committee composed of representatives from various trail groups that makes recommendations on trails funding and other trails related issues. Trail users represented on the committee include the following: hiking, horseback riding, off-highway motorcycling, ATV riding, cross-country skiing, bicycling, mountain biking, snowmobiling, and 4x4 vehicle driving. At November 1996 and August 1998 Montana State Trails Advisory Committee meetings, the group issued a position statement that the “Committee does not support at this time a study of or the inclusion of the Great Western Trail, or any other north-south trail, as a National Scenic or Historic Trail because of insufficient funding for such existing trails.” A Great Western Trail public meeting scheduled for February 1999 in Helena, Montana was cancelled. The study team had concluded at that time that there was little interest in the trail in Montana or northern Idaho, eliminating the need to include these areas in the study. A later study team review revealed that it would be necessary to include potential routes along the entire Mexico to Canada route. Potential trail corridors in northern Idaho and Mon- tana were mapped using information from the 1998 meetings with local trail managers. The study team objective - to reassess local interest and community support for the trail routes - was believed best obtained through informal sessions with local trail groups. Fifty-five Montana trail organizations, clubs, and conservation groups were contacted. This diverse group included horsemen, wilderness, wildlife, conservancy and trail preservation groups; hiking and outdoor clubs; snowmobile, motor bike, bicycling, OHV, and sportsmen clubs. These sessions were

146 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L held in Bozeman, Butte, Helena, and Missoula from September 27-30, 1999. Over 100 people attended. Montana Congressional offices were briefed separately prior to the sessions. Newspa- per articles on the Great Western Trail sessions were subsequently published in several Montana communities. In addition to the 116 comments received during the scoping earlier in the year, another 787 comments were received since September 1999 in response to the request for public input. The Forest Service has reviewed all the public comments using the content analysis approach, a method that captures public concerns and opinions about particular issues or actions (please see Appendix D). These comments are organized into a summary that reflects issues of public concern. This method identifies issues that the public suggests be included for further analysis if the project continues. This method also gives a feel for the level of public interest in the project. Comments from scoping efforts in Arizona, Utah, and Idaho are generally supportive of national designation for the Trail, with a minority stating opposition. Re- sponses from Montana have been mixed.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 147 APPENDIX D GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY PUBLIC CONTENT ANALYSIS & ISSUE SUMMARY REPORT

Prepared by Marna Daley, Ken Meyers, Barbara Todd, Konie Pipes, and Lynn Ballard for the Great Western Trail Feasibility Study Project Leader

revised January 2000

CONTENT ANALYSIS The public comment period for the Great Western Trail Feasibility Study began December 1, 1998. Comments received by December 31, 1999 are included in this analysis. Six public open houses and four information sessions were held during this time. In Arizona, meetings were held in Tucson, Phoenix, and Flagstaff. In Utah, meetings were located in Salt Lake City and Logan. A single meeting was held in Idaho at Idaho Falls. The Montana sessions were located in Bozeman, Butte, Helena and Missoula. To notify people of the open houses in Arizona, Utah and Idaho, news releases were mailed to media of influence in the meeting locations. In Montana, 55 outdoor recreation groups and conservation organizations were notified of meetings by mail. A newsletter was also developed and mailed to individuals listed on the Great Western Trail mailing list. Information was posted on the project web site and the Internet address was highlighted in all outgoing correspondence. A total of 272 visitors attended the meetings. The number of individuals who signed visitor rosters at Great Western Trail meetings follows:

Arizona Idaho Flagstaff 21 Idaho Falls 54 Phoenix 40 Tucson 9 Montana Bozeman 40 Utah Butte 13 Logan 19 Helena 23 Salt Lake City 29 Missoula 24

Approximately 900 + individual letters, postcards, and e-mail communications were received during the comment period. All but 66 were from individuals. The rest were from Non- Government Organizations (NGOs) (48), local (7), state (8) or federal (3) government agencies.

148 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L COMMENTS RECEIVED A total of 903 letters or responses were received from 24 states. Approximately 854 letters contained comments regarding the proposal. The rest either were duplicates, requests for information, or requests to be placed on the mailing list. Figure 1 displays by state, where the letters originated. The majority of the letters received (91%) came from states that would be directly influenced by the trail as follows: Arizona - 5%, Utah - 5%, Idaho - 5%, Wyoming - 2%, and Montana -74%. The majority of the letters represent the opinions of two distinct groups: those who support the idea of the long distance trail, and those who oppose trail designation.

Figure 1. Number of comment letters received by state.*

12 634 3 6 NH-2 45 2 13 2 MA-3 1 1 1 CT-1 42 23 8

43 2 1 1 2 4 2

Figure 2. Comments showing support (left figure) or non-support (right figure) by state.*

5/1 325/276 2/1 2/0 NH-2/0 24/6 1/1 9/1 1/1 MA-3/0 1/0 1/0 1/0 CT-1/0 22/4 18/0 3/2

29/2 0 1/0 0/0 1/1 0/3 2/0 *No comments received from AK or HI

101 comments did not indicate a preference for support or nonsupport as follows: AZ-12, UT-16, ID-15, MT-33, WA-6, NM-2, WY-3, CO-3, LA-1, CA-5, MS-1, MN-3, and OR-1.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 149 ANALYSIS METHOD The Forest Service reviewed all 903 public comments received using the Content Analysis approach. The primary intent of this method of analysis is to capture comments in the public’s own language. It captures and displays public concerns and reasoning about particular issues or actions - regardless of the viewer’s opinion about its logic or worth. The result is an organized summary of what the public’s concerns are towards the Great Western Trail concept. For the purpose of this analysis “issue” is defined as an action, subject or activity suggested by the public to be addressed further if the project continues. The primary intent of this system of analysis is to capture comments verbatim to reduce bias. The result is an organized summary of what people are saying and thinking that can be easily reviewed. A coding system keeps the analysis process systematic, visible, and trackable. Topic codes are developed specifically for individual projects. These topic codes are expandable to capture all issues as well as any other comments or information that is submitted. Responses are coded and entered into a database.

GREAT WESTERN TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY TOPIC CODES USED DURING CONTENT ANALYSIS 1. Trail Activity a. motorized b. non-motorized c. motorized vs. non-motorized d. other 2. Access a. opening/increasing b. closing/decreasing 3. Long distance trails a. challenges b. benefits c. construction, maintenance & improvement d. structures (outhouses) & facilities 4. Fish and Wildlife a. Threatened and Endangered species 5. Changes to landscape with increased use 6. Protection of Uses a. motorized b. non-motorized 7. Route a. seasonal challenges b. location

150 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 8. Support a. Arizona b. Utah c. Idaho d. Montana e. Other states 9. Economics a. Arizona b. Utah c. Idaho d. Montana 10. Effects on existing trails 11. Against a. Arizona b. Utah c. Idaho d. Montana e. Other states 12. Questions 13. OHV management/enforcement 14. Physically Challenged Users 15. Wilderness/roadless 16. Suggestions 17. Public notice of meetings 18. Requests

Below is an issue summary generated from the coded comments.

1) TRAIL ACTIVITY

Motorized use • The use of motorized recreational vehicles is growing steadily; the FS should recognize this and dedicate more trails to ATV and motorcycle use. • Not everyone can be a hiker. There is a large segment of the population that cannot access the backcountry any other way than by motorized vehicles, because of health, physical or economic reasons. • The Great Western Trail recognizes for the first time the legitimate use of trails by non- hikers. • Too many existing trails are being closed to ATV use; it’s about time more trails were opened to ATVs. • It doesn’t matter whether or not the trail follows existing roads or trails, so long as it is opened to 4 x 4s and ATVs. • Motorized vehicles should be taxed to provide money for the trail.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 151 Non-motorized use • There are plenty of roads, trails, etc. in Montana, primarily logging roads on the national forests that can be used by ORV riders. We do not need any additional roads/trails used by any noisy, polluting machines. • We don’t need long distance motorized trails. • Keep the entire trail accessible for horseback riding. • The GWT can’t be considered a scenic trail if it is open for motorized use. • Another long distance trail would be feasible only if it focused on non-motorized use. • Only 3-5% of outdoor recreationists are motorized. • The FS is correct to be closing roads to motorized use to protect the environment and reduce costs.

Motorized vs. non-motorized use • A long distance trail system for all users, motorized and non-motorized, is long overdue. • Motorized recreation and hiking are not compatible uses. • Motorcycles and horses on the same trail are dangerous. • The FS should not allow motorized vehicles in any remaining roadless areas. • Both motorized and non-motorized uses of trails are compatible. • The GWT should stay out of BLM roadless areas. • The GWT is a good idea because it will allow ATV users, horseback riders, skiers, and hikers all to work together. • Please keep the Arizona trail non-motorized. • Hiking and horseback riding trails should be separated from motorized uses. • The trails should be only four feet wide. • Horse trails should be separate from mountain biking trails. • The GWT should strive to accommodate all uses, but it is not necessary or practical to provide a continuous route for every type of use.

Other • Carrying capacity of the resource is going to be swamped.

2) ACCESS • The public wants the same access to public lands as they have had in the past. • Motorized trails are good because disabled people can access public lands in no other way.

Opening/increasing public access • Make as much of the GWT as possible open to non-street licensed vehicles. • Public land should be for the public use. • Keep trails open, reopen closed ones so that access is not limited to a select few. • It is not fair or prudent to set aside an area for the exclusive use of one group. • There is a need for more access for all outdoor activities that can be shared by all.

152 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Closing/decreasing public access • Too many areas are closed to ATVs.

3) LONG DISTANCE TRAILS • Designate the GWT as part of the National Trail System. • Do not make the GWT part of the National Trail System

Benefits • The GWT is a chance for the FS, BLM, state and local agencies to work together on a positive project. • A long distance trail system open to all would allow all users to experience the unique qualities of many different areas. • A long distance trail open to all at all times of the year would be a solution to the overcrowding on many present trail systems. • A long distance trail such as the GWT that allows all users could serve as a model for compatibility. • The GWT system would spread backcountry use over larger areas and reduce problems. • Linking present statewide trail systems together is a good idea.

Construction, maintenance, improvements • GWT designation should not pull funding away from other existing trail systems. • Funding for maintenance should come from the states, cities or counties. • Volunteers such as the Boy Scouts or other special interest groups could maintain the trail. • The members of the GWT Association can maintain the trail.

Structures and facilities • Be sure to provide sufficient areas for parking, camping, and trailheads. • Provide facilities for horses and llamas. • Make sure the trail is well marked. • Provide facilities for the increased human waste that would be generated.

4) FISH AND WILDLIFE • Advocacy groups have underestimated the impacts additional vehicles would have on wildlife. • The routes chosen are wildlife corridors. There is no compatibility between secluded wildlife (lynx, wolf, moose, elk, grizzly bear, black bear, marten, fisher, wolverine, etc.) & increased motorized use. The wildlife in our N.F.’s need quiet trails. • Off-road motorized use causes problems for water quality, fish and wildlife. • More trails and more people would disrupt wildlife migrations, winter and summer range. • The proposed trail is right through grizzly bear country. • The trail goes through closed areas.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 153 • This project has gone forward with little if any input from wildlife experts. • The Arizona Fish and Game Department has been excluded from input about location of the GWT.

Endangered Species • Do not make endangered species a focal point of the corridor. • The public does not want to feel threatened by endangered predator species.

5) CHANGES TO THE LANDSCAPE WITH INCREASED USE • The designation of the GWT will serve to concentrate people, domestic animals and vehicles in areas that will be irreparably damaged by the designation. • Implement guidelines to preserve the natural beauty of the area while keeping it open for all to enjoy. • Increased human use will contaminate springs along the route. • The GWT organizers should make a concerted effort to curtail abuses by ORV users. • The ORV users show appalling lack of responsibility in controlling abuses by their public, and the ORV industry is even worse. • The GWT is unnecessary for hikers and horseback riders. The ORV users will be able to de-spoil even more of the landscape.

6) PROTECTION OF USES Motorized • What I really hate to see is any limitations on trails that are to be utilized that would further restrict the use of motorized trail vehicles.

Non-motorized • ATV use is not appropriate in our remaining public lands. • The GWT should be restricted to horse and foot travel.

7) ROUTE Seasonal Challenges • A continuous groomed snowmobile trail through Idaho is not possible because of Idaho’s geographic features and weather patterns. • It is not possible to provide a continuous route for all types of users in all seasons.

Location • The GWT route through northern Idaho should avoid using the Idaho Centennial Trail. • The GWT needs to go through Montana in order to get to Canada. It could go through North Idaho, but still parts of it would have to go through Montana. • Here in Utah County there has been old trails along the foothills on both east and west sides of the valley. In the central state from Spanish Fork Canyon southward is Skyline Drive. • We are particularly concerned with the proposal to bring a trail through the North Fork of the Flathead, a place where all of the species present in the 19th century still live in a predator-prey relationship.

154 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L • The option of routing the GWT through Magruder Corridor is totally unacceptable because the enforcement mechanism needed to keep ATVs on the road is entirely inadequate. • I recommend the corridor through Butte. This corridor impacts private land less and has a wealth of history of early day mining, homesteading, and logging. • The (special interest group name) is interested and would like to help with route selection. • The (special interest group) recommends that the winter route of the GWT use the McCoy Creek Alpine snowmobile trail to Alpine, Wyoming, and then from Alpine to the Wyoming Continental Divide Snowmobile Trail. This connects with the Flagg Ranch, so users could follow the Fremont County groomed trail system and avoid the barrier of the South Fork of the Snake River. • The (special interest group) is concerned that the GWT would open single-track motorcycle trails to ATV use. The GWT should utilize existing ATV trails. • The GWT proposal includes routes through roadless areas of the Targhee and Caribou NFs. • The GWT trail should go through Idaho Falls. • The GWT should follow a route west of Highway 89 along the Little Colorado Gorge. • The GWT should consider a connection from in Arizona to California along the Mojave Road. • The GWT route should be designed so that the largest section of the public could use it. • A more easterly route near the Paria River to Church Falls and over the dam at Page is better than right through important winter deer range on the North Kaibab. • The route through the Tusayan Ranger district is okay, but when it enters the Chalender District the trail should be located farther east due to wildlife concerns. • The route should cross Weber Canyon and avoid Harrison Blvd. • The section around the coke ovens should be designated as part of the GWT. • The trail signs should be low profile so they aren’t used as targets. • There should be an official trail from Vivian Park on the Provo River to the forest parking lot in the South fork.

8) SUPPORT FOR THE GWT • The GWT would be a welcome addition to the Pacific Crest and Continental Divide National Scenic Trails. • The trail should be completed border to border and be open to all users.

Arizona • Managed trail systems are beneficial to the community and states. • The GWT concept is popular in Arizona even without national trail designation. • Arizona supports GWT designation as a National Scenic Trail. • The GWT should explore connections with Phoenix, Scottsdale, Peoria and other metro trail systems. • Multiple use long distance trails are long overdue. • The GWT is a great idea, should be implemented from Mexico to Alaska.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 155 • The GWT should be incorporated into the NPS. • The GWT is a good idea, but there are too many problems associated with the national trail system.

Utah • Good idea, and it should be open to all users. • The GWT should be designated a national trail. • A multi- use long distance trail fits in with the needs of the (boy) scouts.

Idaho • The Idaho Dept. of Parks and Recreation Trails supports the GWT concept. • The USA is a country of diverse recreation groups, and a multi-purpose trail serves that need. • Each state would be able to benefit from this trail. • The GWT project provides an opportunity for fed, state, county and city governments to work together. • The GWT should incorporate existing trails. • Bonneville, Teton, Madison and Jefferson County commissioners support the project. • Franklin County commissioners favor the Great Western Trail concept provided the designated use allows for motorized as well as not motorized use.

Montana • I am in favor of the idea, but I do have concerns about implementation. • The GWT is the best thing I’ve heard of in many years especially with all the road and land closures going on lately. • I think it would be a great idea, because it would give a longer, funner trail for recreational opportunities for my family and friends. • We would like to recommend including Montana as the “missing link” in the GWT. • I am in favor of multiple uses of all government lands. • I believe this trail is a great addition to the national trails network. • The board of Beaverhead County Commissioners would like to go on record in support of the concept of the Great Western Trail.

Other states • I am in favor of using these trails for all public users regardless of their activity. As long as everyone respects each others activities, we can all benefit. • Good recreation for community and outsiders. Great idea. • I think this is a great idea and should be done ASAP, it will allow a lot of people to be in the great outdoors which is our land. • Please keep the trails available to my grandchildren to come. • I am opposed to anything that limits or restricts my rights. This is a wonderful family recreational opportunity and should be developed. • Having the GWT system completed would open up many more areas for people to enjoy.

156 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L • I try to follow these issues and feel that these trails are for everyone’s use. These trails belong to everyone not just one group. • This looks like it would be a great way to see lots of different terrain, and meet lots of people with the same interests as my family.

9) ECONOMICS • A trail system with multiple access points is good for the economy. • The trail system should not damage rural America. • Turf conflicts and budget battles between the different agencies involved will be a problem. • The GWT would lead to a greater appreciation of our natural resources. • The GWT will be good for the economy. • Why not go thru Dakota’s, etc., where economic help is needed and routes easy.

Arizona • Use the GWT to leverage the profile and value of trail systems in general. • The trail is a good idea from a demographic perspective. Boomers have money and like to spend it on ORVs.

Utah • The GWT needs to seek federal money to make it work. • The GWT should use volunteer labor to maintain the trail. • Recreational tourism is a benefit to rural economies, and this trail would help. • Use national Trail System funds to make the GWT work.

Idaho • Franklin, Bear, and Caribou Counties do not need the trail or the increase in recreation. • The trail will not bring any economic benefits, but will cost money in search and rescue operations. • The trail will spread more noxious weeds. • The trail will benefit the economy of Idaho. • The trail will benefit the economies of small Idaho towns and counties.

Montana • Make sure the funds come from roads programs and not trails, since the project seems to be geared toward ORV use. • Our roadless lands serve more value to the people here than any economic development ever would. • Montana residents are the bottom of the economic pool. Few individuals or families can afford to recreate on these vehicles. Less than 5% of Montana families have ATV’s & many of them are used for commercial activities, not recreation. • The tourism industry in Montana is doing fine, thank you, and needs no further stimu- lation. • While it may offer opportunities for local economic development, it is arguable that tourism does not improve any locality’s “quality of life.”

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 157 • While community economic gain is viewed as a vital part of this plan, the most residents could expect are minimum wage jobs at the expense of precious natural resources.

10) EFFECTS ON EXISTING TRAILS • Don’t close the skyline drive. • Consider the effects of more traffic on forest roads. • We have some concerns about use on the trail; watershed damages, sanitation, and pollution. We would hope these concerns are addressed as the trail is developed. • While we object to the entire trail in principle, we understand, that some portions of it are already in existence. That being the case we strongly object to extending the northern portion through Montana.

11) AGAINST THE GWT PROJECT • Maintain existing trails instead of adding more trails when there is no money to maintain them. • Use the money to maintain existing trails instead of building new ones.

Idaho • Idaho already has plenty of trails, and too many people on them already. • Make the trails available to everyone, not just certain groups. • Motorized trails create noise, air pollution and chase away wildlife. • The FS, State Parks and other agencies already have more than they can handle. Don’t create a project that would draw funds from current needs. • The GWT would despoil the landscape and leave nothing for future generations to enjoy. • Idaho already has all the roads it needs without building more. We already have all the people on them and surrounding land that we need.

Montana • The Montana State Trails Advisory Committee does not support the trail. • A road destroys the wildness; commercialization of wild lands will lead to its destruction. Must large corporations always get their way? Please, no GWT. Enough roads already. • GYC [Greater Yellowstone Coalition] strongly opposes the development of the GWT and any further taxpayer expense related to this effort. • The proposed GWT in Montana should be rejected and not created. • The idea seems to be a marketing ploy by the ATV manufacturer and those who want no restriction on motorized use. • I think there are more than enough existing ORV roads and access. I have seen a huge increase in noxious weeds everywhere there are ORV roads. • It is not feasible to establish the GWT as a National Trail without increasing pressure for increased motorized use on our federal public lands. • The GWT has no basis in history. This scheme is designed to promote ORV use on public lands. • Roads are for motor vehicles, trails are for feet and horses.

158 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L • I oppose the entire project. I oppose all three routes. I oppose the promotion of motorized use on any and all trails. • This massive project epitomizes the excessive amount of country this group seems to need to recreate. • I oppose the GWT development on the grounds that it disturbs wildlife and plants.

Other States • I am outraged that the Forest Service or any public land agency could consider creating a motorized runway through the last of our wild places. • I write to oppose the GWT proposal for ATV-ORV use.

12) QUESTIONS • What guarantees are there that if the ORV community supports the trail, it will remain open to motorized use? • How will the trail comply with the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Idaho Water Quality Act? • Who will be responsible for the control and monitoring of noxious weeds? • Why do ORV users have to buy a sticker when hikers, mountain bikers and horseback riders use the same trails but do not have to pay? • Is it possible to use the Rails to Trails System in some areas? • Why does this need to be done, and how is the money to be managed? • How much state involvement will there be vs. federal, and who maintains the trail? • What problems will there be when you mix motorized and non-motorized uses? • When will detailed maps become available? • Do people really want to ride 3,100 miles on an ORV or snowmobile? Where are the figures to support this? Since when is the FS in the business of promoting “growing niches” in the ORV travel market? • Do you plan on completing local travel plans and ORV policies before committing the State of Montana to a large-scale project of unknown impacts? • Is this review part of the NEPA scoping? • How will our comments be used? • How did this proposal originate? Who supports it? What are the alternatives being considered? How much will it cost? Who will pay for it? Who will maintain it? What is the time frame? • Will you hold hearings in the communities that will be directly affected by the GWT? • Why did the USFS personnel encourage motorized interest groups to attend the Butte, Montana hearing? • What is this, a trail or a road? Who will enforce the restrictions on trails? • What is the schedule for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act procedures and review?

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 159 13) OHV MANAGEMENT/ENFORCEMENT • I feel that the FS, State Parks and other agencies have more than they can take care of already. We do not need more projects that will require funds that will detract from current needs. • Would create unnecessary management problems for the USFS who already can’t keep up with trail maintenance and monitoring illegal use. • Can’t understand how this proposal can even be considered in Montana until the FS/ BLM motorized use restriction plan is resolved. • Any money to study new trails systems should be used to maintain local trail systems. • I also don’t understand why the USFS federally is saying no to the roads and closing them and then we are doing another one. • The FS has many miles of trails they can’t monitor as it is. The [Montana] State Trails Advisory Committee has already said NO to this outrageous proposal. • It’s important that if the corridor is designated that local ranger districts and their travel planning decisions take precedence over any corridor-long management plan. • No trail should be included in any part of the national forest that is out of compliance with open road density standards as identified in forest plans.

14) PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED USERS • Believes there should be N.F. access for those who are not physically capable. • This would be a very high use trail when complete and would give access for many older or handicapped people. • Make some sections of the trails and trailheads handicapped accessible. • By allowing ATV use older people can use the trail. Older people tread lightly and have money to spend. • Should have special handicap facilities. • If you restrict access to roads, how can older people get into public lands? • I am nearing retirement & have a breathing problem. Without motorized vehicles, I would be unable to enjoy the great outdoors.

15) WILDERNESS/ROADLESS • We have little enough real wilderness areas. Let’s not spoil the ones we have with a GWT which might turn into a Wilderness-Bashing Road. • The GWT is totally incompatible with wilderness. • Proposed routes of the GWT currently entertain going through multiple roadless areas & Wilderness Study Areas including the BLM Centennials Wilderness Study Area and Hyalite- Porcupine-Buffalo Horn Wilderness Study area in Gallatin Range north of YNP [Yellowstone National Park].

16) SUGGESTIONS • One necessary alternative is to have the GWT motorized be limited to existing motorized roads. • If the GWT must happen, all routes should avoid the North Fork drainage of the Flathead River.

160 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L • I do not approve of any NFS support for this project, unless you put an equal amount of money into support for the Continental Divide Trail and other quiet studies. • Noise Impacts must be considered. • Expand the GWT to make the Lander cutoff a bike, ATV and snowmobile trail. • Degradation of lands known for high quality of life (serenity, quiet wildlife viewing) must be assessed for these commercial ORV proposals.

17) PUBLIC NOTICE OF MEETINGS • I believe you are highly biased and unprofessional to leave Montana out of the process, yet try to take over our public lands without any public input. • By your instructions, meetings were held with NO MEDIA OR PUBLIC NOTICE, in Bozeman, Helena, Butte and Missoula Sept. 27-30. • The so-called public information-gathering meetings in Montana have been seriously bungled, and add to the sense of this being a pre-packaged marketing effort. • I think you would get a much better idea of whether Montanans support the GWT if they actually knew about it. • I strongly feel that you cannot begin to report on the desirability of the GWT with the extreme lack of public notification the Forest Service has provided the public to date. • At the very least, you should extend the comment period and spend more effort publicizing your plan to promote this shameful plan. • How is it that you have gotten to the point of planning something the public has not had input on? • I object to the inadequate public notice, omission of Montanans from the first round of public comment (completed in Feb. 1999) and omission of the feasibility study from affected forests’ quarterly projects lists. There were NO media notices of meetings in MT. • You stated that the study should determine if the trail is desirable, but the public has received little, if any, information on the proposed trail.

18) REQUESTS • I look forward to receiving a list of the hiking and equestrian groups that have endorsed and support the GWT. • I hereby request the disclosure and analysis of such figures in the DEIS, including the numbers and ratios of user groups as well as the availability of appropriate trails and roads.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 161 APPENDIX E

SUMMARY OF TRIBAL INVOLVEMENT American Indian Tribal groups residing in the vicinity of the Trail have been contacted in an effort to obtain comments and identify concerns regarding Great Western Trail designation. Consultation and coordination with American Indian Tribal groups is important as proposed Great Western Trail routes may cross Tribal Reservation lands or affect traditional cultural tribal activities or sites. The following Tribal groups were identified that may have interest in the Trail proposal.

RELATIONSHIP TO RESULTS OR NAME OF TRIBAL GROUP GWT PROJECT CONCLUSIONS Navajo Nations, GWT crosses Briefings held and heritage site Window Rock Tribal Reservation site information provided - Navajo Tuba City Local chapter - Navajo Bodaway/Gap Local chapter - Navajo Cameron Local chapter - Navajo Copper Mine Local chapter - Navajo Lechee Local chapter San Juan Paiute GWT crosses Briefing scheduled Tribal Reservation Fort McDowell GWT crosses Briefing scheduled Tribal Reservation White Mesa Ute Council GWT corridor not in their No concerns area of interest Ute Indian Tribe GWT corridor nearby No major concerns NW Band of Shoshoni GWT corridor nearby Interest in a visitor contact Tribe station at a Tribal site in area. Requested later revisit. Skull Valley Band of GWT corridor nearby No concerns Goshute Paiute Tribe of Utah GWT corridor nearby No concerns

Shoshone-Paiute Tribes GWT corridor may be in Briefing scheduled area of interest Wind River Arapaho- GWT corridor may be in Briefing scheduled Eastern Shoshone area of interest Confederate Tribes of GWT corridor nearby No concerns Goshute Res Shoshone-Bannock GWT corridor nearby Had questions, some concerns Tribes and comments Confederated Salish and GWT corridor nearby No response received Kootenai Tribes Nez Perce GWT corridor nearby No response received Flathead Nation GWT corridor nearby No response received Blackfeet Nation GWT corridor nearby No response received

162 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L APPENDIX F

PARTIAL LISTING OF INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTRIBUTING TO GREAT WESTERN TRAIL EFFORTS*

NATIONAL

American Hiking Society Blue Ribbon Coalition American Discovery Trail Society

United Four-Wheel Drive Association, American Association of Retired Great Western Trail Association Inc. Persons

Tread Lightly

ARIZONA

Arizona Off-Highway Advisory Group Representative Ed Pastor Representative Jim Kolbe

Phoenix Jeep Eagle Senator Jon Kyl Arizona State Committee on Trails

Prescott Open Trails Association Arizona Four Wheel Drive Assoc. Arizona Mountain Bike Association

Rim Country 4-Wheelers Verde Valley 4-Wheelers

UTAH

Utah Trails Council Utah Off-highway Vehicle Council Salt Lake County Commission

Kane County Commission Garfield County Commission Wayne County Board of Supervisors

Sevier County Board of Supervisors Piute County Board of Supervisors Provo City

City of Orem City of Lindon City of Mapleton

City of Spanish Fork Park City City of Alpine

City of Salina City of Richfield City of Bicknell

City of Fillmore Sevier County Economic Dev. Sevier County Travel Council

Panoramaland Travel Region Panorama RC&D Fishlake Discovery Association

Paiute ATV Trail Committee Logan City Chamber of Commerce Six County Economic Dev. Council

Mountainland Assoc. of Gov’t Utah Valley Community College Snow College volunteers volunteers

Utah State University volunteers Great Salt Lake Council Boy Brigham Young University Scouts of America volunteers

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Wasatch Trails Association Utah National Parks Council Saints volunteers Boy Scouts of America

Cache Valley Council Boy Scouts of Cache-Rich County Tourist Council Wizards Motocross Club America

Utah Sportsman Racing Assoc. Utah Mountain Bike Association Bridgerland Travel Region

Cache Backcountry Horsemen Utah Public Lands Multiple Use Sunrise Cyclists Coalition (conditional)

Salt Lake Regional Trails Council Walkways West Hiking Group Ogden City East Bench Trails Committee

Utah Snowmobile Association Brianhead Ski Area and Community Garfield Travel Council

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 163 Rubys Inn Jorgenson Honda Buds Sport Sales

Rons Sporting Goods Wasatch Mountain Club Paiute ATV Trail Rides

Utah Four Wheel Drive Assoc. Escalante Canyon Outfitters Nu-Skin International

Wasatch Alpine Striders Ultra Club Representative James Hansen Backcountry Horsemen of Utah

Utah State Parks Senator Orrin Hatch Senator Robert Bennett

Utah Territorial State House Park Fremont Indian State Park Otter Cree/Piute State Park

Beaver County Sevier County Commissioners Millard County

Millard County Sheriff’s Office Piute County Sevier County Sheriff’s Office

Beaver Travel Council Piute County Sheriff’s Office Millard Travel Council

City of Elsinore City of Annabella City of Aurora

City of Koosharem City of Glenwood City of Joseph

City of Richfield City of Kanosh City of Monroe

City of Circleville City of Sigurd City of Beaver

City of Junction City of Junction City of Marysvale

Intermountain Health Care Coca Cola Bottling of Richfield Romonico Inn

Utah Division of Oil, Gas & Mining Kawasaki American Honda

Rocky Mountain ATV Jamboree, Inc. Rock Art – Gary Keller Polaris

Utah Department of Wildlife Resources Fillmore National ATV Jamboree Piute County Economic Development

Richfield Reaper Castle Valley ATV Tours, Inc. Old Pine Inn Resort

Five Star Rental Ron & Lizzies Trailer Court Freedom Ford

Trails Illustrated Paiute ATV Rental Modular One

Star Trails ATV Riders Assoc. Silver Sage Enterprises Clint Grow, USFS retired, Smithfield

Charlie Knight, Smithfield LeOna W. Knight, Smithfield Lisa Lirby, Logan

Garden City City of Wasatch Bear River Lodge, Bear River

Rocking C Ranch, Garden City

IDAHO

Madison County Bonneville County Fremont County

Idaho Trails Council Idaho Snowmobile Association Backcountry Horsemen of Priest River

Ricks College volunteers Fox River Pack Station Idaho Trail Machine Association

Backcountry Horsemen Oregon Trail Museum Committee Teton Peaks Council Boy of Eagle Rock Scouts of America

Bear Lake County Commissioners Franklin County Commissioners Caribou County Commissioners

Rotary Club, Montpelier Lions Club, Soda Springs Kiwanis Club, Preston

Soda Springs Chamber of Commerce Preston Chamber of Commerce Rotary Club, Preston

Bear Lake Rangers, Caribou County 4-H Club, Grace Horse Council of Idaho (equestrian), Montpelier

164 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Back Country Horsemen of Idaho Squirril Creek City of Rexburg

Sheep Creek Guest Range, Sheep Creek City of Soda Springs City of Montpelier

Town of Tetonia Town of Ririe Cotton Tree Inn, Rexburg

Island Park Dwight Cochran, retired rancher, Don Clark, retired rancher, Montpelier Montpelier

Keith Martindale, owner KVSI radio Rosa Moosman, Editor, Montpelier Steve Fuller, Attorney at Law, station News Examiner Preston

Brad Smith, rancher, Preston Larry Bradford, retired fur farmer, Necia Seamons, Editor, Preston Preston Citizen, Preston

Lew Munson, USFS retired, Preston Wendel Johnson, USFS retired, LeAnn Gilbert, Preston Montpelier

Mike Pabst, Soda Springs Kay Titensor, Preston Kaye Titensor, Preston

ElDean Holliday, Preston Lee Foster, Preston Mike Titus, Palisades

Norm Smith, Idaho Falls Barbara Zitsman-Smith, Idaho Falls Dave Payne, Rexburg

Jay Larson, Idaho Falls Neil Cunningham, Idaho Falls Jeff Coward, Alpine Hiking Club, Idaho Falls

Rex Hanson, Idaho Falls Doug Caldwell, Idaho Falls Sharon Skenandore, Pocatello

Monte Later, St. Anthony Chuck Christensen, Driggs Connie Bowcutt, Idaho Falls

Leslie Twitchell, Idaho Falls Coy Martin, Idaho Falls Diana Woods, Boise

Leroy Ewing, Paris Mark Steele, Editor, Wade Harris, Soda Springs News-Examiner, Soda Springs

Mike Pabst, Soda Springs Blake Allen, Soda Springs Al Harrison, Montpelier

Dick Adair, Preston Vaunda Rallison, Franklin Orval Rallison, Franklin

WYOMING

Lincoln County Commission City of Afton Sno-Skipper Snowmobiling

Star Valley Development Alpine Snowmobile Club Senator Craig Thomas

* List compiled from National Forest information sources. The Great Western Trail Asso- ciation is compiling an updated list. Current list may be outdated or contain errors. List includes those who have made contributions of labor, materials, financial contributions, or other types of support for Great Western Trail or Paiute ATV Trail development or activities.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 165 APPENDIX G

ESTIMATE OF FEDERAL COST (BASED UPON 1999 DOLLARS) As a National Scenic or National Discovery Trail administered by the Forest Service, costs for the establishment and maintenance of the Great Western Trail are based in comparison to current costs assumed with Forest Service administration of other National Scenic or National Historic Trails. Cost share partnerships and agreements with National Trails organizations and youth work programs is emphasized. Some National Trails advocates believe that the current level of Federal funding and administration for National Trails does not adequately address trail management needs. In 1999, a total of $1.35 million was allocated to the USDA-Forest Service for maintainance of 16 National Trails that the Forest Service administers. Of this amount, $1 million was spent administering the Pacific Crest, Continental Divide, Florida, and Nez Perce National Trails. The remaining $350,000 was divided among the 12 other trails. Trail administration costs vary; $30,000 was allocated to the North Country National Scenic Trail while $310,000 was spent on the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail. For larger trail systems, annual administrative costs average from $150,000 to $170,000 per trail. Congressional allocations for special trails projects are also appropriated. In 1999, these totaled an additional $1.2 million for National Trails on Forest Service administered lands.

ESTIMATE OF COST

Description Low Range Cost High Range Cost

One time Comprehensive Management $400,000 $600,000 Plan completed within first two years

Land acquisition or easements purchased 1,000,000 10,000,000 over a 20-year period

Trail signs – Initial cost 10,000 50,000

Trailhead development over a 20-year period 40,000 200,000

Annual operations including salary, supplies, 150,000 200,000 administration of cooperative agreements

As much of the trail in Utah and Arizona is established, the cost of trail signs is expected to be low because these trail segments are already signed. The use of existing trailheads, trails, and roads is also expected to reduce future construction costs.

166 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L APPENDIX H FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES THAT OCCUR IN COUNTIES ALONG THE GREAT WESTERN TRAIL CORRIDOR

SPECIES STATES

AZ UT ID MT WY ENDANGERED MAMMALS Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) X X X X X Sonoran pronghorn (Antilocapra americana sonoriensis) X Jaguar (Felis onca) X Jaguarundi (Felis yaguarondi tolteca) X Lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae) X Hualapai mexican vole (Microtus hualpaiensis) X Gray wolf (Canis lupus) X X X Woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) X

THREATENED MAMMALS Utah prairie dog (Cynomys parvidens) X Wolverine (Gulo gulo) X Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) X X X

ENDANGERED BIRDS Masked bobwhite (Colinus virginianus ridgway) X Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium X brasilianum cactorum) Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax X X X traillii extimus) Yuma clapper rail (Rallus longirostris yumanensis) X Whooping crane (Grus americana) X X Tern, least (Sterna antillarum) X

THREATENED BIRDS Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) X X X X X Ferruginous hawk (Buteo regalis) X X Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) X Mexican spotted owl (Strix occidentalis lucida) X X X Piping plover (Charadrius melodus) X

ENDANGERED REPTILES Banded gila monster (Heloderma suspectus cinctum) X Desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) X

ENDANGERED AMPHIBIANS Sonoran tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum stebbinsi) X

ENDANGERED FISH Quitobaquito desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius eremus) X Desert pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius macularius) X Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis) X Loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) X Gila trout (Oncorhynchus gilae) X Bonytail (Gila elegans) X X Colorado squawfish (Ptychocheilus lucius) X X

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 167 AZ UT ID MT WY

Humpback chub (Gila cypha) X X Woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus) X Virgin River chub (Gila seminuda) X June sucker (Chasmistes liorus) X X Razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus) X X X X Kendall warm springs dace (Rhinichthys osculus thermalis) X Sturgeon, pallid (Scaphirhynchus albus) X Sturgeon, white (Acipenser transmontanus) X

THREATENED FISH Little colorado spinedace (Lepidomeda vittata) X Sonora chub (Gila ditaenia) X Lahontan cutthroat trout (Oncorrhynchus clarki henshawi) X Roundtail chub (Gila robusta) X Trout, bull (Salvelinus confluentus) X X

ENDANGERED PLANTS Peebles Navajo cactus (Pediocactus peeblesianus var) X Kearney’s blue star (Amsonia kearneyana) X Pima pineapple cactus (Coryphantha scheri var) X Nichol Turk’s head cactus X (Echinocactus horizonthalonius var) Huachuca water-umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana var) X Arizona hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var) X Madrian ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes delitescens) X Arizona agave (Agave arizonica) X Arizona cliffrose (Purshia subintegra) X Dwarf bear-poppy (Arctomecon humilis) X Barneby ridge-cress (Lepidium barnebyanum) X Kodachrome bladderpod (Lesquerella tumulosa) X San Rafael cactus (Pediocactus despainii) X Clay phacelia (Phacelia argillacea) X Autumn buttercup (Ranunculus acriformis) X Barneby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe barnebyi) X Shrubby reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe suffrutescens) X Wright fishhook cactus (Sclerocactus wrightiae) X

THREATENED PLANTS Navajo sedge (Carex specuicola) X X Clay phacelia (Phacelia argillacea) X X Water howellia (Howellia aquatilis) X X MacFarlane’s four-o-clock (Mirabilis macfarlanei) X Ute ladies’-tresses (Spiranthes diluvialis) X X X X Heliotrope milk-vetch (Astragalus montii) X Jones cycladenia (Cycladenia humilis) X Maguire daisy (Erigeron maguirei) X Siler pincushion cactus (Pediocactus sileri) X Winkler cactus (Pediocactus winkleri) X Maguire primrose (Primula maguirei) X Clay reed-mustard (Schoenocrambe argillacea) X Uinta Basin hookless cactus (Sclerocactus glaucus) X Last Chance townsendia (Townsendia aprica) X

168 G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L Bibliography BIBLIOGRAPHY

Burch, Jr. William R. (ed) 1979 Distance Trails. The Appalachian Trail as a Guide to Future Research and Management Needs. Yale University, New Haven, CT

Great Western Trail Association n.d. Great Western Trail. Utah’s Centennial Trail. Northern Utah Maps, Provo, Utah

National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior 1987 California and Pony Express Trails. Eligibility/Feasibility Study and Environmental As- sessment. Denver Service Center, Denver, CO

1996 American Discovery Trail National Feasibility Study. Denver Service Center, Denver, CO

1998 Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic Trail Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment. Denver Service Center, Denver, CO

1998 The Economic Impacts and Uses of Long-Distance Trails. A Case Study of the Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail. North Carolina State University, Ra- leigh, NC

1998 Ala Kahakai National Trail Study and Final Environmental Impact Statement. Pacific West Region. Pacific Great Basin Support Office. San Francisco, California

Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 1985 Continental Divide National Scenic Trail Comprehensive Plan. Rocky Mountain Re- gion, Denver, Colorado

1993 Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail in Colorado and Wyoming. Rocky Mountain Region, Denver, Colorado

1994 Ecological Subregions of the United States: Section Descriptions. Ecosystem Manage- ment, Washington, D.C.

1995 Landscape Aesthetics. A Handbook for Scenery Management. Agriculture Handbook. Number 701

U.S. General Accounting Office 1995 Information on the Use and Impact of Off-Highway Vehicles on Federal Lands. GAO/ RCED-95-209, Washington, D.C.

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 171 List of Preparers LIST OF PREPARERS

USDA Forest Service Intermountain Region Roshanna Stone, Study Team Leader Sid Lopez, Natural Resources Specialist William G. Reed, Heritage Resources Specialist Suzanne Johnson, Geographic Information Specialist Susan McDaniel, Visual Information Specialist

TECHNICAL SUPPORT

USDA Forest Service Jim B. Miller, National Trails Coordinator Gordon M. Williams, Utah GWT Coordinator Steve Barth, Arizona GWT Coordinator Dale L. Hom, Study Leader (March ‘98 - February ‘99) Gary Garthwait, Northern Region Trails Program Manager John Favro, Northern Region Trails Program Manager (successor) John Barksdale, Southwest Region Trails Program Manager Michael Noland, Southwest Region Trails Program Manager (successor) Dorothy Firecloud, Tribal Liaison Jerry Shaw, Tribal Liaison Lynn Ballard, Public Affairs Specialist Pete Heiden, Landscape Architect Management Staff Gary Morrison, Northern Region Joe Meade, Southwestern Region Robert W. Ross, Jr., Intermountain Region Research, Writing or Editing Services Julie Fanselow, Writer Kurt Repanshek, Writer Great Western Trail Association Michael Browning, National Great Western Trail Association Gary Keller, Arizona Great Western Trail Association National Park Service Steven Elkinton, National Park Service, Program Leader

PHOTO CREDITS Pages 38, 40, 65 - Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation Pages 9, 31, 47, 62, 63, 71, 85, 89, 99 - Gary Keller Page 69 - Gordon Williams Pages 12, 15, 26, 27, 32, 35, 36, 43, 44, 53, 57, 66, 80, 91, 96, 105, 112, 122, 175 - USDA Forest Service

G R E A T W E S T E R N T R A I L 175